Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Orange County Power Authority - OCPA - 2020-12-10 (10)
BBK Nicholaus Norvell Interim General Counsel BEST BEST&KRIEGER LIP (619) 525-1380 ATTORNEYS AT LAW nicholaus.norvell@bbklaw.com File No.55735.00001 June 9, 2023 VIA EMAIL&OVERNIGHT COURIER City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (Robin.Estanislau@surfcity-hb.org) Re: Notice of Proposed Fourth Amendment to Orange County Power Authority Joint Powers Agreement Dear City Clerk: On behalf of Orange County Power Authority (OCPA), please find enclosed a proposed Fourth Amendment to the OCPA Joint Powers Agreement. This notice is being provided to OCPA member agencies pursuant to Section 3.9.4.3 of the Joint Powers Agreement, which provides that OCPA must provide at least thirty(30)days' advance written notice to the member agencies of all special voting items under the Joint Powers Agreement, including amendments to the Joint Powers Agreement. On May 17, 2023, the OCPA Board of Directors reviewed the proposed Fourth Amendment and voted unanimously (with one absence) to provide the member agencies with a copy thereof pursuant to Section 3.9.4.3. It is anticipated that the OCPA Board of Directors will consider approval of the Fourth Amendment at its July 19, 2023 regular meeting. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me using the information above. Sincerely, • 6A0 Nicholaus Norvell of BEST BEST& KRIEGER LLP NN:ag Proposed Fourth Amendment to Joint Powers Agreement cc: Al Zelinka, City Manager(renee.walker@surfcity-hb.org) Michael E. Gates, City Attorney(Michael.Gates@surfcity-hb.org) Best Best&Krieger LLP 1655 West Broadway,15th Floor,San Diego,California 92101 Phone:(619)525-1300 I Fax:(619)233-6118 I www.bbklaw.com V "4 L' 9t41 AO A..111 10 A 110 :zlwd I Nnr tzei ORANGE COUNTY POWER AUTHORITY Staff Report—Item 9.7 To: Orange County Power Authority Board of Directors From: Nicholaus Norvell, Interim General Counsel Subject: CONSIDER FOURTH AMENDMENT TO JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT Date: May 17, 2023 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS 1. Review draft Fourth Amendment to Joint Powers Agreement removing weighted voting • provisions and related exhibits. 2. Direct staff to provide Member Agencies with a copy of the proposed Fourth Amendment and place Fourth Amendment on a future agenda for final approval. BACKGROUND Under OCPA's existing Joint Powers Agreement,weighted voting can be invoked by two or more Directors in limited circumstances, such as when there is a tie vote by the Board for Directors or to immediately nullify an action that was passed by an"equal vote" of the Board. On such votes, weighted voting allows the Board to vote in'accordance with the proportion of electricity use by users within their respective jurisdictions. Under the Joint Powers Agreement, the exhibits for weighted voting are required to be updated each year no later than March 1 based on prior calendar year numbers. At its February 15,2023 meeting,the Board of Directors voted to update the exhibits for weighted voting in accordance with the language of the Joint Powers Agreement. As part of the approved motion, the Board provided direction)for staff to return at the April meeting to discuss potential amendments to the weighted voting provisions of the Joint Powers Agreement. As discussed at the February Board meeting, the existing weighted voting language raised two points of discussion: 1. Data reporting delays by SCE can affect OCPA's ability to timely calculate weighted voting shares based on prior calendar year data within each Member Agency's service area. 2. The current weighted voting language has an adverse impact on the weighted voting of new members, as the calculation is based on actual electrical use by accounts served by OCPA.As there will be a period during which any new member is not actually being served by OCPA, a strict application of Section 3.9.3 of the Joint Powers Agreement results in new members having a 0% share for weighted votes. This means that new members have a vote during regular "equal votes" of the Board, but a 0% voting share during weighted votes. Following discussion at the April 19,2023 meeting, the Board approved a motion to proceed with removing weighted voting under the OCPA Joint Powers Agreement. Fourth Amendment to JPA Agreement The draft Fourth Amendment to the JPA Agreement is attached as Attachment 1 and would remove the following weighted voting-related provisions and exhibits (as well as cross-references thereto in Section 3.9.1): • Section 3.9.2 (Voting Shares Vote) • Section 3.9.3 (Voting Shares Formula) • Exhibit B (Annual Energy Use by Jurisdiction) • Exhibit C (Party Voting Shares) Board Review and Next Steps The JPA Agreement requires that the Member Agencies be notified at least 30 days before the approval of amendments to the JPA Agreement. OCPA staff is seeking: (1) Board review of the Fourth Amendment to the JPA Agreement; and (2) direction to provide Member Agencies with a copy of the proposed Fourth Amendment and notify the Member Agencies that the Board will consider the Fourth Amendment for final approval at an upcoming Board meeting. In the alternative,the Board can provide further comments or direction on the Fourth Amendment before notifying the Member Agencies. FISCAL IMPACT None. ATTACHMENT Attachment 1: Draft Fourth Amendment to JPA Agreement FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE ORANGE COUNTY POWER AUTHORITY JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT This Fourth Amendment to that certain Orange County Power Authority Joint Powers Agreement, dated November 20, 2020, by and between the parties set forth in Exhibit A to the Agreement is effective as of , 2023 ("Fourth Amendment"). RECITALS A. The Orange County Power Authority is a joint powers authority established on November 20,2020,and organized under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act(Government Code section 6500 et seq.) as a separate public agency to collectively implement a community choice aggregation program and to exercise any powers common to the Authority's members to further these purposes. B. The Board of Directors previously amended the Agreement on February 9,2021 (First Amendment), October 25, 2022 (Second Amendment), and[May 17, 2023] (Third Amendment). C. The Board of Directors desires to further amend the Agreement to remove the provisions and exhibits in the Agreement relating to Voting.Shares Votes, including internal cross- references thereto. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, and conditions hereinafter set forth, it is agreed by and among the Parties as follows: 1. Amendments to the Agreement. (a) Equal Vote. Section 3.9.1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to remove references to Sections 3.9.2 and 3.9.3 and replaced in its entirety as follows: "3.9.1 Equal Vote. Each Director or participating alternate shall have one vote. Except as provided for in Section 3.9.4, action of the Board on all matters shall require an affirmative vote of a majority of all Directors who are present at the subject meeting("Equal Vote")." (b) Voting Shares Vote; Voting Shares Formula. Sections 3.9.2 and 3.9.3 of the Agreement are hereby deleted in their entirety and the section numbers reserved for future use. (c) Exhibits on Annual Energy Use by Jurisdiction and Party Voting Shares. Exhibits B and C of the Agreement are hereby deleted in their entirety and reserved for future use. 2. Capitalized Terms. Any capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Agreement. 3. Full Force. Except as expressly set forth herein,the Agreement shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect. 1 55735.00001\41074949.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have hereby approved and executed this Fourth Amendment as of the date first written above. ORANGE COUNTY POWER AUTHORITY By: Fred Jung, Chair Orange County Power Authority Dated: Approved as to Form: By: General Counsel Orange County Power Authority 2 55735.00001\41074949.1 Bend OR I.9DBE. Riverside (541)382-3011 (951)686-1450 Indian Wells BEST BEST&KRIEGER Sacramento (760)568-2611 Air O R N E Y S AT LAW (916)325-4000 Irvine San Diego (949)263-2600 (619)525-1300 Los Angeles 655 West Broadway, 15th Floor,San Diego,CA 92101 Walnut Creek (213)617-8100 Phone:(619)525-1300 I Fax:(619)233-6118 I www.bbklaw.com (925)977-3300 Ontario Washington,DC (909)989-8584 (202)785-0600 Nicholaus Norvell Interim General Counsel (619)525-1380 nicholaus.norvell@bbklaw.com File No.55735.00001 March 27,2023 n Or VIA EMAIL&OVERNIGHT COURIER >—i--t N City Clerk o CO ill City of Huntington Beach r 2000 Main Street "1 :< — i1 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 > c.� C) (Robin.Estanislau@surfcity-hb.org) Re: Notice of Proposed Third Amendment to Orange County Power Authority Joint Powers Agreement and Proposed Bylaws Dear City Clerk: On behalf of Orange County Power Authority (OCPA), please find enclosed a proposed Third Amendment to the OCPA Joint Powers Agreement and proposed Bylaws. This notice is being provided to OCPA member agencies pursuant to Section 3.9.4.3 of the Joint Powers Agreement, which provides that OCPA must provide at least thirty (30) days' advance written notice to the member agencies of all special voting items under the Joint Powers Agreement, including amendments to the Joint Powers Agreement and adoption of Bylaws. On March 15, 2023, the OCPA Board of Directors reviewed the proposed Third Amendment and Bylaws and voted unanimously to provide the member agencies with a copy thereof pursuant to Section 3.9.4.3. It is anticipated that the OCPA Board of Directors will consider approval of the Third Amendment and proposed Bylaws at its May 17, 2023 regular meeting. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me using the information above. Sincer ly, Nicholaus Norvell of BEST BEST&KRIEGER LLP 55735.00001\41120456.1 1111k BEST BEST&KRIEGER ATTORNEYS AT LAW City Clerk March 27,2023 Page 2 NN:ag Proposed Third Amendment to Joint Powers Agreement Proposed Bylaws cc: Al Zelinka, City Manager(renee.walker@surfcity-hb.org) Michael E. Gates, City Attorney(Michael.Gates@surfcity-hb.org) 55735.00001\41120456.1 THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE ORANGE COUNTY POWER AUTHORITY JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT This Third Amendment to that certain Orange County Power Authority Joint Powers Agreement, dated November 20, 2020, by and between the parties set forth in Exhibit A to the Agreement is effective as of ,2023 ("Third Amendment"). RECITALS A. The Orange County Power Authority is a joint powers authority established on November 20,2020,and organized under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act(Government Code section 6500 et seq.)as a separate public agency to collectively implement a community choice aggregation program and to exercise any powers common to the Authority's members to further these purposes. B. On February 9, 2021, the Board of Directors approved the First Amendment to the Agreement extending the right of a Founding Party to withdraw under Section 6.1.1 of the Agreement until April 1,2021. C. On October 25, 2022,the Board of Directors approved the Second Amendment to the Agreement, relating to the qualifications of Directors and alternate Directors, setting Directors' and Alternates' terms of office at two (2) years, establishing the terms of office for the Chair and Vice Chair,and related changes. D. The Board of Directors desires to amend the Agreement as follows: 1. Establish that the terms of office for regular and alternate Directors is two(2)years or until a successor is appointed; 2. Establish that vacancies in the offices of Chair and Vice Chair shall be filled at the next regular meeting of the Board or as soon as practicable thereafter,and that the new Chair and Vice Chair will perform the duties of the office for the remainder of the office's term; and 3. Establish that the Board of Directors will appoint a qualified person who is not on the Board to serve as Secretary,and that such office will not automatically be held by the Chief Executive Officer. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, and conditions hereinafter set forth, it is agreed by and among the Parties as follows: 1. Amendments to the Agreement. (a) Terms of Office. Section 3.3 of the Agreement is hereby amended and replaced in its entirety as follows: 1 55735.00001\41074949.1 "3.3 Terms of Office. Each regular or alternate Director shall serve a term of office . of(2) years or until a successor is appointed. A regular or alternate Director shall serve at the pleasure of the governing body of the Party that the regular or alternate Director represents and may be removed by such governing body at any time, with or without cause. If at any time a vacancy occurs on the Board, a replacement Director shall be appointed by the governing body to fill the position of the previous Director within forty-five (45) days of the date that such position becomes vacant. A replacement Director shall serve until the scheduled expiration of the term of office of the Director they replace." (b) Chair and Vice Chair. Section 3.10.1 is hereby amended to add the following sentences at the end of the section: "Upon a vacancy in the office of Chair or Vice Chair, the position shall be filled at the next regular meeting of the Board held after such vacancy occurs or as soon as practicable thereafter. Succeeding officers shall perform the duties normal to said offices for the remainder of the respective term." (c) Secretary. Section 3.10.2 of the Agreement is hereby amended and replaced in its entirety as follows: "3.10.2 Secretary. The Board shall appoint a qualified person who is not on the Board to serve as Secretary. The Secretary shall be responsible for keeping the minutes of all meetings of the Board and all other official records of the Authority." (d) Chief Executive Officer. Section 3.12 of the Agreement is hereby amended and replaced in its entirety as follows: "3.12 Chief Executive Officer. The Board shall appoint a Chief Executive Officer. The Chief Executive Officer shall be the chief administrative officer of the Authority. The powers and duties of the Chief Executive Officer shall be those delegated and/or assigned to the Chief Executive Officer by duly adopted action of the Board." 2. Capitalized Terms. Any capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Agreement. 3. Full Force. Except as expressly set forth herein, the Agreement shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect. [SIGNATURE ON FOLLOWING PAGE] 2 55735.00001\41074949.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have hereby approved and executed this Third Amendment as of the date first written above. ORANGE COUNTY POWER AUTHORITY By: Fred Jung, Chair Orange County Power Authority Dated: Approved as to Form: By: General Counsel Orange County Power Authority 3 55735.00001\41074949.1 BYLAWS FOR ORANGE COUNTY POWER AUTHORITY PREAMBLE The Orange County Power Authority ("Authority") was established pursuant to that certain document entitled Orange County Power Authority Joint Powers Agreement,dated November 20, 2020, as amended from time to time ("JPA Agreement"). All parties that executed the JPA Agreement prior to December 31, 2020 are designated individually as a "Founding Party" or collectively as "Founding Parties."All cities, counties or other public agencies added as parties • to the JPA Agreement after December 31, 2020 are designated individually as an "Additional Party" or collectively as "Additional Parties." The members of the Authority are referred to in these Bylaws individually as a"Party," which includes a Founding Party or Additional Party, or collectively as "Parties,"which includes Founding Parties and Additional Parties. ARTICLE I GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 1. Authority Purpose. The Authority is formed to create an independent public agency to exercise powers common to each Member Agency and to implement a community choice aggregation program and exercise all other powers necessary and incidental to accomplishing this purpose. The Authority will provide opportunities by which Member Agencies can work cooperatively to create economies of scale and implement sustainable energy initiatives that reduce energy demand, increase energy efficiency,provide consumer choice and cost savings, and advance the use of clean, efficient, and renewable resources in the region for the benefit of all Member Agencies and their constituents, including,but not limited to,establishing and operating a community choice aggregation program. Section 2. Purpose of Bylaws. The JPA Agreement authorizes the Board of Directors to adopt such bylaws,rules and regulations as are necessary or desirable to accomplish the purposes of the JPA Agreement; provided, however, that nothing in such bylaws, rules or regulations shall be inconsistent with the JPA Agreement. By approving these Bylaws, the Board intends to adopt additional procedures concerning the Authority's basic governance, internal organization, Board committees, and other matters addressed in these Bylaws. Section 3. Definitions. Unless specifically defined in these Bylaws, all defined terms shall have the same meaning as ascribed to them in the JPA Agreement. Section 4. Precedence In the event of any conflict between these Bylaws and the JPA Agreement, the JPA Agreement shall control and these Bylaws shall be amended or clarified to eliminate such conflict. 55735.00001\40978466.3 ARTICLE II BOARD OF DIRECTORS Section 1. Board of Directors. The Authority shall be governed by a Board of Directors composed of one representative of each of the Member Agencies,except the City of Irvine,which shall appoint two representatives subject to Section 3.1 of the JPA Agreement.The governing body of each Party shall appoint and designate in writing the Director(s)who shall be authorized to act for and on behalf of the Party on matters within the powers of the Authority. The person appointed and designated as the Director shall be a current elected member of the governing body of the Party.A Director shall serve a term of two (2)years or until a successor is appointed. A Director shall serve at the pleasure of the governing body of the Party that the Director represents and may be removed by such governing body at any time, with or without cause. Section 2. Alternate Directors The governing body of each Party shall also appoint and designate in writing an alternate Director(s) who may vote on matters when the regular Director is absent from an Authority meeting. The person appointed and designated as the alternate Director shall be a current elected member of the governing body of the Party. An alternate Director shall serve a term of two (2) years or until a successor is appointed. An alternate Director shall serve at the pleasure of the governing body of the Party that the alternate Director represents and may be removed by such governing body at any time, with or without cause. The alternate Director shall have all the rights and responsibilities of the regular Director when serving in his or her absence. When serving in the absence of the regular Director, an alternate Director may vote on matters in committee, chair committees, and fully participate in discussion and debate during Authority meetings. Section 3. Vacancy If at any time a vacancy occurs on the Board, a replacement shall be appointed by the governing body to fill the position of the previous Director within forty-five (45) days of the date that such position becomes vacant. A replacement Director shall serve until the scheduled expiration of the term of office the Director they replace. Section 4. Resignation A regular or alternate Director may resign at any time by giving written notice to the Board Secretary. The notice of resignation shall specify a date on which the resignation is effective. Section 5. Compensation In accordance with Section 3.8 of the JPA Agreement, the Board shall adopt policies establishing compensation attendance at Board and Committee meetings and work performed by each Director on behalf of the Authority as well as policies for the reimbursement of expenses incurred by each Director; provided that in no instance shall the per meeting or per day compensation be less than the compensation provided to directors of the Orange County Sanitation District. 55735.00001\40978466.3 ARTICLE III OFFICERS Section 1. Officers There shall be a Chair, a Vice-Chair, a Secretary and a Treasurer/Auditor. A. Chair. The Chair of the Authority shall be a Director. Duties of the Chair are to supervise the preparation of the business agenda, preside over Authority meetings, and sign all ordinances,resolutions,contracts and correspondence adopted or authorized by the Board. The Directors shall select among themselves the Chair.Beginning at the first regular Board meeting in December 2022,the term of office of the Chair shall be one year with an election held annually. There shall be no limit on the number of terms held by the Chair. The office of the Chair shall be declared vacant and a new selection shall be made if: (i) the person serving dies,resigns, or becomes legally unable to fulfill his or her duties; or(ii)the Party that appointed the Director serving as Chair withdraws from the Authority pursuant to the provisions of the JPA Agreement.Upon a vacancy in the office of Chair,the position shall be filled at the next regular meeting of the Board held after such vacancy occurs or as soon as practicable thereafter. The succeeding Chair shall perform the duties normal to said office for the remainder of the term. B. Vice-Chair. The Vice-Chair of the Authority shall be a Director. The Vice-Chair shall perform the duties of the Chair in the absence of such officer. The Directors shall select among themselves the Vice-Chair. Beginning at the first regular Board meeting in December 2022,the term of office of the Vice-Chair shall be one year with an election held annually.There shall be no limit on the number of terms held by the Vice-Chair.The office of the Vice-Chair shall be declared vacant and a new selection shall be made if: (i)the person serving dies,resigns,or becomes legally unable to fulfill his or her duties;or(ii)the Party that appointed the Director serving as Vice-Chair withdraws from the Authority pursuant to the provisions of the JPA Agreement. Upon.a vacancy in the office of Vice Chair, the position shall be filled at the next regular meeting of the Board held after such vacancy occurs or as soon as practicable thereafter. The succeeding Vice Chair shall perform the duties normal to said office for the remainder of the term. C. Secretary. The Board shall appoint a qualified person who is not on the Board to serve as Secretary. The Secretary shall be responsible for keeping the minutes of all meetings of the Board and all other official records of the Authority. D. Treasurer and Auditor. In accordance with Government Code section 6505.5, the Board shall appoint a qualified person to act as the Treasurer and a qualified person to act as the Auditor, neither of whom need be members of the Board. The positions of Treasurer and Auditor may be combined into one position. The Treasurer and the Auditor shall possess the powers of, and shall perform those functions required of them by Government Code sections 6505, 6505.5, and 6505.6, and by all other applicable laws and regulations and amendments thereto. The Treasurer shall have custody of all the money of the Authority. The Treasurer shall report directly to the Board and shall comply with the requirements of 55735.00001\40978466.3 treasurers of incorporated municipalities. The Board may transfer the responsibilities of the Treasurer and Auditor to any person or entity permitted by law. ARTICLE IV MEETINGS Section 1. Regular Meetings The Board shall provide for its regular meetings, the date, hour and place of which shall be fixed by resolution of the Board. Section 2. Special Meetings,Emergency Meetings, and Adjourned Meetings Special meetings and emergency meetings may be called upon the request of a majority of the members of the Board or by the Chair, in accordance with the provisions of Government Code sections 54956 and 54956.5,respectively. The Board may adjourn any regular, adjourned regular, special, or adjourned special meeting pursuant to the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code § 54950, et seq.). Section 3. Open Meetings The meetings of the Board,any Executive Committee,and any other legislative bodies established by the Board shall be governed by the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act(Government Code § 54950,et seq.).Directors may participate in meetings telephonically or remotely,with full voting rights, to the extent permitted by law and in accordance with any policies, rules, resolutions, or motions of the Board relating thereto. Section 4. Attendance of Alternates in Closed Session Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.96(a)(2), the Board hereby authorizes an alternate Director who is attending a properly noticed Board meeting in the absence of the regular Director to attend a closed session held during such meeting. Section 5. Preparation of Agendas The Chief Executive Officer, or designee, shall prepare the agenda for each Board meeting. Agenda items will be generated by the need to conduct Authority business in a timely manner.The Chief Executive Officer shall review with the Board Chair, or the Vice-Chair in the absence of the Chair,the agenda for Board meetings.The Chief Executive Officer shall cause the agenda for each meeting to be posted in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code § 54950 et seq.). The below steps shall be followed in finalizing the meeting agenda: A. The Chief Executive Officer will cause a draft of the meeting agenda to be created, including any timely received Director Initiated Agenda Items (discussed below). B. The Chief Executive Officer will submit the draft agenda to the General Counsel for legal review and verification of the necessary materials/documents.Any revisions will be given to the Chief Executive Officer. 5573 5.00001\40978466.3 C. The Chief Executive Officer will revise the drafted agenda, if necessary, for the Board Chair's review. D. After approval of the Board Chair, the Chief Executive Officer will post agenda as required. Section 6. Addition of Agenda Items Before a Meeting Any Director may add a "Director Initiated Agenda Item" for consideration on an upcoming regular meeting agenda. Director Initiated Agenda Items are prepared by the requesting Director and require no staff time.Director Initiated Agenda Items must be submitted to the Chief Executive Officer at least five(5)calendar days prior to the next Board regular meeting.Items submitted less than five(5)calendar days before the scheduled regular meeting date may be postponed to a later meeting in order to allow sufficient time for consideration and research of the issue. In addition, items may be added to a future Board meeting agenda in the following ways: A. The Chair provides express oral direction to the Chief Executive Officer during a Board meeting.If a Director disagrees with the Chair's direction,the Director may make a motion regarding the addition of the agenda item without discussion of the substance of the item. B. For agenda items requiring staff time, an agenda item shall be added by motion without discussion of the substance of the item. C. Requests from members of the public, after being authorized to speak, may be added to a future Board meeting agenda by a Director as a Director Initiated Agenda Item, as discussed above.If the item requires staff time,the item may be added only by an approved motion without discussion of the substance of the item. The Chair or a majority of the Board may refer items to a committee for further review. Section 7. Modification of Agenda Order; Addition of Items During a Meeting The order of items on a Board meeting agenda may be modified by the Chair if there is no objection, or by a motion and majority vote of the Board. No action or discussion may be undertaken on any item not appearing on the posted agenda, except as allowed by the Ralph M. Brown Act(Government Code § 54950 et seq.). Section 8. Consent Calendar The consent calendar for a Board meeting shall consist of agenda items that are routine or ministerial in nature on which no Board discussion will be required. These items will be acted upon as one item. Before adopting the consent calendar, the Chair will ask Directors whether anyone desires to remove a matter from the consent calendar. Members of the public may also request that a Director remove a matter from the consent calendar. The Board will then proceed with consideration of the remaining consent calendar. The consent calendar will be acted upon in one motion without discussion. Items pulled from the consent calendar will be considered immediately following adoption of the remaining consent calendar,and oral staff reports will only be given if requested by the Director who pulled them. 55735.00001\40978466.3 Section 9. Public Comments Agendas of regular Board meetings shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the Board on any item within the Authority's jurisdiction that is not on the agenda. Generally,speakers shall be limited to three(3)minutes each.The total time for non-agenda public comments shall not exceed thirty (30)minutes;provided,however,that if the number of speakers is estimated to exceed the 30-minute period, the Chair may, in his or her discretion, reduce the time allotted to each speaker, extend the period for non-agenda public comment, and/or continue the remaining comments to the end of the agenda. For public comments on agenda items, speakers shall be limited to three (3) minutes each. The Chair may, in his or her discretion,reduce the time allotted to each speaker. Section 10. Order and Procedure at Meetings All meetings of the Board shall be conducted in an orderly manner designed to expedite the business of the Board in accordance with applicable law, the JPA Agreement and these Bylaws. Except as otherwise provided therein, Rosenberg's Rules of Order (League of California Cities, Rev. 2011)will be used as a guide to resolve questions of parliamentary procedures. The General Counsel shall serve as the Parliamentarian. Section 11. Rules of Debate and Decorum Debate upon all matters pending before the Board shall be under the supervision of the Chair and conducted in such a manner as to expedite the business of the Board. Every Director desiring to speak shall so indicate by using the "request to speak" button, if available, or otherwise address the Chair. Upon recognition by the Chair, the Director shall confine remarks to the item under consideration. A Director, once recognized, shall not be interrupted when speaking unless it is to call the Director to order. If a Director while speaking is called to order, the Director shall cease speaking until the question of order is determined. ARTICLE V QUORUM &VOTING Section 1. Quorum A majority of the Directors of the entire Board shall constitute, and is necessary to constitute, a quorum, except that less than a quorum may adjourn a meeting from time to time in accordance with law.No actions of the Board may be taken without a quorum of the Directors present. Section 2. Equal Vote In general, except when a Voting Shares Vote or Special Voting is expressly required by the JPA Agreement,action of the Board on all matters shall require an affirmative vote of a majority of all Directors who are present at the subject meeting("Equal Vote"). Notwithstanding the foregoing, an Equal Vote may be subject to a"Voting Shares Vote." Section 3. Voting Shares Vote Immediately after (and during the same Board Meeting as) an affirmative or tie Equal Vote, two or more Directors shall have the right to request and conduct a Voting Shares Vote to reconsider that action approved by the Equal Vote. In the event of a Voting Shares Vote where the City of 55735.00001\40978466.3 Irvine appoints two Directors to the Board and one or more Irvine Directors requests a Voting Shares Vote, a Party other than the City of Irvine must constitute the second Director for purposes of having the right to request and conduct a Voting Shares Vote. A"yes"vote on the Voting Shares Vote shall be a vote to reverse and reject the Equal Vote;a"no" vote on the Voting Shares Vote shall be a vote to affirm the Equal Vote.For Voting Shares Votes, votes shall be weighted as described in subsection 3.9.3 of the JPA Agreement. A"yes"vote on a Voting Shares Vote shall require (i) for votes requiring a majority under subsection 3.9.1, more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting shares of all Directors voting; (ii) for votes requiring a supermajority of two-thirds under this JPA Agreement, sixty-seven percent(67%) or more of the voting shares of all Directors voting; and(iii)for votes requiring a supermajority of three quarters under this JPA Agreement more than seventy-five percent (75%) of the voting shares of all Directors voting. If a Voting Shares Vote yields a"no"vote,the legal.effect is to affirm the Equal Vote with respect to which the Voting Shares Vote was taken.If the Voting Shares Vote succeeds, the legal effect is to nullify the Equal Vote with respect to which the Voting Shares Vote was taken. If the underlying Equal Vote was a tie, the Voting Shares Vote replaces that tie vote. No action may be taken solely by a Voting Shares Vote without first having taken an Equal Vote. The formula for a Voting Shares Vote shall be determined pursuant to Section 3.9.3 of the JPA Agreement. Section 4. Special Voting An affirmative vote of two-thirds of the Directors of the entire Board shall be required to take any action on the following: A. Issuing or repayment of bonds or other forms of debt; B. Adding or removing Parties on or after January 1, 2021; C. Amending or terminating the JPA Agreement or adopting or amending Authority Bylaws; and D. Terminating the CCA program. An affirmative vote of three-fourths of the Directors of the Board shall be required to initiate any action for eminent domain and no eminent domain action shall be approved within the jurisdiction of a Party without the affirmative vote of such Party's Director (or both Irvine Directors, if applicable,in the case of eminent domain action within the City of Irvine). Matters requiring Special Voting may be subject to a Voting Shares Vote. Matters that require Special Voting shall require at least 30 days advance written notice to each Member Agency. Such notice shall include a copy of all substantive documents necessary to meaningfully deliberate and consider the proposed vote(e.g.,any proposed amendment to the JPA Agreement or the Bylaws.The Authority shall also provide prompt written notice to each Member 55735.00001\40978466.3 Agency of the action taken,which shall include any resolution,ordinance,rule,policy,agreement, filing or other operative document(if any) adopted or approved by the Board. ARTICLE VI POLICY REGARDING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION DISCLOSED DURING CLOSED SESSIONS Information obtained during closed sessions of the Board shall be confidential. Notwithstanding, under certain circumstances, it may be necessary and appropriate for Directors to divulge certain confidential information obtained in closed sessions to representatives of their Member Agencies as authorized by law. Therefore, these Bylaws adopt the policy set forth in Government Code section 54956.96, which authorizes the disclosure of confidential closed session information that has direct financial or liability implications for that Member Agency as follows: A. A Director or alternate Director who is also a member of the governing body of a Member Agency may disclose information obtained in an Authority closed session that has direct financial or liability implications for that Member Agency to the following individuals: 1. Legal counsel of that Member Agency for purposes of obtaining advice on whether the matter has direct financial or liability implications for that Member Agency; and 2. Other members of the governing body of the Member Agency present in a closed session of that Member Agency. B. The governing body of the Member Agency may, upon the advice of its legal counsel, conduct a closed session to receive, discuss and take action concerning information obtained in a closed session of the Authority pursuant to this Article. ARTICLE VII BOARD COMMITTEES Section 1. Committees The Board may establish committees as the Board deems appropriate to assist the Board in carrying out its functions and implementing the purposes of the JPA Agreement. In accordance with the JPA Agreement,the Board may delegate to any committees that consist solely of Board members any of the powers specified in subsection 2.1 of the JPA Agreement, except for the power to acquire property by eminent domain. Committees that include or consist of non-Board members shall be advisory only. Committees established by the Board shall be either standing committees or temporary ad hoc advisory committees. Each duly established committee may establish any standing or ad hoc committees determined to be appropriate or necessary. The duties and authority of all committees shall be subject to the approval and direction of the Board. Section 2. Executive Committee Upon the Authority's membership consisting of nine or more members, the Board shall establish an Executive Committee consisting of a smaller number of Directors. The initial members of the 55735.00001\40978466.3 Executive Committee shall be the Directors of the Founding Members with the Chair of the Board serving as chair of the Executive Committee. Section 3. Appointment to Standing Committees For standing committees, the Chair shall nominate committee members, subject to approval by a majority vote of the Board. If the Board fails to approve the Chair's nomination(s) to a standing committee,the Board may entertain a motion for the appointment of committee members. The Executive Committee, if established, shall also be a Standing Committee. Other committees composed of Board members with continuing subject matter jurisdiction, or having a meeting schedule fixed by resolution or formal action of the Board, shall also be standing committees of the Board. Section-4. Committee Voting Action by a committee on all matters shall require an affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the committee who are present at the meeting. A Voting Shares Vote does not apply to committee voting. Section 5. Alternate Directors in Standing Committees In the event a member of a standing committee is a regular Director who is unavailable to attend a duly noticed meeting of that committee, the alternate Director representing the same Member Agency as the absent Director may attend and, if applicable, vote in the committee meeting in place of the regular Director. The alternate Director may also chair the committee and fully participate in discussion and debate during meetings. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this section shall not apply to the Executive Committee. Section 6. Removal of Committee Members The Board may remove a committee member from a committee, with or without cause, by a majority vote of the Board. Section 7. Ad Hoc Committees The Board may establish temporary ad hoc advisory committees that: (a) are composed of less than a quorum of the Board, (b) have no continuing subject matter jurisdiction, and (c) have no meeting schedule fixed by resolution or formal action of the Board. The Chair shall appoint the members of such ad hoc committees. ARTICLE VIII CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Section 1. Duties. The Chief Executive Officer shall be the chief administrative officer of the Authority responsible for the day-to-day operation and management of the Authority.The powers and duties of the Chief Executive Officer shall be those delegated and/or assigned to the Chief Executive Officer by duly • adopted action of the Board. 55735.00001\40978466.3 Section 2. Contracts. The Chief Executive Officer is authorized to contract and execute on behalf of the Authority all contracts in accordance with Authority procurement and risk management policies and other delegations of authority by the Board. ARTICLE IX DEBTS, LIABILITIES AND OBLIGATIONS As provided in Section 5.7 of the JPA Agreement, and subject to the provisions of Section 6.3 of the JPA Agreement, the debts, liabilities and obligations of the Authority shall not be debts, liabilities or obligations of the individual Member Agencies unless the governing board of a Member Agency agrees in writing to assume any of the debts, liabilities, or obligations of the Authority. ARTICLE X AMENDMENTS Section 1. General Requirements In accordance with Sections 3.9.4.1 and 3.9.4.3-of the JPA Agreement, the Board may adopt amendments to the JPA Agreement and these Bylaws by a two-thirds vote following 30 days' advance written notice to the Member Agencies. This Article provides further procedures concerning the Authority's consideration and approval of amendments to the JPA Agreement and these Bylaws. Section 2. Initial Consideration;Notice to Member Agencies The Board shall consider proposed amendments to the JPA Agreement or these Bylaws at an open and public meeting of the Board. Following such consideration,the Board may,by majority vote, direct the Chief Executive Officer to provide written notice of the proposed amendment(s)to the Member Agencies in any manner permitted under the JPA Agreement. Section 3. Adoption of Amendments At a Board meeting held at least 30 days after such notices have been provided, the Board may consider adoption of the proposed amendment(s) to the JPA Agreement or these Bylaws, which shall require a two-thirds vote of the Board. The Authority shall provide prompt written notice to all Member Agencies of the action taken and enclose the adopted or modified document(s). 55735.00001\40978466.3 N ORIGIN ID:SDMA (619)525-1300 SHIP DATE 27MAR23 1 " NICHOLAUS NORVELL ACTWGT:0.50 LB BEST BEST&KRIEGER CAD:253834847MlSXI3600 655 W.BROADWAY15TH FLOOR {I:. �, SAN DIEGO CA 92101 BILL SENDER �j' E • 0- - -76: .o:.2 - ' UNITED STATES US • EI c°i c o °o TO CITY CLERK jr l.a a=�' N x CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ' "- "o � ° Ti a) c,Cj VT ° `°W 2000MAINST. Q >',LD �0.� E „ 'I E 0.D N E o cca �w c w N m oco C9 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 I �" ° • � >` ° 63 ti° 0 (714)536-5227 REF:55735.00001.1723 I a CO w y o w o 0 co $•�o °= '1,0 4) moo ° Z o $ III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII11E DEFT '''0 ooz�� Eco3tiw x O 6 CO � c >i�I j `m $, 8._f.° m J _ o �n C7 n I ' r .. .. OY o �-o o USN aN a' �- 11111 Express1'>Op' O U CO C «E -ci a)w (CO-O`O•Ua I I, tl • cn as occooNp c� ZO moc 11 o ` II (1 ` IP4011fl ° ' N (n�to E E Im E a x o1111-111 I ;f .. N O� �Yii� • 3tc ...., m� �I ;j'a ~ U �= E53cE o c .m € 3785346 L, Q, v) o' o .« c y v o•c N cA > E a=•.0 U O O p p c 0:4:0 — Q 07 icnicc; N 0TUE-28MAR10:30A ' 'Q �' � E'�� °rarI Q. N ++, L a) > O Q T N w O3962 7958 6286 PRIORITY OVERNIGHT 1:Nco °' a ` —TRK# o N aiw o ca7 x� mI 0201 I I� L, c _, > C m >..0 m, ai 0 ai CO 11, a (_9.0 °•- a g o o v o 92648 �' ° �8 � �"�yE(-9WZ APVA CAUSSNA " �o 0xi ��° m lilIUUas E.W CD .— E�mcc2 11_ - aNyc �timcWC _ Eo� `o o co cccio V A N (� c O � � m�m � �= ac c t N CO o QQ. aoocyay n 00 a C fl O a mc��.no w O wW aa) •• c � w o � a.yaCECc - € , v LL a N (U O d) L.o a m N c,y LL O O C ( % ma) w u) U NCa)LIQ.m=o' a) 0Ea) wEoc o ,I. w .r � �• vl ��Le� mcRc3Io �o� cn 00_ II 73 U L N13 E co 0.. O O a O f0 (0.2•- ..... co , Q s! ct3 w N L a�0 o io N o =c Z 3 H� 3 o 'i Llo_ OY U AD ccenEc-'mc°oaci� �� ocb a M I} � N M aE �cma�� a°i ? x�;ao� _o W CNI ;.I C�•a)•N E U U N U U C O N .._ • ._ _ ........ ....... _ ...__ _ .__ ______ ____. _. _ I aJ I--N C EiJ >C 0)CI1C 0CCO O- SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE ORANGE COUNTY POWER AUTHORITY JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT This Second Amendment to that certain Orange County Power Authority Joint Powers Agreement, dated November 20, 2020, by and between the parties set forth in Exhibit A to the Agreement is effective as of October 25, 2022 ("Second Amendment"). RECITALS A. The Orange County Power Authority is a joint powers authority established on November 20,2020 and organized under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act(Government Code section 6500 et seq.) as a separate public agency to collectively implement a community choice aggregation program and to exercise any powers common to the Authority's members to further these purposes. On February 9, 2021, the Board of Directors approved the First Amendment to the Agreement extending the right of a Founding Party to withdraw under Section 6.1.1 of the Agreement until April 1, 2021. B. The Board of Directors desires to amend the Agreement as follows: 1. Requires that a regular or alternate Director be a current elected member of the governing body of the Party; 2. Changes the terms of office for a regular and alternate Director to two (2) years; 3. Clarifies that a regular or alternate Director serves at the pleasure of the governing body that appointed the Director and can be removed at any time,with or without cause; 4. Change the terms of office for the Chair and Vice-Chair to one(1)year with annual elections thereafter beginning in December 2022; and 5. Changes the maximum vacancy period for a Director to forty-five (45) days. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, and conditions hereinafter set forth, it is agreed by and among the Parties as follows: 1. Amendment to the Agreement. (a) Appointment of Directors. Section 3.2 of the Agreement is hereby amended and replaced in its entirety as follows: "3.2 Appointment of Directors. The governing body of each Party shall appoint and designate in writing the Director(s) who shall be authorized to act for and on behalf of the Party on matters within the powers of the Authority. The governing body of each Party shall also appoint and designate in writing an alternate Director(s)who may vote in matters when the regular Director is absent from a Board meeting. The governing bodies of the Founding Parties may, in their sole discretion, elect to appoint their respective Director(s) prior to the Effective Date, in which case such appointment(s) to the Board shall take effect on the 1 Effective Date. The persons appointed and designated as the regular Director and alternate Director shall be a current elected member of the governing body of the Party." (b) Terms of Office. Section 3.3 of the Agreement is hereby amended and replaced in its entirety as follows: "3.3 Terms of Office. Each regular or alternate Director shall serve a term of office of(2) years. A regular or alternate Director shall serve at the pleasure of the governing body of the Party that the regular or alternate Director represents and may be removed by such governing body at any time, with or without cause. If at any time a vacancy occurs on the Board, a replacement Director shall be appointed by the governing body to fill the position of the previous Director within forty-five (45) days of the date that such position becomes vacant. A replacement Director shall serve until the scheduled expiration of the term of office of the Director they replace." (c) Chair and Vice Chair. Section 3.10.1 is hereby amended and replaced in its entirety as follows: "3.10.1 Chair and Vice-Chair. The Directors shall select from among themselves a Chair and a Vice-Chair. The Chair shall be the presiding officer of all Board meetings. The Vice- Chair shall serve in the absence of the Chair. Beginning at the first regular Board meeting in December 2022, the terms of office of the Chair and Vice-Chair shall be one-year with an election held annually. There shall be no limit on the number of terms held by the Chair and the Vice-Chair. The office of either the Chair or Vice-Chair shall be declared vacant and a new selection shall be made if: (i)the person serving dies,resigns,or becomes legally unable to fulfill his or her duties, or (b) the Party that appointed the Chair or Vice-Chair withdraws from the Authority pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement." 2. Capitalized Terms. Any capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Agreement. 3. Full Force. Except as expressly set forth herein, the Agreement shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect. [SIGNATURE ON FOLLOWING PAGE] 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have hereby approved and executed this Second Amendment as of the date first written above. ORANGE COUNTY POWER AUTHORITY By: 71 .. ll, Chair ge Cou ty Power Authority Dated: /f '" r'" r 02 Approved as to Form: By: 6F\ General Counsel Orange County Power Authority 3 Bend OR I.� Riverside (541)382-3011 (951)686-1450 Indian Wells BEST BEST&KRIEGER Sacramento (760)568-2611 (916)325-4000 ATTORNEYS AT LAW Irvine San Diego (949)263-2600 (619)525-1300 Los Angeles 18101 Von Karman Avenue,Suite 1000,Irvine,CA 92612 Walnut Creek (213)617-8100 Phone:(949)263-2600 I Fax:(949)260-0972 I www.bbklaw.com (925)977-3300 Ontario Washington,DC (909)989-8584 (202)785-0600 Ryan M.F.Baron (949)263-6568 ryan.baron@bbklaw.com File No.55735.00001 0 November 22, 2022 ^' :^X ., C x � c VIA EMAIL&OVERNIGHT COURIER —4-� .C..) ti"Ty City Clerk ="rixl City of Huntington Beach _ a 2000 Main Street o Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (Robin.Estanislau@surfcity-hb.org) Re: Notice to Member Agency of Adoption of Second Amendment to Orange County Power Authority Joint Powers Agreement Dear City Clerk: Please find enclosed a Second Amendment to the Orange County Power Authority Joint Powers Agreement, approved by the OCPA Board of Directors on October 25, 2022 at its regular meeting. This notice is being provided to OCPA member agencies pursuant to Sections 3.9.4.3 and 7.8 of the Joint Powers Agreement. No further action is required by the member. Please note that the term of office for an OCPA Director has been modified to a two-year term. If you have questions about the term of office for the Director representing your member agency and potential reappointment, please contact Pat Jacquez-Nares, Board Clerk & Assistant to the CEO, pinares(a,ocpower.org. Sincerely, Ryan M. F. Baron of BEST BEST &KRIEGER LLP RMB:mb Second Amendment to Joint Powers Agreement cc: Al Zelinka, City Manager(renee.walker@surfcity-hb.org) Michael E. Gates, City Attorney(Michael.Gates@surfcity-hb.org) 55735.00001\40856231.1 FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE ORANGE COUNTY POWER AUTHORITY JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT This First Amendment("First Amendment")to that certain Orange County Power Authority Joint Powers Agreement ("Agreement") dated November 20, 2020, by and between the Parties set forth in Exhibit A to Agreement is effective as of February 9,2021. Under the Agreement,the Parties are sometimes referenced individually as a "Founding Party" and collectively the "Founding Parties." RECITALS A. The Orange County Power Authority is a joint powers authority established on November 20,2020 and organized under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act(Government Code§6500 et seq.). B. The Founding Parties desire to extend the right of a Founding Party under Section 6.1.1 of the Agreement to with withdraw without financial penalty until April 1, 2021. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants and conditions hereinafter set forth, it is agreed by and among the Parties as follows: 1. Right to Withdraw Prior to April 1,2021. Section 6.1.1 of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: "6.1.1 Right to Withdraw Prior to April 1, 2021. Except for the City of Irvine, a Party may withdraw from the Authority for any reason and without liability or cost prior to April 1, 2021 upon providing the Authority fifteen(15)days advance written notice." 2. Right to Withdraw On or After April 1, 2021. Section 6.1.2 of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: "6.1.2 Right to Withdraw On or After April 1,2021. Except for the withdrawal provided for in Section 6.1.1, a Party may withdraw its membership in the Authority on or after April 1,2021, effective as of the beginning of the Authority's fiscal year, by giving no less than one hundred eighty(180)days advance written notice of its election to do so,which notice shall be given to the Authority and each Party. Withdrawal of a Party shall require an affirmative vote of the Party's governing board. A Party that withdraws from the Authority pursuant to this subsection may be subject to certain continuing liabilities as described in this Agreement. The withdrawing Party and the Authority shall execute and deliver all further instruments and documents, and take any further actions as may be reasonably necessary to effectuate the orderly withdrawal of such Party." 3. Definitions: Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meaning set forth in the Agreement. 1 4. Full Force: Except as expressly set forth herein,the Agreement remains unmodified and in full force and effect. [SIGNATURE ON FOLLOWING PAGE] 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereby have made and executed this First Amendment as of the date first written above. ORANGE COUNTY POWER AUTHORITY By: it Dated: Approved as to Form: By: _ General Counsel 3 AnOXOvE"D s-.z r1* (PFrb?=A( 0R7-7Z-No) City of Huntington Beach File #: 20-2095 MEETING DATE: 12/21/2020 Adopt Ordinance No. 4227 regarding consideration of joining the Orange County Power Authority (OCPA), a Community Choice Energy (CCE) Joint Powers Authority (JPA) Approved for introduction December 10, 2020 - Vote 5-0-2 (Peterson, Ortiz absent) Adopt Ordinance No. 4227, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Authorizing the Implementation of a Community Choice Aggregation Program." City of Huntington Beach Page 1 of 1 Printed on 12/16/2020 power Legistar- ORDINANCE NO. 4227 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AUTHORIZING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION PROGRAM The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. FINDINGS. 1. The City of Huntington Beach has been actively investigating options to provide electric services to constituents within its service area with the intent of achieving greater local involvement over the provisions of electric services and promoting competitive retail choice. 2. Assembly Bill 117 (Stat. 2002, ch. 838; see California Public Utilities Code § 366.2 et seq.; hereinafter referred to as the "Act") authorizes any California city or county, whose governing body so elects, to combine the electricity load of its residents and businesses in a community-wide electricity aggregation program known as Community Choice Aggregation ("CCA") 3. The Act expressly authorizes participation in a CCA program through a joint powers agency, and to this end,the City of Huntington Beach has been evaluating a countywide CCA program. 4. Through Docket No. R.03-10-003, the California Public Utilities Commission ("Commission") has issued various decisions and rulings addressing the implementation of CCA programs, including establishing a procedure by which the Commission will review implementation plans, which are required to be submitted under the Act as the means of describing the CCA program and ensuring compliance with the Act. 5. The City has elected to form a joint powers authority that would specify the terms and conditions by which participants may participate as a group in energy programs, including, but not limited to, the implementation of a CCA program with the following benefits: a. Providing customers a choice of power providers; b. Increasing local control over energy rates and other energy-related matters; C. Providing electric rates that are competitive with those provided by the incumbent utility; d. Improving the local economy by increasing local and regional renewable generation capacity and energy conservation and efficiency projects and programs; e. Increasing regional energy self-sufficiency; and f. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions arising from electricity use in the City. 20-9216/241040 1 Ordinance No. 4227 6. The Joint Powers Agreement creating the Authority will govern and operate the CCA program on behalf of its member jurisdictions. The City may participate in the Authority by approving the execution of the Joint Powers Agreement and adoption of a CCA ordinance required by Public Utilities Code § 366.2(c)(12). The City's participation in the Authority will include membership on the Board of Directors of the Authority as provided in the Joint Powers Agreement. 7. The Authority will enter into agreements with electric power suppliers and other services providers and, based on these agreements,the Authority plans to provide power to residents and businesses at rates that are competitive with those of the incumbent utility. Once the Commission approves the implementation plan prepared by the Authority, the Authority may provide service to customers within the City and those cities that choose to participate in the Authority. 8. Under Public Utilities Code § 366.2, customers have the right to opt-out of a CCA program and continue to receive service from the incumbent utility. Customers who desire to continue to receive service from the incumbent utility will be able to do so at any time. 9. On December 10, 2020 the City Council held a public meeting at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or in opposition to implementation of the CCA program within the City. 10. This ordinance is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, as it is not a"project" and has no potential to result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment because it is merely the formation of an organization. 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15378(a). The ordinance is also exempt from CEQA because it is an organizational or administrative activity of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical change in the environment. 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15378(b)(5). The ordinance is also exempt from CEQA because it is merely a change in organization of local agencies. 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15320. Further, the ordinance is exempt from CEQA because there is no possibility that the ordinance or its implementation, which would only result in the formation of a governmental organization, would have a significant negative effect on the environment. 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15061(b)(3). The City Manager shall cause a Notice of Exemption to be filed as authorized by CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. SECTION 2. AUTHORIZATION TO IMPLEMENT A COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION PROGRAM. Based upon the foregoing, and in order to provide businesses and residents within the City with a choice of power providers, the City hereby elects to implement a community choice aggregation program within the jurisdiction of the City by participating in the CCA program of the Authority, as described in the Joint Powers Agreement. SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is held for any reason to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining 20-9216/241040 2 Ordinance No. 4227 portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, clause, phrase or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. That this Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach on this 21st day of December 12020 wee May rV 7D AND A VED: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager City Attorney INITIATED AND APPROVED: 4L Assistant City Mana er 20-9216/241040 3 Ord. No. 4227 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, ROBIN ESTANISLAU,the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing ordinance was read to said City Council at a Special meeting thereof held on December 10,2020, and was again read to said City Council at a Regular meeting thereof held on December 21,2020, and was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council. AYES: Kalmick, Carr, Posey, Moser, Delgleize NOES: Peterson, Ortiz ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None I,Robin Estanislau,CITY CLERK of the City of Huntington Beach and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council,do hereby certify that a synopsis of this ordinance has been published in the Huntington Beach Wave on December 31,2020. L In accordance with the City Charter of said City. T Robirt Estanislau, City Clerk City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk De u Ci Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California Moore, Tania From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 3:00 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: CCE vote From: Michael Hoskinson<mikehosk@me.com> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 12:17 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Cc: Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:CCE vote Once again the disaster that is Community Choice Aggregation (or Energy) rears its head in Huntington Beach, now in the form of an "invite" from Irvine to join a co-op of cities forming a new and expensive bureaucracy called a JPA* (Joint Powers Authority). CCE was first brought to our city council in 2017. During that time a compelling case was made that implementation would end in financial disaster for HB. CCE was scrapped because of that effort. 3 years later the truth of CCE is worse, not better. While this issue of CCE is complex it boils down to these points: • The City Council (or JPA)will set citizen's power rates.Power rates can be increased with no oversight and whenever the city or JPA wants more money. CCEs bypass statutory requirements for pricing approval. • CCE will become a way to fill the union coffers by raising electricity rates....with no government oversight !! • The customer has no *choice* with CCE. • Renewable energy costs will rise when state and federal subsidies are taken away. • Despite claims to the contrary CCE customers cannot directly buy renewable power. • CCE will create a very expensive new bureaucracy with pensions for all employees. City of HB currently has over$1 billion in unfunded liabilities, CCE will make that crisis worse. • CCE creates conflicts of interest between politicians, city employees, consultants and energy retailers. • The State of California has mandated use of renewable energy. There is no need to take this risk locally. • If the City Council guesses poorly signing long-term energy contracts the CCE could bankrupt the city. Viewed through the prism of Risk Management CCE's dangers far outweigh the benefits. No issue ever before council has the destructive possibilities that Community Choice Energy does. CCE is an Enron-Level disaster in the makinP. CCE is technical and complex, that's how they hide the truth, it requires a deep dive to understand exactly how the sausage is made and our money is stolen. Read on for the details. SUPPLUEME�N�TALN Sometimes bad ideas die, killed by the weight of their misconceptions. But somComeMs ta7 ideaas thiivee Uy hope, platitudes, greed and outright lies. MmbrQ Dada: 1-11A6�)O9-0 Ager►ds lam No.• lal (.�o — -Icq5 That is Community Choice Aggregation (Energy). Lets review the talking points and uncover the underlying truth. What is Community Choice Aggregation? Here's how it works. Local government agencies form a new, semi-invisible government agency to purchase and sell electricity. The local utility company, such as SCE,provides transmission, distribution and customer billing services for a fee paid by the new agency's customers. All people who live and do business in the area become customers of the new agency unless they ask to "opt out. " Lets begin with the lynchpin of CCE-Energy Subsidies. "A sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive" From Forbes: "There is no doubt that (these) subsidies incentivize renewables, but what do they do to the cost of the electricity generated by them? They actually increase the cost. However, this cost is transferred from the ratepayer to the taxpayer, and so goes unnoticed by most Americans. Using the per-kWh subsidy numbers from EIA and UT in the figure above, each kWh of solar produced in 2010 received 88¢, more than ten times the actual cost of any other energy source. These subsidies have to be added to the retail cost of that energy to determine total costs since that's what was actually spent to produce it. So in 2010 and 2011, solar cost about 1000 per kWh, and in 2013 and 2014, solar cost about 800 per kWh. For comparison, nuclear energy cost between 4¢ and 5¢per kWh to produce over this time period. Remember, though, the cost to produce energy is not the same as the price charged for it. Price is set by the region and the market, and has add-ons for transmission, grid maintenance and other non production costs. Subsidies decrease the price while increasing the cost. " 1) Because renewable energy is always more expensive* than"system power" (fossil power sold through CAISO daily markets and hour-ahead markets) CCE's ability to offer competitive energy is solely dependent on taxpayer subsidies. These subsidies are now on the chopping block. "The Trump administration is again seeking severe cuts to the U.S. Energy Department division charged with renewable energy and energy efficiency research, according to a department official familiar with the plan. The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity,said the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy would see its $2.3 billion budget slashed by about 70 percent, to $700 million, under President Donald Trump's fisca12020 budget request." "Without that cash infusion, the wind and solar industries will need to become even more efficient, competing with energy sources such as natural gas and nuclear that will continue to receive federal subsidies. Under federal tax law, oil and natural gas drillers are singled out for lucrative deductions based on the amount of energy they produce.And nuclear powerplants receive a long list offederal benefits, including a $500 million cap on liability in the event of a meltdown." Choice. Proponents of CCE say "consumers want choice" 1) The customer has no "choice"under CCE. The city council or JPA makes all energy purchases. All of SCE's former customers are forced to become the CCE's customers and must"Opt-Out" if they want remain an SCE customer. If CCE is such a good deal why are customers automatically enlisted? because the consultants that implement CCEs realized a much higher retention rate when they do. If given an actual choice and the facts people do not willingly choose CCE. Cost. Proponents say "ratepayers bills will go down" 2 1) When I began researching CCE four years ago I attended or watched over a dozen presentations including the meeting at our main library on March 20th, 2017. At the time all of the presentations quoted that ratepayers could"possibly receive S%savings through CCE".Now, CCEs are claiming possible savings of 2%. That's a 3%drop in the promoted, not actual, savings in just 2 years. The CCE pricing propaganda is going in the wrong direction. 2) CCEs claim that they will buy power"more competitively"than SCE or other IOUs. This is impossible as SCE's scale is massive compared to any particular city or JPA and thus cities will always have less buying power, not more than the SCE. The proposed Irvine group would encompass Irvine, Costa Mesa, Huntington Beach,Newport Beach and Tustin; of which the combined population is 763,182. SCE's coverage area has a population of 20,549,812. To put that in perspective the proposed Irvine joint CCE would be just 3.71% of SCE's coverage area...Kern County alone has more people than all of the proposed Irvine CCE combined. It's like your corner grocer claiming he can sell Corona cheaper than Costco...economies of scale and common sense tell us that cannot be true. 3) How exactly do CCEs offer lower rates than IOUs? SCE, PG&E and SDG&E must go before the PUC's Energy Resource Recovery Account(ERRA) and General Rate Case (GRC) and disclose their future pricing. CCEs get to sit there and take note. Then they price their power fractionally less than the IOUs. It's like having to disclose your cards at poker but the other guy doesn't. This way CCEs can always appear competitive. https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/Costs Rates/s 4) You're never free from SCE. CA energy regulators increased the fees (PCIA-Power Charge Indifference Adjustment,the charge that SCE levies for every customer lost to CCE)by 1.68%, topping 5% overall. This comes directly out of any proposed"savings"CCEs might offer. From the Newport Beach Independent: "Laguna Beach decided not to participate in the proposed clean energy authority,partly because of a recent ruling by the California Public Utilities Commissions that allows investor-owned utilities to recover costs (PCIA)from customers leaving their system, Shohreh Dupuis, assistant city manager and director ofpublic works said in a statement to the Daily Pilot. ". We strongly suspect that the Irvine CCE is being rushed right now because of the PCIA increase. Quote from Dawn Weisz, Marin Clean Energy CEO March 20th, 2017 "We must make SCE whole (with PCIA), we have no idea what that costs, SCE is working on the model now, biggest unknown for CCE" 5) Recently a former energy executive with deep knowledge of CCE reviewed Irvine's feasibility study and found that, at best, a $.88 per month savings for the average household. 6) Startup costs. $10 million for HB alone. These costs are fronted by Irvine to entice HB but will need to be paid back entirely. 7) During the CCE meeting held at HB's main library on March 20th, 2017 Lancaster junior city manager Jason Caudle (current CEO of the Lancaster Ca Choice Energy Authority) said `you can't do it cheaper and greener than SCE, We have not seen cheaper energy" Green Energy Fraud. Proponents of CCE say"you will be able to buy Green Energy" 1) CCEs purchase fossil fuel energy and sell it as "green"by a process known as "Greenwashing". Greenwashing happens when a renewable energy provider like a solar farm, which receives massive taxpayer subsidies, produces energy. When 1 megawatt of clean energy is produced the solar farm operator can issue a REC (renewable eneray certificate),they can then sell the REC to a CCE which purchases fossil fuel energy and applies the REC to the purchase, thereby "greenwashing" that megawatt of power allowing the CCE to call it "renewable", or "green" energy. Think of RECs as a taxpayer subsidized"discount coupon"allowing CCEs to purchase cheap fossil fuel and fraudulently pass it off to ratepayers as"Green"energy. The RECs game, and the profits derived from misleading consumers, is over with the implementation of AB 1110 in late 2019. 3 2) Because of the physical reality of the grid the consumer cannot *buy* green, or renewable, energy. Our grid system delivers power to customers, it wouldn't know what energy is green or otherwise. All CCEs claim that consumers can, in fact, directly buy renewable power through the CCE and they even sell tiered plans where the consumer is offered increased amounts of"green energy" if they pay more (see image at the top). This is fraud. There is no way to take power produced from a renewable source and separate it from the power produced by SCE and send it to a customer. "When electricity is generated—either from a renewable or non-renewable power plant—the electrons added to the grid are indistinguishable".NREL 3) Because they are always subsidized by the taxpayers renewables are always more costly and when subsidies are decreased or removed will massively increase consumer costs. The concept and pricing are a scam and will only continue to be viable as long as renewable energy is subsidized. After that the game is over and taxpayers will be stuck with wildly escalating energy bills. 4) The state of California already mandates the use of renewables, fully 50%of the state's energy must come from renewables by 2030. Because of this there is no need to take the risk of CCE. Accountability and Potential Misuse. 1) IOUs must go before the Public Utility Commission (PUC)to ask for rate increases. CCEs are under no such burden, a rate increase can be made at the whim of a city council or the JPA. 2) Every time the city needs an infusion of cash the urge to raise energy rates will be irresistible for unprincipled leaders. In a city with 200k residents and 1000s of commercial ratepayers raising their rates even 1%would result in massive revenue increases. To politicians who are constrained by the fiscal realities of CA this ability will be like catnip. It is a tool that should never be in the hands of politicians. 3)Joint Powers Authority. A JPA is simply a legal formation allowing cities to collude on CCE. The JPA will be populated with council people. 4)No actual choice. Although billed, literally, as"choice"the customer's only possible decision is whether they stay or exit the CCE. SCE. 1) Power Generation is the riskiest part of the retail energy business due to fuel and maintenance costs. IOUs want out of the generation business. CCE gives SCE a way to get out of long-term contracts. Then SCE charges CCEs for energy transport and billing and keeps all customers on the hook with monthly PCIA fees. With CCE SCE literally has their cake and eats it all up. New Bureaucracy and Fiscal Danger. 1) CCEs will create a massive new bureaucracy with new upfront costs ($10 million), pensions and ongoing liabilities. And, because no one in local government has any experience buying power in the energy markets any choices they make could have disastrous consequences for the taxpayers of HB. CCEs will sign long-term energy contracts that will be irrevocable. If cities guess wrong they will fiscally encumber their towns, at a time that all CA cities are scrambling to increase revenue and decrease costs. Implementation of CCE could be catastrophic. Think Enron. 2) Irvine CCE will be in precarious financial situation because CPUC (Rulemaking 18-07-003: "DECISION ON 2019 RENEWABLES PORTFOLIO STANDARD PROCUREMENT PLANS") upholds SB350, which requires all energy providers to have executed long-term contracts for their renewable energy. This means that Irvine, like all CCEs, will (i) need tens of millions of dollars as collateral to execute these energy contracts... or (ii) Irvine will keep this liability secret while launching its CCE, and then escalate its retail electricity prices to attempt to raise tens of millions of dollars to fund its looming contract liability. The consultants operating Irvine's CCE will likely tell few, if any City of Irvine staffers about this (assuming they know), and will attempt 4 to push Irvine into figuring out how to make things work down the road, after the Irvine CCE launches. Unlike NICE and SCP, which have on hand $217 MM and$60 MM in cash& securities,respectively, and have already executed much of their req'd long term energy contracts, this is not a smart time to be launching a new CCE because new CCEs don't have the requisite financial strength to execute long-term energy contracts. As things progress, the consultants will be taking their fee money from Irvine while claiming the financial calamity was beyond their knowledge. 3)The danger of a city or JPA's insolvency because of starting and running a CCE cannot be overstated. CCEs sales points are false, startup costs are huge, bureaucracies are increased and ratepayers are put in fiscal and actual danger from the implementation of CCE. 4) Looking over Irvine's feasibility study it appears to rely heavily on existing CCEs (Mann Clean Energy et al...)cash on hand. From energy expert Jim Phelps: "... the early CCEs all benefitted from massive use and abuse of RECs. RECs allowed early CCEs to sell "clean" energy that was little more than inexpensive system power (fossil power sold through CAISO daily markets and hour-ahead markets)plus a certificate. CCEs then benchmarked their prices against PG&E's (high)prices, and sold this clean energy at a premium to consumers. In other words, NorCal CCEs sold high-profit-margin "REC clean energy"against an incumbent utility whose prices were high, and in the process banked millions of dollars. " 4) The unbundled RECs game, and the profits derived from misleading consumers, is over with the implementation of AB 1110 (Greenhouse gases emissions intensity reporting) in late 2019. 5) Energy Executive Jim Phelps "The schism between old CCEs and new CCEs—the haves and the have nots— is seen by many in the energy industry. We all believe that newer CCEs will fail financially, while older CCEs with large cash holdings survive—these guys are getting credit ratings as they prepare to float bonds. That —$47 million reserve fund that Irvine's consultant shows in its pro forma table for CCE is...fiction. Cities may have a " inancial firewall" that insulates them from PPA (Power Purchase Agreement) liabilities, but they will STILL incur on-going costs for bonds, Feed-in Tariffs, etc. Failures will be messy& expensive for cities. " Physical Danger. 1) Ratepayers enjoy stable electricity with IOUs like SCE. Recent intentional blackout events highlight the danger of the CA government involving themselves in the energy business, with disastrous results. CA is in the grip of environmental regulatory insanity forcing costs to skyrocket and reliability to plummet. CCEs are the local extension of those regulatory overreaches. Ask any of the 800,000 PG&E customers who recently had their lights turned out how they feel about energy reliability. 2) Our grid was not designed to handle renewables. Renewables like solar power overload the grid with energy that must sometimes be offloaded to other states or risk overload. This puts great stress on the CA grid. 3) CAISO. CA's energy"traffic cop". CCEs create demand and confusion. A CA Balancing Authority(CBA) is responsible for maintaining the electricity balance within its region. The Balancing Authority does this by controlling the generation and transmission of electricity throughout its own region, and between neighboring Balancing Authorities. Every hour of every day, Balancing Authorities undertake a delicate dance to ensure the generation, transmission and distribution systems are all working reliably to meet California's energy needs. https://www.tanc.us/understanding-transmi ssion/a-matter-of-balance/ 4) "Besides having the most expensive electricity west of the Mississippi River in the continental U.S., California already has the least reliable electricity,"Forbes reported. "California easily leads the nation with nearly 470 power outages a year, compared to 160 for second place Texas, which is really amazing because Texas produces 125% MORE electricity! ere)." "California's reliability problems will be multiplied as more wind and solar enter the power mix, intermittent resources located in remote areas that cannot be so easily transported to cities via the grid." 5 Conflicts of Interest. 1) Irvine's CCE feasibility study was performed by EES Consulting. From EES' CCE page "EES Consulting, Inc. (EES) is currently providing technical energy consulting services such as feasibility assessment,feasibility peer review services, and implementation and launch services to numerous CCE initiatives in California". So the company tasked with giving a non-biased opinion on whether the CCE would be viable is also the company that would likely run and operate it and be involved in energy purchases profiting handsomely from the commissions received. What is the likelihood that EES would recommend denial of the potential CCE ? Zero. Only one consultancy has written a negative CCE feasibility report,they have never worked for a CCE again. 2) During the CCE debate held at HB city hall on 2017 the advocate was Howard Choi, (Board Chair/General Manager, Office of Sustainability, County of Los Angeles) Mr. Choi left soon after for consultancy job at EES. In conclusion, The HB City Council would be locking our town into a program based on taxpayer-funded subsidies,and massive accounting tricks; in that way CCE is more akin to a pyramid scheme than an energy program. Government takes taxpayer money to subsidize renewables then mandates program that REQUIRE those same renewables. When(not if) subsidies for renewables are stopped energy prices will naturally skyrocket. Huntington Beach City Council members were elected to lead,to look deeply into the issues that affect its citizens and make the most informed decisions possible. With that in mind please vote NO ON CCE Yours, Michael Hoskinson Former HB Planning Commissioner 2014-16 6 Moore, Tania From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 3:01 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: CCE From:Craig Frampton<cframpton143@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 12:37 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:CCE This is to let the whole council know that. The citizens of this town are united in our fight against this vote. But we realize we have 5 council members who are bought and paid for by the unions. Barbara your fake Q&A was pathetic. But be warned. We are going to run the biggest campaign this city has ever seen to get people to opt out. Just remember. Tito got 40 thousand votes. Craig Frampton Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Mee"fie:, Ag*ncM RWn No: 1�I Moore, Tania From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 3:03 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:R MyHB-#488157 City Council [40179] From: MyHB<reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 12:53 PM To:Jun, Catherine<catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:©MyHB-#488157 City Council [40179] MyHB New Report Submitted -#488167 Status new Work Order #488157 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes Vote NO on CCE. Keep SCE as our energy provider. View the Report Reporter Name Mary Jane Bartee Email �I PPLEMENTAL Mlbsubl3(a)yahoo.com COMMUNICATION Phone meeft Date. Report Submitted DEC 21, 2020 - 12:53 PM pP.nca ltqMwo.�l°I�n,� ` P - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Moore, Tania From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 3:03 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:© MyHB-#488159 City Council [401801 From: MyHB <reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 12:57 PM To:Jun, Catherine<catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:©MyHB-#488159 City Council [40180] MyHB New Report Submitted -#488159 Status new Work Order #488159 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes Vote NO on CCE. Keep SCE as our energy provider View the Report Reporter Name Mary Jane Bartee SUPPLEMENTAL Email k,41 #IJNICATION mibsubl UDYahoo.com Meetirng Cate. Phone Report Submitted Agenda Item Wo.�Iq 5 DEC 21, 2020 -12:56 PM J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Moore, Tania From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 3:04 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:Tonight's Agenda Item 19 on CCE From: larry mcneely<Imwater@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 1:12 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:Tonight's Agenda Item 19 on CCE I watched the emergency meeting on the CCE proposal, it seems funny to me that this was even held"Emergency"?This when the only two on our council could have interjected reason and objections.Not only do I find this objectionable I see it as a way to sneak a vote through without objections. I Oppose our city's efforts to place us in a risky misadventure to form what is best described as another Enron type Fiasco despite what Crary Dan Kalmick Says placing our city at risk and adding layers to the process of adding employees and overhead while hoping for a better rate. If you remember Bob Citron who invested in risky misadventures and caused the County to go Bankrupt, luckily we had a wise experienced County elector come and save the County. I also take issue with the fact that the public is barred from public speaking in person yet a consultant who profits off our city is allowed to speak in person while those in our community and barred.Open up our city council meetings with the same safeguards we had just before the ban. SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date;LL Agenda Item No. - 3045 1 1 Moore, Tania From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 3:05 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: CCE-NO From: Lisa Ager<lisabager@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 1:35 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: CCE-NO Please vote no on CCE today. HB does not need additional debt or assistance with utilities that will add further funding issues down the road. Lisa Ager-HB resident. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting pate: . Agenda Item No.:,—A-q �`%Q 0-)0q5) Moore, Tania From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 3:06 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: CCE Item From: Kathy Carrick<carrick92647@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 1:46 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: CCE Item City Council Members, Please vote not on joining with Irvine in a CCE. Most HB residents don't have enough information on this and most that do don't want it. The city of HB has its hands full with many other issues. This is not the time to take on the creation and administration of an energy company. It is the belief of many that this is a politically motivated move to force HB residents into using "green" energy. This is not what the residents want. Please listen to the people you represent and vote NO on CCE. Respectfully, Kathy Carrick 45 year HB resident SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION MeetfngarP: Agenda item No.• l Moore, Tania From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 3:06 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:E] MyHB-#488213 City Council [40183] From: MyHB<reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 1:54 PM To:Jun, Catherine <catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:©MyHB-#488213 City Council [40183] MyHB New Report Submitted -#488213 Status new Work Order #488213 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes I oppose item 19 "Adopt Ordinance No.4227 regarding consideration of joining the Orange County Power Authority(OCPA), a Community Choice Energy (CCE)Joint Powers Authority" on the Council's agenda for Dec 21,2020. 1 strongly urge all council members to reject the item. View the Report Reporter Name Nicholas Mestanas Email SUPPLEMENTAL Nmestanas(d)gmail.com COMMUNICATION Phone MAMkV Data: 9A 714-375-0303 Report Submitted N9M N0" DEC 21, 2020-1:54 PM 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please do not change subject line when responding. 2 Moore, Tania From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 3:07 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:Agenda Item 19/20-2095 - CCE From:Steve Farnsworth<hazmn54@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, December 21, 20201:56 PM To:CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org>; Chi, Oliver<oliver.chi@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:Agenda Item 19/20-2095-CCE Mayor, City Council Members and City Manager, I am asking you to NOT adopt Ordinance 4227 (joining the JPA). There are a number of reasons this is not good for the City. Money is the number one reason. SCE already provides "green energy" to all of it's customers. By joining a JPA that promises to provide lower cost, greener energy is not a wise decision at any time. more less at a time where the city doesn't'have money to throw away. As mentioned at the last meeting, the savings to residential customers "could be" 1.5%. That's wonderful,the average citizen in Huntington Beach could save $1.50 off their electric bill by using "green energy" at the lowest tier of the JPA's purchasing tiers. If someone wants to go greener, it's going to cost them more. So why does the city feel compelled to spend $100's of thousands of dollars just to get into this now? The downside of the CCE/JPA is that citizens will end up paying more for their electricity and if enough people "opt out" the City looks like it could lose millions $$$. I would ask you to replay Erik Peterson's talk about CCE from a year or two ago, or listen to his common sense tonight. Honestly I don't believe any of you will read this, I'm just another complaining citizen. I did however work for SCE for 30 years, I know how the system works, I know SCE is mandated by the PUC to have contracts with all the renewable energy that is out there. I do know that SCE purchases about 40% of renewable energy now that is delivered to your home and with their mass purchasing power the cost is less than what a small JPA would pay. SCE also offers the option to buy more green power if a customer wants. So, the question is WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH WANT TO GET INTO THE ELECTRICAL BUSINESS. Leave that to the experts. You as a City Council member have more to stay busy with the multitude of issues in HB right now, and the last thing you need to do is add the buying and selling of electricity. If this passes, I will opt out as many others have in parts of the country that this consultant sham is in place. Thank you for your time. I have more to say, but like I said I seriously doubt anyone will read this. Steve Farnsworth (714) 975-1038 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: ao Agenda hem No.• 20 1 Moore, Tania From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 3:07 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: No on CCE -----Original Message----- From: Sally Neiser<sneiser@pacbell.net> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 2:50 PM To:CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: No on CCE Please vote NO to pursue CCE for HB energy needs.This is a horrible long-term situation for the residents of Huntington Beach that YOU represent.Vote NO! Sincerely, Sally Neiser SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Mee#ng Date: ,�d��. -on Agenda llUM No.•4 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Friday, December 18, 2020 1:56 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: Irvine and CCE Program From: Dee Fox<dee.fox@me.com> Sent: Friday, December 18, 2020 1:49 AM To:cityhall@buenapark.com; constituentservices@costamesaca.gov; fred.jung@cityoffullerton.com; AhmadZ@cityoffullerton.com; council@lakeforestca.gov; CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Irvine and CCE Program I am an Irvine Resident and very concerned about our City organizing a Community Choice Energy Program. Our City Council appointed Mike Carroll as a board member and he abused taxpayer funds to the tune of $72,000. He used these funds to promote himself in the last election. Mayor Christina Shea, at that time, was appalled and left the decision with the new council as to how to handle his blatant abuse. Since Mike Carroll, Farrah Khan, and Anthony Kuo are part of the majority council that answers to developers, nothing was done. The new Mayor, Farrah Khan, shifted funds around to makeup less then half of the shortfall. This was done after almost 75 public comments were received that stated they wanted Mike Carroll removed for breaking their own city law of using taxpayer dollars for self promotion. Recently these three council members voted to approve an item to be able to get on the agenda requires two council members support or just the support of the Mayor. Again, approximately 75 residents spoke out against this stating it silences the minority council. But it was approved anyway. So, needless to say, the people of Irvine are not happy with our council. Since the council doesn't listen to its people, the people will not be listening to Mike Carroll or Farrah Khan. Mike Carroll is not to be trusted with any part of financial dealings. He was put in this position for a reason, it was planned, and it has nothing to do with"greener" energy or saving costs for residents. And if Mike Carroll's history doesn't concern you, this program should ... https://www.technocracy.news/energyy-alert-community-choice-aggregator-latest-energy -sue https:Hirvinecommunitypewsandviews.or investigation-continues-into-vice-mayor-carrolls-misuse-of- taxpayer-funds/ Dee Fox SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Da*_ /--�1.211 pW ?-C) Agenda brn No.L /9 - a Moore, Tania From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 8:45 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: No on CCE From: Mark Moreno<djmarkmoreno@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, December 20, 2020 8:31 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: No on CCE No on CCE - we oppose this Mark Moreno www.markmorenousa.com SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Da* oZ AgerwU rmn No.._ Moore, Tania From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 8:31 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: No on CCE From: Roger Sabanegh <roger@sabanegh.com> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 7:37 AM To: Ortiz,Tito<Tito.Ortiz @surfcity-hb.org> Cc:CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: No on CCE No on CCE Keep SCE directly accountable. Adding a middle broker increases administrative overhead. Roger Sabanegh roger sabanegh.com 1 714-742- 3726 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION MMOV�:_ i 14'3oa- Moore, Tania From: Steven C. Shepherd, Architect <steve@shepherdarchitects.com> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 11:32 AM To: CITY COUNCIL; supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: Agenda Item #19 - YES on CCE 4 HB! Hello HB City Council— My name is Steve Shepherd. I am an HB resident writing in support of Agenda Item #19, which would have the City of Huntington Beach join the Orange County Power Authority (OCPA). I've been writing to the HB City Council for three years, first, in favor of studying Community Choice Energy and now joining the cities of Irvine, Fullerton, Buena Park, and Lake Forest in an Orange County-based Community Choice Energy program. In past correspondence, I've often cited basic facts about how CCE's operate and publicly available information on the track record of different operational CCE throughout the State of California. I felt this was essential information for those in our community to consider before making an educated decision about CCE for HB. Sadly, it would appear that even after three years, many of the same inaccurate and seemingly disingenuous claims about CCE are resurfacing again. After you approve of Agenda Item #19, 1 urge that the City of Huntington provide some elementary CCE education for Huntington Beach residents. It doesn't need to be extensive. Perhaps just a CCE page on the City of Huntington Beach website would be enough, but it is a mistake to ignore misinformation no matter how silly or baseless it is may appear. Thank you for voting YES on Agenda Item #19 and supporting choice for HB! Sincerely, Steve Shepherd Huntington Bch, 92646 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeft Dabs:_ I abdaFY?i n Agenda tWn No.:--1 of (fin- a) Moore, Tania From: Belindajon <belindajon@aol.com> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 12:16 PM To: CITY COUNCIL; supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: Yes on Agenda Item #19 - Community Choice Energy Dear City Council— I'm not a political person, as much as that's possible these days, but I care about my community's wellbeing very much. I think Community Choice Energy is a good idea for Huntington Beach. It seems like there are lots of people who are afraid of anything new or different. While I can empathize with their feelings, I think we must always be looking for new opportunities for our city and our residents. I've seen a few posts insisting this is a bad idea, but I can't find an actual source to back up any of these claims. I had only one question about Community Choice Energy, and although I'm not a researcher, it wasn't hard to find the answer to my biggest concern: Is the City of Huntington Beach at risk or liable if this program fails? The answer: No.The cities and counties have firewalled their general funds by forming a Joint Powers Authority (JPA). The debts and liabilities of the JPA do not extend to the member cities and counties. This firewall is protected by state law. While I really do feel for my fellow residents who are legitimately afraid, we cannot reject progress due to irrational fears. Lastly, it seems everyone overlooks one of the best aspects of Community Choice Energy programs: the ability to choose. Anyone who rejects change has the choice to keep everything the same. Please vote in favor of Agenda Item #19. Thank you. Belinda Jon Huntington Beach 92646 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Viee*V Date: Agenda Item No.: i Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Friday, December 18, 2020 1:58 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: CCE (Community Choice Energy) - so called emergency city council meeting for IRVINE??? From: Maria T. Spain <mtspainl@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2020 11:30 AM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org; CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Fw: CCE (Community Choice Energy) - so called emergency city council meeting for IRVINE??? Please advise if the City County Members below have received and read my email below. Maria T. Spain Email: mtspain1(cDyahoo.com, Mobile: 714-600-9992 "Nothing in life is to be feared,it is only to be understood. Now is the time to understand more,so that we may fear less."—Marie Curie ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Maria T. Spain <mtspain1@yahoo.com> To: city.counciI(a-)surfcity-hb.org <city,council(a,)surfcity-hb.org>', Michael Gates <michael.gates(c),surfcity-hb.orq> Cc: oliver.chi(d�surfcity-hb.org <oliver.chi(Z.surfcity-hb.org> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020, 06:14:09 PM PST Subject: CCE (Community Choice Energy) - so called emergency city council meeting for IRVINE??? To the City of Huntington Beach Mayor and City Council Members: CC: City Attorney Michael Gates; City Clerk Robin Estanislau As a long-time member of the community; I have been vehemently opposed this horribly, misguided scam of a program since it was first proposed a few years ago. As the facts continue to evolve more and more, like my fellow neighbors, we stand in opposition to this dangerous program. • Please explain to me why? We just had a our City Council Election and yet the first move out-the-gate is an emergency meeting, without the benefit of having ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS in attendance with the express intent to benefit the City of Irvine. Excuse me but since when do we bend to another city's agenda????????????????????? • Why are we "covering the backs" of Irvine's bad decision instead of protecting the best interest of our own city. • The citizens of Huntington Beach did NOT vote for HB City hall to take over the energy business! • Seriously, this requires at a minimum; to be discussed at a council meeting when ALL newly elected City Council members are fully present. • Meanwhile, this city has a high priority of issues we are facing: 1 . The growing homeless crisis, 2. The crumbling infrastructure, 3. The increased budget losses, to the likes HB has never experienced before. 4. A massively unfunded pension debt and, 5. Our Local HB small businesses are collapsing all around us; everywhere we see empty strip malls, and huge loss of business and city revenue. 6. A year-long pandemic crisis, and all the services that been affected for our most vulnerable, children and seniors. 7. And Gruesome Newsome Governor has to GO!!! WE NEED Strong City Leadership is desperately needed to immediately address and come up with solutions to the ISSUES IMPORTANT TO THE CITIZENS....NOT SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS AND THEIR AGENDAS!! hold our Mayor and City Council wholly responsible to respond to these issues and crisis and show up! Show up to support our City first. Irvine is not our issues. fully expect at a minimum continuous email communication; one that informs the HB Citizens as to How and When will this be seriously discussed for resolution. NOW! Including Quote from another HB Citizen: Last night several things were said regarding the financial aspects of CCE that raised red flags. First. Councilman Dan Kalmick admitted that the savings to ratepayers would be less than 2%. He actually provided an example using 1.5% savings to ratepayers. If you recall, when CCE was first raised as a possibility for our city, the city council members in favor (and staff) were promising a 5% rate savings to us. Earlier in the discussion last night one of the consultants raised the point that there would be plenty of money to pay Irvine back for the upfront costs charged to 2 Huntington Beach to join the JPA (Joint Powers Authority). He said there would be "tens of millions of of dollars of profit generated" by the JPA. If I think of these two comments and try to make sense of them as a whole, several questions arise. • First, most of us have done family budgets. We realize that there is an income side, an expense side and a savings side. For most of us the income side doesn't vary much. But, depending how we decide to live our lives, the expense side can vary greatly. Consequently the savings side (think income less expenses) can also vary. When looking at CCE, we have the income side, the cost of energy, the cost of running the program, the savings to the ratepayers and the amount of profit. • My question is, when the savings to the ratepayers was reduced from 5% to 1.5%, was it because the cost of energy has already increased 3.5% (indicating an unstable energy market)? Or did Irvine decide to retain a larger portion of the savings as profit, to be distributed to the cities making up the JPA? One of my concerns with the concept of CCE is that it infers that the governments will be making profit at the expense of the residents of the cities it supposedly serves. I am diametrically opposed to this. It is nothing more than a tax. Maria T. Spain Email: mtspain1 yahoo.com, Mobile: 714-600-9992 "Nothing in life is to be feared,it is only to be understood.Now is the time to understand more,so that we may fear less."—Marie Curie 3 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 5:01 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:0 MyHB-#488292 City Council [40188] From: MyHB <reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 4:06 PM To:Jun, Catherine <catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:R MyHB-#488292 City Council [40188] MyHB New Report Submitted -#488292 Status new Work Order #488292 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes Community Choice Energy: Asking the Huntington Beach Council to vote `No'. If passes I will be opting out and staying with SCE. View the Report Reporter Name Patrick Tone Email TonePJ3(aDaol.com Phone Report Submitted DEC 21, 2020 -4:05 PM - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 5:02 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: F] MyHB-#488293 City Council [40189] From: MyHB<reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 4:12 PM To:Jun, Catherine <catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:F MyHB-#488293 City Council [40189] MyHB New Report Submitted -#488293 Status new Work Order #488293 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes I want to express my wife and I opposition item#19 before the Council tonight.Thank you Mark and Valerie Tonkovich View the Report Reporter Name Mark Tonkovich Email Marktonko((Dgmail.com Phone 714-519-9555 Report Submitted DEC 21, 2020 -4:12 PM - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2020 9:33 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: " MyHB-#488360 City Council [40194] From: MyHB<reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent:Tuesday, December 22, 2020 1:34 AM To:Jun, Catherine <catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:0 MyHB-#488360 City Council [40194] MyHB New Report Submitted -#488360 Status new Work Order #488360 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes As a long-timeresidentofhuntibgton Beach, both my husband and I are opposed to CCE and prefer to continue with SCE as our electrical provider View the Report Reporter Name Maria and Don Howarth Email Maria howarth(a)yahoo.com Phone Report Submitted DEC 22, 2020-1:33 AM - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 3:03 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:0 MyHB-#488153 City Council [40178] From: MyHB<reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 12:51 PM To:Jun, Catherine <catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:0 MyHB-#488153 City Council [40178] MyHB New Report Submitted -#488153 Status new Work Order #488153 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes CCE-vote no, refer to Michael Hoskinsons Itr View the Report Reporter Name Cathi Crouch Email Crouchieplinkline.com Phone 714-848-1384 Report Submitted DEC 21, 2020-12:50 PM - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 3:28 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: Community Choice Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sarah<sarahkac@aol.com> Sent: Monday, December 21, 2020 2:17 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Community Choice Energy Dear City Board Members, As a resident of Huntington Beach since 2009,we have seen our city change.Some for the good of our community, but also a lot of bad moves by our city council.As a new board,you have the opportunity to do good for us. Please do not vote for this new energy source for our city. We pay a good deal in taxes to live in this beautiful city.We do not wish to pay more for our energy bill. Please don't risk our future for some new, unknown energy source. Sincerely, Sarah Aguayo Sent from my iPhone i s-o z 44 City of Huntington Beach ( PjT sDAj Dp7-1 &V. /�-_:�_ File #: 20-2082 MEETING DATE: 12/10/2020 Consider joining the Orange County Power Authority (OCPA), a Community Choice Energy (CCE) Joint Powers Authority (JPA) by adopting Resolution No. 2020-87, approving for introduction Ordinance No. 4227 and authoring execution of a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) Provide direction to staff on whether to join the Orange County Power Authority CCE JPA as a Founding Member. If the City Council directs to move forward, the staff recommendation would be as follows: A) Introduce Ordinance No. 4227 for first reading; "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Authorizing the Implementation of a Community Choice Aggregation Program;" and, B) Adopt Resolution No. 2020-87; "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, Approving the Orange County Joint Powers Authority Agreement and Authorizing the Implementation of a Community Choice Aggregation Program;: and, C) Authorize the City Manager to execute the Orange County Power Authority Joint Powers Agreement; and, D) Appoint from the City Council one Board Member and one Alternate to serve on the Board of Directors of the Orange County Power Authority on behalf of the City of Huntington Beach; and, E) Authorize and direct that staff perform a full financial risk assessment associated with joining the Orange County Power Authority, and bring those findings back for City Council consideration by February 1, 2021, to determine if the City should maintain membership or withdraw from the Orange County Power Authority before the March 1, 2021, no-risk deadline. City of Huntington Beach Page 1 of 1 Printed on 12/9/2020 powered 4 Legistar'" Dept. ID CS 20-020-Page 1 of 5 Meeting Date: 11/16/2020 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 12/10/2020 SUBMITTED TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY: Oliver Chi, City Manager PREPARED BY: Travis Hopkins, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Consider joining the Orange County Power Authority (OCPA), a Community Choice Energy (CCE) Joint Powers Authority (JPA) Statement of Issue: In 2018, the City of Irvine initiated a feasibility study to assess the possibility of implementing a CCE program for their community. Those efforts evolved over the past two years, and in 2020, Irvine extended an invitation to all Orange County municipalities, asking interested parties to consider joining them in forming a CCE JPA, which has since been named the Orange County Power Authority (OCPA). Currently, the city of Fullerton has signed on to participate in the OCPA with Irvine. In addition, the cities of Buena Park and Lake Forest are also expected to sign-on in 2020 to join the OCPA. Pursuant to the OCPA JPA agreement, there are certain benefits to joining the group in 2020, including the following: • Jurisdictions that join the group in 2020 will be considered a Founding Party member agency. • Founding Party agencies will automatically be placed on the new JPAs Executive Committee. • Those joining the JPA after 2020 will be considered an Additional Party member, and could be subject to a membership fee upon joining. Of note, the JPA agreement also provides that any agency joining the group has the right to withdraw for any reason and without any liability or cost prior to March 1, 2021. Given these factors, members of the City Council have requested the opportunity to consider joining the OCPA JPA, thereby opting Huntington Beach into the CCE program as a Founding Party member. Financial Impact: There is no direct fiscal impact from joining the OCPA JPA. Per the JPA agreement, participating agencies are not required to make any financial contribution. Rather, the City of Irvine has agreed through the JPA agreement to cover all initial start-up costs associated 5 Dept. ID CS 20-020-Page 2 of 5 Meeting Date: 11/16/2020 with establishing the new OCPA entity. Those costs that Irvine has agreed to cover include the following: • OCPA agency start-up costs, which are estimated at $2.5 M. • Initial working capital cash, which is estimated to be $8 - $17 M, depending on the participation level in the initial JPA agency. Additionally, as noted above, the JPA agreement stipulates that any participating agency has the right to withdraw from the venture for any reason and without any liability or cost prior to March 1, 2021. Financial details and risks associated with the proposed JPA, and its associated impacts on Huntington Beach, would need to be further reviewed and assessed based on actual participation levels after the JPA is formed. Of note, under the JPA agreement, Founding Party members have no financial obligation to the CCE entity being formed, which provides financial protections for Huntington Beach in the event that the City Council decides to move forward joining the OCPA. Additionally, in California, there are currently 21 CCE entities that have been formed, and none of those entities have experienced any serious financial difficulties. This reality means that it remains untested how much a CCE JPA could financially lean into its member agency, should any fiscal difficulties arise. Given these fiscal scenarios, should the City Council decide to move forward with joining the OCPA agency as a Founding Party member, staff would recommend that the City Council also direct that a full fiscal analysis of the JPA situation and its impacts on Huntington Beach be developed and presented for consideration by February 1, 2021. Recommended Action: Provide direction to staff on whether to join the Orange County Power Authority CCE JPA as a Founding Member. If the City Council directs to move forward, the staff recommendation would be as follows: A) Introduce Ordinance No. 4227 for first reading; An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Authorizing the Implementation of a Community Choice Aggregation Program; and B) Adopt Resolution No. 2020-87; A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, Approving the Orange County Joint Powers Authority Agreement and Authorizing the Implementation of a Community Choice Aggregation Program; and C) Authorize the City Manager to execute the Orange County Power Authority Joint Powers Agreement; and D) Appoint from the City Council one Board Member and one Alternate to serve on the Board of Directors of the Orange County Power Authority on behalf of the City of Huntington Beach; and 6 Dept. ID CS 20-020-Page 3 of 5 Meeting Date: 11/16/2020 E) Authorize and direct that staff perform a full financial risk assessment associated with joining the Orange County Power Authority, and bring those findings back for City Council consideration by February 1, 2021, to determine if the City should maintain membership or withdraw from the Orange County Power Authority before the March 1, 2021, no-risk deadline. Alternatively, the City Council should take no action if the decision is made to not move forward with joining the Orange County Power Authority as a Founding Party member. Analysis: CCE Background CCEs are a mechanism authorized in California in 2002 by Assembly Bill 117, whereby local electrical service customers are provided with options when it comes to determining who they purchase their power from. Under the CCE set-up, customers can continue to procure their electrical power through their current utility provider (in the case of Huntington Beach, that would be Southern California Edison), or they can opt to have a local municipal government (or a coalition of local governments) procure electrical power on their behalf. Typically, CCEs are established with larger environmental or social goals in mind, such as increasing the share of power procured from renewable sources. In addition, CCEs have been shown to provide slight cost savings (around 1-2% decrease) over traditional investor-owned utility operations. Of note, establishing a CCE does not mean completely severing ties with the investor- owned utility, given that the utility agency still owns and manages the distribution lines that transmit electrical power to homes and businesses. Further, the utility company still meters each customer's power usage, and continues to send customers their electrical bill. Under the CCE model, what changes is the entity which purchases electricity on behalf of the customer— rather than the utility company performing that role, the responsibility is transferred to the newly formed local entity. The Orange County Power Authority The City of Irvine has been spearheading an effort to create a regional CCE Joint Powers Authority (JPA), called the Orange County Power Authority (OCPA). Under this JPA approach, the OCPA would become the entity that procures power for its customer base, and would coordinate with SCE on electrical distribution, metering, and billing related matters. Of note, CCEs have been authorized to exist in California since 2002, and today, there are 21 CCE programs in California that serve around 10 million customers. Based on Irvine's efforts to date, staff is aware of at least 8 other agencies that are interested in joining the OCPA today. Those agencies include: 1. Irvine 2. Fullerton 3. Lake Forest 4. Buena Park 5. Costa Mesa Dept. ID CS 20-020-Page 4 of 5 Meeting Date: 11/16/2020 6. Laguna Woods 7. Santa Ana 8. Villa Park Of note, it appears that Irvine, Fullerton, Lake Forest, and Buena Park will be joining as Founding Party members by entering the JPA before the end of 2020, with the other identified agencies looking to participate as Additional Party members with possible JPA entry dates in 2021. Given the uncertain nature of which agencies are looking to join the JPA, it is difficult to model precise fiscal data for the proposed OCPA entity. However, Irvine has commissioned a detailed fiscal analysis to assess various possible scenario through a 10- year pro forma document, a copy of which is included as an attachment to this report. Per that assessment, the proposed OCPA was identified as being financially viable, with the following key summary findings: • OCPA would be able to repay the City of Irvine's start-up and working capital loans, and build up proper financial reserves, during the first 5-7 years of operation. • After initial debt service costs are repaid, it is estimated that a significant amount of net income will be available to the OCPA for use towards customer program or additional electrical rate discounts. If the decision is made to move forward with joining the OCPA, staff would recommend that a full assessment of the arrangement be analyzed and brought back for City Council review by February 1, 2021. In addition to a full financial analysis of the effort, included among some of the other issues that should be assessed are: • Structure / Management of the OCPA o The proposed OCPA agency is expecting to hire 2 staff members in 2021, and ramping up to 5 staff members in 2022. At build out in 2023, the OCPA is expected to have 10 employees in 2023. o The staffing, structure, and management of the OCPA will be critical to its success, and needs to be assessed moving ahead. • Customer Opt-out Risks o The primary risk to the CCE would be if it could no longer offer competitive electrical power rates when compared against SCE. Customers have the option of opting out of the OCPA CCE option, and will likely do so if power costs for the JPA exceed what is charged by SCE. o Based on actual experience in California, CCEs have seen opt-out rates of around 2-3% of eligible customers. o Additionally, customers could leave the OCPA entity and move to Direct Access programs. • Energy Cost Risks o CCEs face real financial risks associated with procuring energy, capacity, renewable energy credits, and carbon-free energy, all at a cost that is below revenues received from retail customers. 8 Dept. ID CS 20-020-Page 5 of 5 Meeting Date: 11/16/2020 • Legislative and Regulatory Risks o The electrical power industry is in the midst of significant change and disruption, and regulatory issues related to electrical energy procurement and management pose a possible risk moving forward. These issues need to be properly analyzed and reviewed moving forward. Environmental Status: Not applicable. Strategic Plan Goal: Click here to enter text. Attachment(s): 1) Orange County Power Authority Joint Powers Agreement 2) Ordinance No. 4227, An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Authorizing the Implementation of a Community Choice Aggregation Program 3) Resolution No 2020- 87, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Approving the Orange County Joint Powers Agreement and Authorizing Implementation of a Community Choice Aggregation Program 4) OCPA Preliminary Pro Forma 9 ATTAC H M E N T # 1 ORANGE COUNTY POWER AUTHORITY JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT This Joint Powers Agreement("Agreement'), effective as of the date specified in Section 1.2, below, which is November 20, 2020("Effective Date") is made and entered into pursuant to the Joint Exercise of Powers Act(California Government Code§ 6500 et seq.)relating to the joint exercise of powers among the parties set forth in Exhibit A. All parties that execute this Agreement prior to December 31,2020 shall be designated individually as"Founding Party"and collectively as "Founding Parties". All cities, counties, or other public agencies added as parties to this agreement after December 31, 2020 shall be designated individually as "Additional Party" and collectively"Additional Parties". The term"Party"refers individually to any Founding Party or Additional Party, and the term "Parties" refers collectively to the Founding Parties and the Additional Parties. RECITALS A. In 2002, Assembly Bill 117 (Stat. 2002, Ch. 838,codified at Public Utilities Code Sections 218.3,366,394,394.25,331.1 366.2,and 381.1)was signed into law allowing customers to aggregate their electrical loads as members of their local community with public agencies designated as community choice aggregators,and allowing such public agencies to aggregate the electrical load of interested consumers within their jurisdictional boundaries and purchase electricity on behalf of those consumers. B. In 2006,Assembly Bill 32(Stat.2006,Ch.488,codified at Health and Safety Code Sections 38500 et seq.), known as the Global Warming Solutions Act, was signed into law, mandating a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. C. In 2015, Senate Bill 350 (Slat. 2015, Ch. 547, codified at Health and Safety Code Section 44258.5; Labor Code Section 1720; Public Resources Code Sections 25302.2, 25310, 25327 and 25943; and Public Utilities Code Sections 237.5, 337, 352, 359, 365.2, 366.3, 399.4, 399.11, 399.12, 399.13, 399.15, 399.16, 399.18, 399.21, 399.30,454.51, 454.52, 454.55,454.56, 701.1, 740.8, 740.12, 9505, 9620, 9621, 9622, and Article 17 (commencing with Public Utilities Code Section 400))was signed into law,mandating a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. D. In 2018, Senate Bill 10 (Stat.f 2018, Ch. 312, codified at Public Utilities Code sections 399.11, 399.15, 399.30, and 454.53) was signed into law, directing that the Renewables Portfolio Standard to be increased to 60 percent renewables by 2030 and establishing a policy for eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources to supply 100 percent of electricity retail sales to California end-use customers by 2045. E. The Parties each hold various powers under California law, including, but not limited to, the power to purchase, supply, and aggregate electricity for themselves and customers within their jurisdictions in accordance with Public Utilities Code Sections 333.1 and 366.2, they are therefore properly empowered to enter into this Agreement under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act(Government Code Section 6500 et seq., the"Act'). 1 55695.00OO1U3485367.1 F. The purposes for entering into this Agreement are more fully specified in subsection 1.4 below, but principally consist of the study, promotion, development, funding, financing, purchasing, conduct, operation, and management of energy, energy efficiency and conservation, and other energy-related and community choice aggregation programs (the "CCA Program"), through which the following objectives may be advanced: (a) reducing greenhouse gas emissions related to the use of power throughout the Parties' jurisdictions and neighboring regions;(b)providing electric power and other forms of energy to customers at a competitive cost; (c) carrying out programs for ratepayers of all income levels to reduce energy consumption; (d) stimulating and sustaining the local economy by developing local jobs in renewable and conventional energy; and (e) promoting long-term electric rate stability, energy security and reliability for residents through local control of electric generation resources. G. The Founding Parties desire to establish a separate public agency, known as the Orange County Power Authority("Authority"),under the Act and consistent with Assembly Bill 117, in order to collectively implement the CCA Program,and to exercise any powers common to the Authority's members to further these purposes. H. The Parties have each adopted an ordinance electing to participate as a group in a community choice aggregation program through the Authority,as authorized by California Public Utilities Code § 366.2(a)(12)(B). AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, and conditions hereinafter set forth, it is agreed by and among the Parties as follows: SECTION 1. FOILMATION OF AUTHORITY 1.1 Creation of Agency. Pursuant to the Act there is hereby created a public entity to be known as The Orange County Power Authority. Pursuant to Section 6507 of the Act, the Authority is a public agency separate from the Parties. The jurisdiction of the Authority shall be all territory within the geographic boundaries of the Parties; however, the Authority may, as authorized under applicable law, undertake any action outside such geographic boundaries as is necessary to accomplish its purpose. 1.2 Effective Date and Term. This Agreement shall become effective and the Authority shall exist as a separate public agency on the date this Agreement is executed by at least two Parties. The Authority shall continue to exist, and this Agreement shall be effective, until this Agreement is terminated in accordance with this Agreement, subject to the rights of a Party to withdraw from the Authority. 1.3 Parties. The names, particular capacities, and addresses of the Parties are shown on Exhibit A as it may be amended from time to time. 1.4 Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to establish an independent public agency in order to exercise powers common to each Party to implement the CCA Program,and to 2 55695.00001t33485367.1 exercise all other powers necessary and incidental to accomplishing this purpose. This Agreement authorizes the Authority to provide opportunities by which the Parties can work cooperatively to create economies of scale and implement sustainable energy initiatives that reduce energy demand, increase energy efficiency, provide consumer choice and cost savings, and advance the use of clean, efficient, and renewable resources in the region for the benefit of all the Parties and their constituents,including,but not limited to,establishing and operating a CCA Program(collectively, the"Purpose"). The Parties intend for this Agreement to be used as a contractual mechanism by which they are authorized to participate in the CCA Program and achieve the Purpose. The Parties intend that other agreements shall define the terms and conditions associated with the implementation of the CCA Program and any energy programs approved by the Authority. SECTION 2. POWERS OF AUTHORITY 2.1 Powers. The Authority shall have all powers common to the Parties and such additional powers accorded to it by law. The Authority is authorized,in its own name, to exercise all powers and do all acts necessary and proper to carry out the provisions of this Agreement and fulfill its Purpose,including, but not limited to,each of the following powers: 2.1.1 Serve as a forum for the consideration, study, and recommendation of energy services for the CCA Program; 2.1.2 To make and enter into any and all contracts to effectuate the purpose of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, those relating to the purchase or sale of electrical energy or attributes thereof, and related service agreements; 2.1.3 To employ agents and employees, including, but not limited to, engineers, attorneys,planners,financial consultants,and separate and apart therefrom to employ such other persons,as it deems necessary; 2.1.4 To acquire, contract, manage, maintain, and operate any buildings, works, or improvements, including, but not limited to, electric generation resources; 2.1.5 To acquire property by eminent domain,or otherwise, except as limited by Section 6508 of the Act, and to hold or dispose of property; 2.1.6 To lease or license any property; 2.1.7 To sue and be sued in its own name; 2.1.8 To incur debts, liabilities, and obligations, including, but not limited to, loans from private lending sources pursuant to its temporary borrowing powers, such as California Government Code§ 53850 et seq. and authority under the Act; 2.1.9 To form subsidiary or independent corporations or entities, if appropriate, to carry out energy supply and energy conservation programs, or to take advantage of legislative or regulatory changes; 3 55695.000O1U3495367.1 2.1.10 To issue revenue bonds and other forms of indebtedness; 2.1.1 l To apply for,accept,and receive all licenses,permits,grants,loans,or other assistance from any federal,state,or local agency; 2.1.12 To submit documentation and notices, register, and comply with orders, tariffs,and agreements for the establishment and implementation of the CCA Program and other energy and climate change programs; 2.1.13 To adopt rules, regulations, policies, bylaws, and procedures governing the operation of the Authority; 2.1.14 To receive loans, gifts, contributions, and donations of property, funds, services,and other forms of financial assistance from persons, firms,corporations, and any governmental entity; 2.1.15 To make and enter into service agreements relating to the provision of services necessary to plan, implement,operate and administer the CCA Program and other energy programs, including the acquisition of electric power supply and the provision of retail and regulatory support services; 2.1.16 To receive revenues from sale of electricity and other energy-related programs; 2.1.17 To partner or otherwise work cooperatively with other CCAs on the acquisition of electric resources,joint programs, advocacy and other efforts in the interests of the Authority; and 2.1.18 To the extent not specifically provided in this Agreement, to exercise any powers authorized by the member agencies to achieve the Authority's objectives and such further powers not specifically mentioned herein, but common to Parties, and authorized by the California Government Code. 2.2 Additional Powers to be Exercised. In addition to those powers common to each of the Parties, the Authority shall have those powers that may be conferred upon it by law and by subsequently enacted legislation. 2.3 Manner of Exercising Powers. The powers specified in subsections 2.1 and 2.2 shall be exercised by the Board (as defined in subsection 3.1, below), unless otherwise delegated to a committee of the Board or the Chief Executive Officer of the Authority in accordance with a Board adopted policy or action. All such powers shall be exercised in the manncr set forth in this Agreement. 2.4 Limitation on Exercise of Powers: The powers of the Authority are subject to the restrictions upon the manner of exercising power possessed by the City of Irvine, California and 4 5 5695.0000 1 W483367.1 any other restrictions on exercising the powers of the Authority that may be adopted by the Authority's Board of Directors. SECTION 3: GOVERNANCE 3.1 General Governance: Board of Directors. The governing body of the Authority shall be a Board of Directors ("Board") consisting of one director for each Party appointed in accordance with subsection 3.2,except the City of Irvine whose governing body shall appoint two directors(the"Irvine Directors"). Notwithstanding the foregoing,the governing body of the City of Irvine shall appoint one director upon the full satisfaction and repayment of the Capital Loan, as defined in subsection 5.5. 3.2 Appointment of Directors. The governing body of each Party shall appoint and designate in writing the Director(s) who shall be authorized to act for and on behalf of the Party on matters within the powers of the Authority. The governing body of each Party shall also appoint and designate in writing an alternate Director(s)who may vote in matters when the regular Director is absent from a Board meeting. The governing bodies of the Founding Parties may, in their sole discretion, elect to appoint their respective Director(s) prior to the Effective Date, in which case such appointment(s) to the Board shall take effect on the Effective Date. The persons appointed and designated as the regular Director and the alternate Director shall be a member of the governing body of the Party when appointed. 3.3 Terms of Office. Each regular and alternate Director shall serve a term of four years. If at any time a vacancy occurs on the Board, a replacement shall be appointed by the governing body to fill the position of the previous Director within ninety(90)days of the date that such position becomes vacant. Replacement Directors shall serve until the scheduled expiration of the four year term of the Board member that they replace. 3.4 Quorum. A majority of the Directors of the entire Board shall constitute, and is necessary to constitute,a quorum,except that less than a quorum may adjourn a meeting from time to time in accordance with law. 3.5 Powers of the Board of Directors. The Board may exercise all the powers enumerated in this Agreement and shall conduct all business and activities of the Authority consistent with this Agreement and any bylaws,operating procedures, and applicable law. 3.6 Executive Committee. The Board shall establish an executive committee consisting of a smaller number of Directors upon the Authority's membership consisting of nine or more members. The initial members of the executive committee shall be the Directors of the Founding Members with the chair of the Board serving as chair of the Executive Committee. 3.7 Committees. The Board may establish committees as the Board deems appropriate to assist the Board in carrying out its functions and implementing the purposes of this Agreement. In accordance with subsection 2.3, the Board may delegate to any committees that consist solely of Board members any of the powers specified in subsection 2.1,except for the power to acquire property by eminent domain specified in subsection 2.1.5. Committees that include or consist of non-Board members shall be advisory only. 5 55695.00001\33495367.1 3.8 Director Compensation. The Board shall adopt policies establishing compensation attendance at Board and Committee meetings and work performed by each Director on behalf of the Authority as well as policies for the reimbursement of expenses incurred by each Director; provided that in no instance shall the per meeting or per day compensation be less than the compensation provided to directors of the Orange County Sanitation District. 3.9 Voting by the Board of Directors. 3.9.1 Fcual Vote. Each Director or participating alternate shall have one vote. Except as provided for in Sections 3.9.2, 3.9.3 and 3.9.4, action of the Board on all matters shall require an affirmative vote of a majority of all Directors who are present at the subject meeting ("Equal Vote"). 3.9.2 Votinp Shares Vote. Immediately after(and during the same Board Meeting as) an affirmative or tic Equal Vote, two or more Directors shall have the right to request and conduct a Voting Shares Vote (defined below) to reconsider that action approved by the Equal Vote. In the event of a Voting Shares Vote where the City of Irvine appoints two Directors to the Board and one or more Irvine Directors requests a Voting Shares Vote, a Party other than the City of Irvine must constitute the second Director for purposes of having the right to request and conduct a Voting Shares Vote. A"yes"vote on the Voting Shares Vote shall be a vote to reverse and reject the Equal Vote; a "no" vote on the Voting Shares Vote shall be a vote to affirm the Equal Vote. For Voting Shares Votes,votes shall be weighted as described in subsection 3.9.3. A "yes"vote on a Voting Shares Vote shall require(i)for votes requiring a majority under subsection 3.9.1, more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting shares of all Directors voting; (ii) for votes requiring a supermajority of two-thirds under this Agreement, sixty-seven percent(67%) or more of the voting shares of all Directors voting; and (iii) for votes requiring a supermajority of three quarters under this Agreement more than seventy-five percent (75%) of the voting shares of all Directors voting. All votes taken pursuant to this subsection 3.9.2 shall be referred to as a"Voting Shares Vote." If a Voting Shares Vote yields a "no"vote, the legal effect is to affirm the Equal Vote with respect to which the Voting Shares Vote was taken. If the Voting Shares Vote succeeds, the legal effect is to nullify the Equal Vote with respect to which the Voting Shares Vote was taken. If the underlying Equal Vote was a tie, the Voting Shares Vote replaces that tie vote. No action may be taken solely by a Voting Shares Vote without first having taken an Equal Vote. 3.9.3 Voting Shares Formula. When a Voting Shares Vote is requested by two or more Directors, voting shares of each Director shall be determined by the following formula: (Annual Energy Use/Total Annual Energy) x 100 For purposes of this formula(a)"Annual Energy Use"means(r) for the first two years following the Effective Date, the annual electricity usage, expressed in kilowatt hours ("kWh"), within the jurisdiction of the Party appointing the Director(s)and(it)following the second anniversary of the Effective Date, the annual electricity usage, expressed in kWh,of accounts within the jurisdiction of the Party appointing the Director(s) that are served by the Authority, and (b) "Total Annual Energy"means the sum of all Parties' Annual Energy Use. The initial values for Annual Energy 6 55695.0000I U3e85367.1 use are designated in Exhibit B and the initial voting shares are designated in Exhibit C. Both Exhibit B and Exhibit C shall be adjusted annually as soon as reasonably practicable after January 1 of each year,but no later than March 1 of each year,subject to the approval of the Board. Voting shares attributable to Irvine shall be divided equally between the Irvine Directors. 3.9.4 Special Voting. 3.9.4.1 Two-Thirds Supemiaiority Votes. An affirmative vote of two-thirds of the Directors of the entire Board shall be required to take any action on the following(r)issuing or repayment of bonds loans or other forms of debt; (h) adding or removing Parties on or after January 1, 2021; (iit) amending or terminating this Agreement or adopting or amending the bylaws of the Authority;and (iv) terminating the CCA Program. 3.9.4.2 Three-Fourths Supermaiority Votes.An affirmative vote of three-fourths of the Directors of the Board shall be required to initiate any action for eminent domain and no eminent domain action shall be approved within the jurisdiction of a Party without the affirmative vote of such Party's Director(or both Irvine Directors,if applicable, in the case of eminent domain action within the City of Irvine). 3.9.4.3 Advance Notice of Special Voting. At least thirty(30)days advance written notice to the Parties shall be provided for all special voting items under subsection 3.9.4.1 and/or subsection 3.9.4.2. Such notice shall include a copy of all substantive documents necessary to meaningfully deliberate and consider the proposed vote (e.g., any proposed amendment to this Agreement or the bylaws of the Authority). The Authority shall also provide prompt written notice to all Parties of the action taken, which shall include any resolution, ordinance, rule, policy, agreement, filing or other operative document(if any) adopted or approved by the Board. 3.10 Officers. 3.10.1 Chair and Vice Chair. The Directors shall select from among themselves a Chair and a Vice-Chair. The Chair shall be the presiding officer of all Board meetings. The Vice-Chair shall serve in the absence of the Chair. The term of office of the Chair and Vice-Chair shall continue until the expiration of the office of the Directors serving in such positions. There shall be no limit on the number of terms held by the Chair and the Vice- Chair. The office of either the Chair or Vice-Chair shall be declared vacant and a new selection shall be made if: (r) the person serving dies, resigns, or becomes legally unable to fulfill his or her duties,or(b)the Party that appointed the Chair or Vice-Chair withdraws from the Authority pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 3.10.2 Secretary. The Secretary shall be responsible for keeping the minutes of all meetings of the Board and all other official records of the Authority. 3.10.3 Treasurer/Auditor. In accordance with California Government Code § 6505.5, the Board shall appoint a qualified person to act as the Treasurer and a qualified person to act as the Auditor,neither of whom need be members of the Board. The Treasurer 7 5 5695.0000 1\3 3495367.1 and the Auditor shall possess the powers of, and shall perform those functions required of them by California Government Code §§ 6505, 6505.5, and 6505.6, and by all other applicable laws and regulations and amendments thereto. 3.11 Meetings. The Board shall provide for its regular meetings, the date, hour, and place of which shall be fixed by resolution of the Board. Regular,adjourned,and special meetings shall be called and conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act, California Government Code § 54950 et seq. 3.12 Chief Executive Officer. The Board shall appoint a Chief Executive Officer. The Chief Executive Officer shall be the chief administrative officer of the Authority, and shall be Secretary of the Board. The powers and duties of the Chief Executive Officer shall be those delegated and/or assigned to the Chief Executive Officer by duly adopted action of the Board. 3.13 Additional Officers and Employees. The Board shall have the power to authorize such additional officers and assistants as may be necessary and appropriate, including retaining one or more administrative service providers for planning, implementing, and administering the CCA Program. Such officers and employees may also be, but are not required to be,officers and employees of the Parties. 3.14 Bonding Requirement. The officers or persons who have charge of,handle,or have access to any property of the Authority shall be the members of the Board, the Treasurer, the Executive Director, and any such officers or persons to be designated or empowered by the Board. Each such officer or person shall be required to file an official bond with the Authority in an amount which shall be established by the Board. Should the existing bond or bonds of any such officer be extended to cover the obligations provided herein, said bond shall be the official bond required herein. The premiums on any such bond attributable to the coverage required herein shall be the appropriate expenses of the Authority. 3.15 Audit. The records and accounts of the Authority shall be audited annually by an independent certified public accountant with the final audit completed within six months of.the fiscal year end,and copies of such audit report shall be filed with the State Controller, and each Party no later than fifteen (15)days after receipt of said audit by the Board. 3.16 Privileges and Immunities from Liability. All of the privileges and immunities from liability, exemption from laws, ordinances and rules, all pension, relief, disability, workers' compensation,and other benefits which apply to the activities of officers, agents, or employees of a public agency when performing their respective functions shall apply to the officers, agents, or employees of the Authority to the same degree and extent while engaged in the performance of any of the functions and other duties of such officers, agents, or employees under this Agreement. None of the officers, agents, or employees directly employed by the Authority shall be deemed, by reason of such employment to be employed by the Parties(or any of them). 8 5 5695.00001\33495367.1 SECTION 4: ADDITIONAL PARTIES AND IMPLEMENTATION OF CCA PROGRAM 4.1 Additional Parties. An incorporated city or county, or other public agency as authorized by California Public Utilities Code § 331.1, may become a member of the Authority and a Party to this Agreement upon satisfaction of the following: 4.1.l Adoption of a resolution by the governing body of the proposed additional party approving the Agreement, and requesting participation and an intent to join the Authority; 4.1.2 Adoption by the Board of a resolution authorizing participation of the proposed additional party; 4.1.3 Satisfaction of any additional conditions as established by the Board or applicable laws or regulations; and 4.1.4 Execution of the Agreement by the proposed additional party. 4.2 Continuing Participation. The Parties acknowledge that participation in the CCA Program may change by the addition or withdrawal or termination of a Party. The Parties agree to participate in good faith with additional members as may later be added. The Parties also agree that the withdrawal or termination of a Party shall not affect the enforceability of this Agreement as to the remaining Parties,or the remaining Parties'continuing obligations under this Agreement. 4.3 Implementation of CCA Program. The Authority shall cause to be prepared an implementation plan meeting the requirements of California Public Utilities Code § 366.2 ("Implementation Plan") and any applicable regulations of the California Public Utilities Commission("CPUC"). The Board shall approve the Implementation Plan prior to it being filed with the CPUC. The Authority, acting by and through the Board, shall take all such steps as are necessary and appropriate to implement the Implementation Plan and the CCA Program in a manner consistent with this Agreement. 4.4 Power Sunnly. The Board will establish power supply options for the Authority. The Authority's power supply options will include,but not be limited to,renewable and GHG-free base product that is equivalent to the minimum required by law. Each Party may select its power supply base product for the ratepayers in its jurisdiction. Each Party shall also have the flexibility to achieve its climate goals without impeding any other Party from doing the same. 4.4 Authority Documents. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the operations of the Authority will be implemented through various program documents and regulatory filings duly adopted by the Board, including, but not limited to, bylaws, an annual budget, and plans and policies related to the CCA Program. The Parties agree to abide by and comply with the terms and conditions of all such Authority documents that may be approved or adopted by the Board. 4.5 Termination of CCA Program. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed to limit the discretion of the Authority to terminate the implementation or operation of 9 55695.00001U3495367.1 the CCA Program at any time, so long as such termination is in accordance with any applicable requirements of state law and the voting procedures specified in subsection 3.9.4.1, above. SECTIONS: FINANCIAL PROVISIONS 5.1 Fiscal Year. The Authority's fiscal year shall be twelve(12)months commencing July 1 of each year and ending June 30 of the succeeding year. 5.2 Treasurer. The Treasurer for the Authority shall be the depository for the Authority. The Treasurer of the Authority shall have custody of all funds and shall provide for strict accountability thereof in accordance with California Government Code § 6505.5 and other applicable laws. The Treasurer shall perform all of the duties required in California Government Code § 6505 et seq. and all other such duties as may be prescribed by the Board. 5.3 Depository & Accounting. All funds of the Authority shall be held in separate accounts in the name of the Authority and not commingled with the funds of any Party or any other person or entity. Disbursement of such funds during the term of this Agreement shall be accounted for in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles applicable to governmental entities and pursuant to California Government Code § 6505 et seq. and other applicable laws. There shall be a strict accountability of all funds. All revenues and expenditures shall be reported regularly to the Board. The books and records of the Authority shall be promptly open to inspection by the Parties at all reasonable times. 5.4 Budget. The Board shall establish the budget for the Authority,and may from time to time amend the budget to incorporate additional income and disbursements that might become available to the Authority for its purposes during a fiscal year. 5.5 City of Irvine Initial Funding of Authority. The Authority shall, concurrent with the execution of this Agreement, enter into an agreement that covers repayment to the City of Irvine of(i)funding and collateral provided by the City of Irvine to the Authority to facilitate start- up and launch costs for the Authority and the CCA Program, and (it) costs incurred by the City (including staff, consultant, and legal expenses, and associated allocated overhead and administrative expenses) in connection with the study and analysis of the CCA, the formation of the Authority, and the creation of the Implementation Plan (the "Capital Loan Agreement" or the "Capital Loan"). The Capital Loan shall be repaid from customer charges for electrical services to the extent permitted by law when the CCA Program becomes operational. The form of the Capital Loan Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit D. The Authority shall enter into the Capital Loan Agreement so long as its final form is substantially consistent with the form attached as Exhibit D. 5.6 No Requirement for Contributions or Payments. Except as otherwise specified make herein, the Parties are not required under this Agreement to ma any financial contributions or payments to the Authority, and the Authority shall have no right to require such a contribution or payment. 5.6.1 Notwithstanding subsection 5.6, the Board may adopt a membership fee to be paid by Additional Parties upon entering into the Agreement, which 10 55695.00001 U3485367.1 membership fee shall be established (if at all)by the Board and may cover a reasonable estimate of the transactional and other costs incurred by the Authority in processing the addition of the Additional Party to the Authority. 5.6.2 Notwithstanding subsection 5.6, the Authority and a Party may mutually and voluntarily enter into an agreement to provide the following: (Q contributions of public funds for the purposes set forth in this Agreement; (it) advances of public funds for the purposes set forth in this Agreement, such advances to be repaid as provided by such written agreement; or(iii) its personnel,equipment or property. 5.6.3 For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in this Agreement requires, nor shall the Authority for any reason ever require,that any Party adopt any local tax, assessment, fee or charge for the benefit of the Authority. 5.7 Obligations of the Authoriri. Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties, the debts, liabilities, and obligations of the agency shall not be the debts, liabilities, and obligations, either jointly or severally, of the members of the agency. A Party may, in its sole discretion, agree to assume one or more of the debts, liabilities, and obligations of the Authority if, and only if, such Party, with the approval of its governing body, agrees in writing to assume any such debts, liabilities, or obligation of the Authority. SECTION 6: WITHDRAWAL AND TERMINATION 6.1 Right to Withdraw. 6.1.1 Right to Withdraw Prior to March 1. 2021. Except for the City of Irvine, a Party may withdraw from the Authority for any reason and without liability or cost prior to March 1, 2021 upon providing the Authority fifteen (15)days advance written notice. 6.1.2 Right to Withdraw After March 1, 2021. Except for the withdrawal provided for in Section 6.1.1,a Party may withdraw its membership in the Authority, effective as of the beginning of the Authority's fiscal year, b giving no less than one hundred eighty 180 B g Y' Y Y g g (� Y ( ) days advance written notice of its election to do so, which notice shall be given to the Authority and each Party. Withdrawal of a Party shall require an affirmative vote of the Party's governing board. A Party that withdraws from the Authority pursuant to this subsection may be subject to certain continuing liabilities as described in this Agreement. The withdrawing Party and the Authority shall execute and deliver all further instruments and documents, and take any further actions as may be reasonably necessary to effectuate the orderly withdrawal of such Party. 6.2 Involuntary Termination. This Agreement may be terminated with respect to a Party for material non-compliance with provisions of this Agreement upon a two-thirds vote of the entire Board(excluding the vote of the Party subject to possible termination) taken in accordance with subsection 3.9.4.1. Prior to any vote to terminate this Agreement with respect to a Party, written notice of the proposed termination and the reason(s)for such termination shall be delivered 11 55695.00001 U3<85367.1 to the Party whose termination is proposed at least thirty (30) days prior to the regular Board meeting at which such matter shall first be discussed as an agenda item. The written notice of proposed termination shall specify the particular provisions of this Agreement that the Party has allegedly violated with supporting documentation. The Party subject to possible termination shall have the opportunity at the next regular Board meeting following the expiration of the thirty-day (30) day notice period to respond to any reasons and allegations that may be cited as a basis for termination. The Party's response shall be evaluated at a public meeting prior to a vote regarding termination. A Party that has had its membership in the Authority terminated may be subject to certain continuing liabilities, as described in subsection 6.3. If the Board votes to terminate a Party's membership in the Authority, the effective date of the termination shall be scheduled by the Board, in its reasonable discretion,to ensure adequate time for the transition of the terminated Party's CCA Program customers to another electricity provider. The Parties expressly intend, agree and acknowledge that a Board action to terminate a Party's membership in the Authority shall be upheld so long as it is not arbitrary and capricious, and is supported by substantial evidence. 6.3 Continuing Liability: Refund. Upon a withdrawal of a Party under subsection 6.1.2 or involuntary termination of a Party under subsection 6.2, the Party shall be responsible for any claims, demands, damages, or liabilities attributable to the Party through the effective date of its withdrawal or involuntary termination. Such Party also shall be responsible liable to the Authority for (a) any damages, losses, or costs incurred by the Authority which result directly from the Party's withdrawal or termination, including, but not limited to, costs arising from the resale of capacity, electricity, or any attribute thereof no longer needed to serve such Party's load, and removal of customers from the CCA Program resulting from the withdrawal or termination of the Party; and (b)any costs or obligations associated with the Party's participation in any program in accordance with the program's terms,provided such costs or obligations were incurred prior to the withdrawal of the Party. Except as otherwise specified,such Party shall not be responsible for any claims, demands, damages, or liabilities commencing or arising after the effective date of the Parry's withdrawal or involuntary termination. From and after the date a Party provides notice of its withdrawal or is terminated, the Authority shall reasonably and in good faith seek to mitigate any costs and obligations to be incurred by the withdrawing or terminated Party under this subsection through measures reasonable under the circumstances; provided, however, that this obligation to mitigate does not impose any obligation on the Authority to transfer any cost or obligation directly attributable to the membership and withdrawal or termination of the withdrawing or terminated Party to the ratepayers of the remaining Parties. Further the liability of the withdrawing or terminated Party shall be based on actual costs or damages incurred by the Authority and shall not include any penalties or punitive charges imposed by the Authority. The Authority may withhold funds otherwise owing to the Party or may require the Party to deposit sufficient funds with the Authority,as reasonably determined by the Authority,to cover the Parry's liability for the costs described above. The withdrawing or terminated Party agrees to pay any such deposit determined by the Authority in consultation with a third party audit firm. Any amount of the withdrawing or terminated Party's funds held on deposit with the Authority above that which is required to pay any liabilities or obligations shall be returned to that Party. In the implementation of this subsection 6.3,the Parties intend, to the maximum extent possible, without compromising the viability of ongoing Authority operations, that any claims, demands, damages, or liabilities covered hereunder, be funded from the rates paid by CCA Program customers located within the 12 55695,0000103485367.1 service territory of the withdrawing Party,and not from the general fund of the withdrawing Party itself The liability of a withdrawing Party under this subsection shall be only to the Authority and not to any other Party. 6.4 Termination of Agreement. This Agreement may be terminated by vote of the Board in accordance with subsection 3.9.4.1, or by mutual agreement of all the Parties approved by majority votes of their respective governing bodies. provided, however, that this subsection shall not be construed as limiting the rights of a Party to withdraw in accordance with Section 6. 6.5 Disposition of Authority Assets Upon Termination of Agreement. Upon termination of this Agreement, any surplus money or assets in possession of the Authority for use under this Agreement, after payment of all liabilities, costs,expenses, and charges incurred by the Authority, shall be returned to the then-existing Parties in proportion to the contributions made by each. SECTION 7: MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 7.1 Dispute Resolution. The Parties and Authority shall make efforts to settle all disputes arising out of or in connection with this Agreement Before exercising any remedy provided by law, a Party or Parties and the Authority shall engage in nonbinding mediation in the manner agreed to by the Party or Parties and the Authority. In the event that nonbinding mediation does not resolve a dispute within one hundred twenty (120)days after the demand for mediation is made, any Party or the Authority may pursue any all remedies provided by law. 7.2 Liability of Directors. Officers, and Employees. The Directors, officers, and employees of the Authority shall use ordinary care and reasonable diligence in the exercise of their powers and in the performance of their duties pursuant to this Agreement. No current or former Director, officer, or employee will be responsible for any act or omission by another Director, officer, or employee. The Authority shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the individual current and former Directors, officers, and employees for any acts or omissions in the scope of their employment or duties in the manner provided by California Government Code § 995 et seq. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to limit the defenses available under the law to the Parties, the Authority, or its Directors, officers,or employees. 7.3 Indemnification. The Authority shall acquire such insurance coverage as the Board deems necessary to protect the interests of the Authority, the Parties, and the Authority's ratepayers. The Authority shall indemnify,defend,and hold harmless the Parties and each of their respective board members or council members, officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims, losses, damages, costs, injuries, and liabilities of every kind to the extent arising directly or indirectly from the conduct, activities, operations, acts, and omissions of the Authority under this Agreement. 7.4 Assignment. The rights and duties of a Party may not be assigned or delegated without the advance written consent of all other Parties. Any attempt to assign or delegate such rights or duties without express written consent of all other Parties shall be null and void. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and shall be binding upon, the successors and assigns of the Parties. This subsection does not prohibit a Party from entering into an independent agreement I � 13 55695.00001t33485367.1 with another entity regarding the financing of that Party's contributions to the Authority(if any), or the disposition of proceeds which that Party receives under this Agreement, so long as such independent agreement does not affect, or purport to affect,the rights and duties of the Authority or the Parties under this Agreement. 7.5 Severability. If any part of this Agreement is held, determined, or adjudicated to be illegal, void, or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement shall be given effect to the filllest extent reasonably possible. 7.6 Further Assurances. Each Party agrees to execute and deliver all further instruments and documents, and take any further action that may be reasonably necessary to effectuate the purposes of this Agreement. 7.7 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute but one and the same instrument. 7.8 Notices. Any notice authorized or required to be given pursuant to this Agreement shall be validly given if served in writing either personally, by deposit in the United States mail, first class postage prepaid with return receipt requested, or by a recognized courier service to the addresses specified on Exhibit A. Notices given (a) personally or by courier service shall be conclusively deemed received at the time of delivery and receipt and (b) by mail shall be conclusively deemed given 48 hours after the deposit thereof(excluding Saturdays, Sundays and holidays) if the sender receives the return receipt. All notices shall be addressed to the office of the clerk or secretary of the Authority or Party, as the case may be,or such other person designated in writing by the Authority or Party. Notices given to one Party shall be copied to all other Parties. Notices given to the Authority shall be copied to all Parties. [Signature to Follow on Next Page] 14 55695.0000 1 U3495 367.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as evidenced by the signatures below MEMBER AGENCY: CITY OF IRVINE CITY O A PARK By: A+.n.Mn•kay4aw By: Name:Marianna Marysheva me: Aron France Title:Interim Manager Title: Interim City Manager Dated: 11120 2020 Dated: December 15, 2020 Approved as ttoForm: Approved as/toQForm! r City Attorney City Attorney Approved as to Form: Afw� Nya- ATTEST: Special Counsel CITY OF FULLERTON 'L✓ h AORTA M.JIMENEZ, MI CITY CLERK Name: Title: Dated: 2020 A �P CgLIFCO) Approved as to Form: City Attorney COUNTERPART IS 5569500DOIO3485367 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as evidenced by the signatures below MEMBER AGENCY: CITY OF IRVINE By: Name: Title: Dated: 2020 Approved as to Form: City Attorney Approved as to Form: Special Counsel CITY LL ON Name: Vr,%ne-+� A, eT Title: G� ed An-y j¢! Dated: II- ZO 2020 rov to Form: ty Atto COUNTERPART IS 5569$,00001U5485567.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the patties hereto have executed this Agreement as evidenced by the signatures below MEMBER AGENCY: CITY OF IRVINE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH By: Name: Title: May Dated: , 2020 Approved as to Form: City lee VIE A APP VED City Attorney Approved as to Form: City Manager Approve as to Form Special Counsel GCity Attorney h1V CITY OF FULLERTON By: — — Name: Title: Dated: 2020 Approved as to Form: City Attorney COUNTERPART IS 556950000n35495567A IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as evidenced by the signatures below MEMBER AGENCY: CITY OF IRVINE By: Name: Title: Dated: 12020 CITY OF LAKE FOREST Ely: / . ; — -� /Nan eelti Moatazedi TK e: Mayor Dated:December 15,2020 COUNTERPART 16 55695.000DIUI4D$101.3 EXHIBIT A LIST OF PARTIES Founding Members: City of Irvine City of Fullerton 1 Civic Center Plaza 303 W. Commonwealth Ave. Irvine,CA 92606 Fullerton, CA 92832 City of Huntington Beach City of Buena Park 2000 Main Street 6650 Beach Blvd, Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Buena Park, CA 90622 City of Lake Forest 25550 Commercentre Dr. Suite 100 Lake Forest,CA 92630 EXHIBIT B ANNUAL ENERGY USAGE BY JURISDICTION 2019 Annual Load GWh1 City of Buena Park' 450 City of Fullerton 676 City ofHuntington Beach 1046 ; City of hvine 1,937 City of Lake Forest 459 Total 4,569 1. Annual energy usage is preliminary data and has not been validated by Southern California Edison (SCE)at the time of execution of the Agreement.This Exhibit will be updated without requiring an amendment of the Agreement upon SCE validation of the data. 2. City's 2019 annual load is an estimated value that may change pending preliminary and validated data from SCE. 55695.00001\33526896.1 EXHIBIT C PARTY VOTING SHARES Estimated Voting Share' City of Buena Park 9.8% City of Fullerton 14.8% City of Huntington Beach 22.9% City of Irvine 42.4% City of Lake Forest 10.0% Total 100.0% I 1. Estimated Voting Share is based on Exhibit B(Annual Energy Usage by Jurisdiction). Annual energy usage is preliminary data and has not been validated by Southern California Edison(SCE) at the time of execution of the Agreement.This Exhibit will be updated without requiring an amendment of the Agreement upon SCR validation of the data. I i I i i I I I I 55695.00001V0526896.1 D=Slgn Envelope ID:E8953DE3.EDE5.477C-AC16-82834D472329 EXHIBIT D FORM OF CAPITAL LOAN AGREEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF IRVINE AND THE ORANGE COUNTY POWER AUTHORITY FOR THE ADVANCE OF FUNDS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF A COMMUNITY CHOICE ENERGY PROGRAM This Agreement,effective ("Effective Date"),is by and between the CITY OF IRVINE,a municipal corporation and charter city("City"),and the ORANGE COUNTY POWER AUTHORITY,a California joint powers authority("Authority"), for the purpose of stating the terms for an advance of funds from the City to be repaid to City by the Authority as provided herein. City and Authority shall be referred to individually as a"Party" collectively as the"Parties." RECITALS A. On the Authority was formed by participating Orange County cities, including the City, to administer a community choice aggregation("CCA") program within the jurisdictional boundaries of its members in Orange County, B. Prior to formation of the Authority,the City funded a feasibility study, peer review,and other activities necessary to evaluate the feasibility and implementation of a CCA program. The City also funded certain costs to form the Authority and implement the CCA program for itself and the Authority's founding members. C. As expressly stated in that certain document entitled, Orange County Power Authority Joint Powers Agreement,at Section 5.5,which is incorporated herein by this reference, it was agreed upon by the parties thereto that the City would be reimbursed by the Authority for all costs regarding the feasibility and implementation of the CCA program,contingent upon the Authority's launch of the CCA program. D. The City estimates that its costs to study, form and implement the Authority are $250,000, which include, but are not limited to,costs for its feasibility study, peer review,City staffing, legal costs,member and stakeholder outreach,and formation of the Authority ("Formation Costs"). E. The City estimates that the Authority will need approximately$2,500,000 for working capital to pay for implementation costs through a projected launch of the CCA program in 2022 ("Pre-Launch Costs'). F. The City further estimates that the Authority will need up to an additional $8,000,000 to $20,000,000 in the form of a credit facility for operational support and power procurement as well as other cash flow needs, and that any such credit facility may require cash collateral from an Authority member between$2,000,000 to$5,000,000("Launch Costs"). 19 55695.DDDD I U3485367.1 D=Slgn Em tope ID:E6953DE9-EDE5471C-AC1642834D472329 & The Parties desire to enter into this Agreement to document the Authority's repayment obligations to the City for all such funds expended on behalf of,or in support of,the formation of the Authority and implementation of the CCA program. AGREEMENT NOW THEREFORE,in consideration of their mutual promises and obligations,the Parties hereby agree as follows: 1. City Loan to the Authority. 1.1. Formation Costs. The Authority acknowledges that the City has expended certain City funds toward Formation Costs and agrees to reimburse the City for such costs in an amount not to exceed$250,000 dollars,subject to the repayment provisions herein. 1.2. Pre-Launch Costs. The City agrees to loan the Authority Pre-Launch Costs in the amount of$2,500,000 by January 1,2021,which shall be used by the Authority for working capital costs associated with the Authority's launch,anticipated in 2022. 1.3 Launch Costs. The City agrees to post the necessary cash collateral,not to exceed $5,000,000, in order for the Authority to secure a credit facility for its Launch Costs for additional working capital associated with power procurement and operational support("Credit Agreement"). The City will also provide a loan for Launch Costs if needed by the Authority should a Credit Agreement be unavailable or insufficient to cover the Authority's working capital needs. The terms and conditions of any City loan to the Authority for Launch Costs (excluding the cash collateral requirement above)shall be negotiated and agreed upon in an amendment to this Agreement, subject to the reasonable approval of the Parties. The Authority shall provide the City with the Authority's pro forma demonstrating the amount needed for the aforementioned City loan. 1.4. City Loan Amount. Formation Costs,Pre-Launch Costs,and Launch Costs shall be collectively referred to herein as"City Loan Amount." 2. Reoavment: Interest. 2.1 Repayment Date. The Authority shall repay the City Loan Amount to City,plus interest,no later than the repayment date, which shall be January 1,2027. The Parties acknowledge that they may modify the Repayment Date for the Launch Costs in an amendment to this Agreement depending on the terms and conditions of the Credit Agreement. 2.2 Interest Rate. In accordance with subsection 2.3, interest shall be paid on all outstanding portions of the City Loan Amount that bear interest. The interest rate on any outstanding amount shall be calculated according to the sum of the following calculation of each respective quarter: 20 5$695.DDDDIU3485567.1 DocuSl9a Ern Tope ID:E6953DE9.EDE5.871C-AC18-82834D472329 Principal x Quarterly Interest Rate x(No. of Days in Quarter/No. of Days in Year) Where"Principal"is the relevant funding of the City Loan Amount as described herein; "Quarterly Interest Rate"is the gross earnings for the respective quarter as reported in the City of Irvine Treasurer's monthly investment report found on the Treasurer's website h tt ps://www.c itvofirvine.oretadmi n istrati ve-services-deoa rtment/investment-Dol icies-and-reports "No.of Days in Quarter"is the sum of days of each month that make up each respective I quarter; and"No.of Days In Year"is 365,except in leap years,in which the number of days in the year shall be 366. The City Loan Amount shall bear interest as follows: a. Formation Costs shall bear no interest whatsoever and shall be repaid to City as reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses by the Repayment Date. b. Pre-Launch Costs shall bear interest beginning January 1, 2021 through the Repayment Date as estimated and set forth on Exhibit A,attached hereto. c. Launch Costs for the City's collateral associated with the Credit Agreement shall bear interest beginning on the effective date of the Credit Agreement. Launch Costs for amendment to this Agreement,as set forth in subsection 1.3,through the Repayment Date. In the event the City Loan Amount,along with any and all interest owed pursuant to this Section 2,are not repaid by the Repayment Date,any such amounts that remain outstanding shall accrue interest at the rate specified by law for prejudgment interest. 3. City Liability; Hold Harmless: Indemnification. 3.1 City Liability. The Authority acknowledges and agrees that by lending said funds to the Authority,the City does not assume any debt,liability,obligation,or duty whatsoever with respect to the Authority's operations, liabilities,business,or transactions. 3.2. Hold Harmless/Indemnification. The Authority shall hold harmless, indemnify and defend the City,its elected officials,officers,employees,and agents from and against any and all claims,suits or actions of every kind which arise out of the performance or nonperformance of the Authority's covenants,responsibilities,and obligations under this Agreement,and which result from the negligent or wrongful acts of the Authority or its board members,officers,employees, or agents. City shall hold harmless,indemnify and defend the Authority, its board members,officers,employees and agents from and against any and all claims,suits or actions of any kind which arise out of the performance or non-performance of the City's covenants, responsibilities and obligations under this Agreement and which result from the negligent or wrongful acts of the City or its elected officials,officers,employees or agents. In the event of concurrent negligence of the City, its officer or employees, and the Authority,its officers and employees,the liability for any and all claims for injuries or damages to persons 21 55695.0000103495367.1 DocuSlpn Envelope ID:E6953DE9-EDE5471C-AC1"28 4D472329 and/or property or any other loss or costs which arise out of the terms,conditions,covenants or responsibilities of this Agreement shall be apportioned according to the California theory of comparative negligence. 4. General Provisions. 4.1. Audit. Prior to January 1, 2023,the City may audit the Authority's expenditure i of Pre-Launch Costs to confirm that such expenditures have been made consistent with the purposes of this Agreement. I 4.2 Waiver. The waiver by City or Authority of any term,covenant,or condition herein contained shall not be deemed to a waiver of such terns,covenant,or condition or any subsequent breach of the same or any other term,covenant,or condition herein contained. 4.2. Successors and Assims/Assienment. The terms of this Agreement shall apply and bind the heirs,successors,executors,administrators and assigns of the Parties. No Party may assign this Agreement without the express written consent of the other Party,which shall not be unreasonably withheld. 4.3. Entirety/Amendment. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the Parties relating to the obligations of the Parties described herein. No provision of this Agreement maybe amended or added to except by an agreement in writing signed by the Parties or their respective successors in interest.This Agreement shall not be effective or binding until fully executed by both Parties. 4.4. Venue&Choice of Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of California. In the event of any legal action to enforce or interpret this Agreement,the sole and exclusive venue shall be a court of competent jurisdiction located in Orange County,California. 4.5. Independent Entities. This Agreement is by and between two independent entities and is not intended to and shall not be construed to create the relationship of agent, servant,employee,partnership,joint venture,joint employer,or association. 4.6. Authority to Execute AUeement. The Parties each warrant that they have the authority to execute this Agreement and that all actions have occurred, and all necessary approvals or consents have been obtained to allow each party to enter into this Agreement. 4.7. Notices. All notices provided for herein shall be in writing and shall be delivered to the appropriate parties as provided below: For City: Attn: City Manager City of Irvine 1 Civic Center Plaza Irvine,CA 92606 22 5569s M11334as367.1 D=SIgn Envelope ID:E6953DE9.EDEei71C-ACIM28340472329 For Authority: TBD 23 55695.00001U1185367.1 D=Slgn Erw "ID:E6963DE9-EDE&471C-AC1B-92834D472329 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,Authority and City have executed this Agreement on the date set forth below. CITY OF IRVINE I Irzorzo20 Date: By: AUK.hmjs( w Title: (ntcrim City Manvgcr Approved as to Form: City Attorney ORANGE COUNTY POWER AUTHORITY Date: By: i Title: I I Approved as to Form: General Counsel i I 24 55695.00001 U 3485367.1 Docu519n Envelope ID:E6953DE9•EDE5-477C-ACI"2834D472329 EXHIBIT A PRE-LAUNCH COSTS INTEREST SCHEDULE Loan Borrower Orange County Power Authority Loan Amount/Pre-Launch $2,500,000 Loan Start Date 1/1/2021 Loan Maturity Date I/l/2027 Estimated Interest Rate 1.75% See Note on Interest Rate Period Interest Cumulative Interest 3/31/2021 10,787.67 $10,787.67 6/30/2021 10,907.53 21,695.21 9/30/2021 11,027.40 32,722.60 12/31/2021 11,027.40 43,750.00 3/31/2022 10,787.67 54,537.67 6/30/2022 10,907.53 65,445.21 9/30/2022 11,027.40 76,472.60 12/31/2022 11,027.40 87,500.00 3/31/2023 10,787.67 98,287.67 6/30/2023 10,907.53 109,195.21 9/30/2023 11,027.40 120,222.60 12/31/2023 11,027.40 131,250.00 3/31/2024 10,877.73 142,127.73 6/30/2024 10,877.73 153,005.46 9/30/2024 10,997.27 164,002.73 12/31t2024 10,997.27 175,000.00 3/31/2025 10,787.67 185,787.67 6/30/2025 10,907.53 196,695.21 9/30/2025 11,027.40 207,722.60 12/31/2025 11,027.40 218,750.00 3/31/2026 10,787.67 229,537.67 6/30/2026 10,907.53 240,445.21 9/30/2026 11,027.40 251,472.60 12/31n026 11,027.40 $262,500.00 Pre-Launch Loan $2,500,000.00 Total Due 1/1/2027 $2,762,500.00 Note: Interest Rate is based on the average of last six months of interest earned on the City's investment portfolio. 25 55695.00001 U.3485367.1 City of Huntington Beach A - 2000 Main Street ♦ Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 • www.huntingtonbeachca.gov r Office of the City Clerk Robin Estanislau, City Clerk December 18, 2020 City of Irvine Attn: City Manager 1 Civic Center Plaza Irvine, CA 92606 Dear City Manager: Enclosed is a partially executed original of the "Orange County Power Authority Joint Powers Agreement" and a certified copy of"Resolution No. 2020 —A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, Approving the Orange County Joint Powers Authority Agreement and Authorizing the Implementation of a Community Choice Aggregation Program" approved by the Huntington Beach City Council on December 10, 2020. Upon complete execution, please return a copy of the fully executed agreement to us. Please mail the Agreement to: Robin Estanislau City Clerk 2000 Main Street, 2"d Floor Huntington Beach CA 92648 Your attention to this matter is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Robin Estanislau, CIVIC City Clerk RE:ds Enclosures - Sister Cities: Anjo, Japan ♦ Waitakere, New Zealand ATTAC H M E N T #2 ORDINANCE NO. 4227 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AUTHORIZING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION PROGRAM The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. FINDINGS. 1. The City of Huntington Beach has been actively investigating options to provide electric services to constituents within its service area with the intent of achieving greater local involvement over the provisions of electric services and promoting competitive retail choice. 2. Assembly Bill 117 (Stat. 2002, ch. 838; see California Public Utilities Code § 366.2 et seq.; hereinafter referred to as the"Act") authorizes any California city or county, whose governing body so elects, to combine the electricity load of its residents and businesses in a community-wide electricity aggregation program known as Community Choice Aggregation("CCA") 3. The Act expressly authorizes participation in a CCA program through a joint powers agency, and to this end,the City of Huntington Beach has been evaluating a countywide CCA program. 4. Through Docket No. R.03-10-003, the California Public Utilities Commission ("Commission") has issued various decisions and rulings addressing the implementation of CCA programs, including establishing a procedure by which the Commission will review implementation plans, which are required to be submitted under the Act as the means of describing the CCA program and ensuring compliance with the Act. 5. The City has elected to form a joint powers authority that would specify the terms and conditions by which participants may participate as a group in energy programs, including, but not limited to, the implementation of a CCA program with the following benefits: a. Providing customers a choice of power providers; b. Increasing local control over energy rates and other energy-related matters; C. Providing electric rates that are competitive with those provided by the incumbent utility; d. Improving the local economy by increasing local and regional renewable generation capacity and energy conservation and efficiency projects and programs; e. Increasing regional energy self-sufficiency; and f. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions arising from electricity use in the City. 20-9216/241040 1 " ">` ��"'=y�.�'-*" -+�`="� :�'%+-�-°'. ...:�,� �:w�€'.,X :. 2 � �-�'�Cc".. �"`��s4'�'W��,z_..-'3�:• '=.Vie;;w ..�,�;,,.�'"""N'p',�-r(- Ordinance No. 4227 6. The Joint Powers Agreement creating the Authority will govern and operate the CCA program on behalf of its member jurisdictions. The City may participate in the Authority by approving the execution of the Joint Powers Agreement and adoption of a CCA ordinance required by Public Utilities Code § 366.2(c)(12). The City's participation in the Authority will include membership on the Board of Directors of the Authority as provided in the Joint Powers Agreement. 7. The Authority will enter into agreements with electric power suppliers and other services providers and, based on these agreements,the Authority plans to provide power to residents and businesses at rates that are competitive with those of the incumbent utility. Once the Commission approves the implementation plan prepared by the Authority, the Authority may provide service to customers within the City and those cities that choose to participate in the Authority. 8. Under Public Utilities Code § 366.2, customers have the right to opt-out of a CCA program and continue to receive service from the incumbent utility. Customers who desire to continue to receive service from the incumbent utility will be able to do so at any time. 9. On December 10, 2020 the City Council held a public meeting at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or in opposition to implementation of the CCA program within the City. 10. This ordinance is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, as it is not a"project" and has no potential to result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment because it is merely the formation of an organization. 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15378(a). The ordinance is also exempt from CEQA because it is an organizational or administrative activity of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical change in the environment: 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15378(b)(5). The ordinance is also exempt from CEQA because it is merely a change in organization of local agencies. 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15320. Further,the ordinance is exempt from CEQA because there is no possibility that the ordinance or its implementation, which would only result in the formation of a governmental organization, would have a significant negative effect on the environment. 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15061(b)(3). The City Manager shall cause allotice of Exemption to be filed as authorized by CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. SECTION 2. AUTHORIZATION TO IMPLEMENT A COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION PROGRAM. Based upon the foregoing, and in order to provide businesses and residents within the City with a choice of power providers, the City hereby elects to implement a community choice aggregation program within the jurisdiction of the City by participating in the CCA program of the Authority, as described in the Joint Powers Agreement. SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is held for any reason to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining 20-9216/241040 2 ^,�r^'�� `a�,``�.�"'"�-y"' "F'�„���� ���� "'^u„"'"�,', %t� �* �"`�Ove3,R.-�Nw^'�ar� �� � �•arm� Ordinance No. 4227 portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, clause, phrase or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. That this Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach on this 21st day of December , 2020 May ,!7D AND A �VE-D: APPROVED AS TO FORM: )zL— J � / ' ►-�,�. City Manager City Attorney INITIATED AND APPROVED: Assistant City Mang er 20-9216/241040 3 e Ord. No. 4227 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, ROBIN ESTANISLAU,the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing ordinance was read to said City Council at a Special meeting thereof held on December 10,2020, and was again read to said City Council at a Regular meeting thereof held on December 21, 2020, and was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council. AYES: Kalmick, Carr, Posey, Moser, Delgleize NOES: Peterson, Ortiz ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None I,Robin Estanislau,CITY CLERK of the City of Huntington Beach and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council,do hereby certify that a synopsis of this ordinance has been published in the Huntington Beach Wave on December 31,2020. In accordance with the City Charter of said City. Robin Estanislau,City Clerk City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk tti �Qe u Ci Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California ATTACHMENT #3 RESOLUTION NO. 2020-87 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH APPROVING THE ORANGE COUNTY JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A COMMUNITY CHOICE ,AGGREGATION PROGRAM The City of Huntington Beach has been actively investigating options to provide electric services to constituents within its service area with the intent of providing rate savings and consumer choice, encouraging adoption of renewable energy, reducing energy consumption, fostering local control, and providing Huntington Beach residents and businesses with alternatives to Southern California Edison Company ("SCE"); and On September 24, 2002, the Governor signed into law Assembly Bill 117 (Migden, 2002; codified at California Public Utilities Code § 366.2; hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), which authorizes any California city or county, whose governing body so elects, or cities or counties through a joint powers authority, to combine the electricity load of its residents and businesses in a community-wide electricity aggregation program known as Community Choice Aggregation (CCA); and On November 20, 2020, the Orange County Power Authority ("Authority") was established as a joint powers authority pursuant to that certain document entitled Orange County Power Authority Joint Powers Agreement, as amended from time to time ("Agreement"); and The City of Huntington Beach is committed to the purposes of the Orange County Power Authority; and Electricity in Huntington Beach is currently generated and provided by SCE and there is not presently an alternative provider in the City; and The City finds it important that its customers—residents, businesses, and public facilities—have alternative choices to energy procurement beyond SCE; and In order to become a member of the Authority, the Agreement requires the City to adopt a resolution electing to implement a Community Choice Aggregation program within its jurisdiction by and through its participation in the Authority. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach resolves as follows: Section 1. Based upon the foregoing recitals, the City of Huntington Beach City Council elects to implement a Community Choice Aggregation program within the City of Huntington Beach's jurisdiction by and through the City of Huntington Beach's participation in the Authority. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the Agreement. 20-9216/241041 1 Resolution No. 2020-87 Section 2. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution for any reason is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Resolution, and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 3. This resolution shall take effect on the date the Board of Directors of the Authority approves adding the City of Huntington Beach as a member. Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a special meeting of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach on this 1 Oth day of December, 2020. Mayor banager A6-CED: INITIATED AND PROVED: Assistant City Manage APPROVED I 'AS TO FORM: V City Attorney 2 Res. No. 2020-87 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, ROBIN ESTANISLAU, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council at a special meeting thereof held on December 10, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: Kalmick, Carr, Posey, Moser, Delgleize NOES: None ABSENT: Peterson, Ortiz ABSTAIN: None City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California RESOLUTION NO. 2020-87 y.. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH APPROVING THE ORANGE COUNTY JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT,./ .r AND AUTHORIZING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION PROGRAM The City of Huntington Beach has been actively investigating options to provide p electric services to constituents within its service area with the intent of providing rate savings and consumer choice, encouraging adoption of renewable energy, reducing energy consumption, fostering local control, and providing Huntington Beach residents and businesses with alternatives to Southern California Edison Com, pany ("SCE"); and On September 24, 2002, the Governor signed into law Assembly Bill 117 (Migden, 2002; codified at California Public Utilities Code § 366,2; hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), which authorizes any California city or county/, whose governing body so elects, or cities or counties through a joint powers authority,to"combinethe electricity load of its residents and businesses in a community-wide electricity aggregation program known as Community Choice Aggregation (CCA); and On November 20, 2020, the Orange C u ty Power Authority ("Authority") was established as a joint powers authority pursuant to that certain document entitled Orange County Power Authority Joint Powers Agreement, as amended from time to time ("Agreement"); and The City of Huntington Be ch is committed to the purposes of the Orange County Power Authority; and Electricity in Huntington Beach is currently generated and provided by SCE and there is not presently an alternative provider in the City; and The Cityfinds/it important that its customers—residents, businesses, and public ,� p facilities—have al emative choices to energy procurement beyond SCE; and In order to become a member of the Authority, the Agreement requires the City to adopt a resolution electing to implement a Community Choice Aggregation program within its jurisdiction by and through its participation in the Authority. J NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach resolves as follows f Section 1. Based upon the foregoing recitals,the City of Huntington Beach City Council elects to implement a Community Choice Aggregation program within the City of Huntington Beach's jurisdiction by and through the City of Huntington Beach's participation in the Authority. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the Agreement. /20-8628/229310 1 Resolution No. 2020-87 `A , Section 2. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this,,"*' Resolution for any reason is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any ,,.,•,. court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Resolution, and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or,-portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 3. This resolution shall take effect on the date the Board of Directors of the Authority approves adding the City of Huntington Beach as a member.,.,,`r F� Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a ro 4ar eting of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach on this 10th da ember , 2020. r,. r` May -- r VIE AND APPRR YED: i' INITIATED AND APPROVED: City Manager / Assistant City Manager r' J F APPROVED AS TO FORM: a City A orney r F 20-8628/229310 2 ATTAC H M E N T #4 DRAFT Amber Nyquist, Manager Consulting amber.nyquist@gdsassociates.com In direct 425-655-1042 a GDS Associates Company cell 360-319-7946 November 12, 2020 To: Mark Steuer FROM: Gary Saleba;Amber Nyquist SUBJECT: OC CCA Preliminary Proforma cc: Jeff Melching, Ryan Baron Introduction 5A EES has updated the preliminary 10-year financial pro forma for the proposed Orange County CCA (OC CCA) joint powers authority. The update modifies several assumptions including incorporating preliminary load data provided by SCE for each potential city participant,and recent'CPUC filings informing rate and power costs. Upon receiving the final SCE load data and 2021 PCIA, this pro forma will be updated by December 31,2020 and used to draft an Implementation Plan and obtain necessary financing. Key assumptions and updates for this version of the pro forma are summarized below. 1. SCE provided preliminary 2019 load data for the following Vcities: Irvine, Santa Ana, Huntington Beach, Fullerton, Costa Mesa, Lake Forest and Vtlla Park This data was analyzed for r.. reasonableness a ;used as the basis for thel load forecasts �'''Impacts from COVID are not modeled. 2. There will be a phased launch of the 1PA as is customary for all CCAs. Non-residential customers (commercial & industrial) are assumed to begin,taking CCA service in April 2022 and residential customers wtll take service beginning October 2022. The later launch of residential customers srgnifica ily'reduces the costs of resource adequacy and cash for working capital requirements. 3 ..2020 SCE generation and delivery rates have been updated based on current SCE 2020 filings at the CPUC, including SCE's preliminary 2021 Energy Resource Recovery Account ("ERRA") filing. SCE's ERRA filing projects the following year's fuel and energy purchase costs. SCE generation rates f Flo,2021 are estimated to increase by 3%. 4. The PCIA is based on SCE's draft 2021 ERRA filing($0.0161/kWh filed in July 2020)where the 2021 vintage PCIA is tncreased by the$0.005/kWh cap in 2022 and increased annually at 5%. Final 2021 Vintage PCIA rate"s may not be available until December 2020 or even early 2021 depending on the proceedings tha ,,' ave received protests from currently operating CCAs. ;r 5. Power costs for market (SCE area), resource adequacy, long-term renewable and short-term renewable energy having been updated based on the Market Price Benchmarks forecast by the CPUC.1 The benchmark calculations have resulted in a decrease in forecast power prices compared with the previous pro forma. 1 Calculation of the Market Price Benchmarks for the Power Charge Indifference Adjustment Forecast and True Up. November 2, 2020. Pursuant to Decision (D.) 19-10-001, Energy Division issues the following values for the Power 570 Kirkland Way Suite 100 Kirkland,WA 98033 425-889-2700 Fax 866-611-3791 www.eesconsulting.com Marietta,GA;Austin,TX;Auburn,AL;Manchester, NH; Madison,WI;Orlando, FL;Augusta, ME; Seattle,WA and Portland, OR 40 DRAFT 6. Power supply is assumed to be 38.5%renewable at launch then increases to 60%by 2030 to meet State mandates. 7. Start-up costs are $2.5 million and repaid starting in 2026 over a 3-year period. This assumption is made to comport with anticipated lending covenants. 8. Cash working capital requirements are estimated at$8-$17 million depending on the participation scenario. This cash working capital requirement is repaid over 5 years from launch. 9. It is assumed that the CCA employs 5 full time staff at launch ramping up to 10 full time staff in 2023. These updates and assumptions are described in more detail below. Load Forecast The OC CCA load forecast is based on preliminary 2019 usage for bundled customers (i.e. direct access customers are excluded). Participation rates of 90% are applied to non-residential customers and 95% participation rates are applied to residential customers. Table 1 summarizes the load and service account forecasts for 3 CCA scenarios. Note that the three scenarios have been modified and include only cities for which SCE provided data. TABLE 1 OC CCA LOAD FORECAST"PRELIMINARY" . • • • • • 2022 1,441E 174,919 2,336 303,901 3,317 418,990 j 2023 2,442 ; 176,006 ,, 4,024 ; 305;790 r ,F. 5,694 421,594 2024 2,457~ 177,098 4,049 307,686 5,729 424,208 1'111 2025 2,472', i 178,196 ,.. 4,074 `F. 309,693 . ., ,765 `ry,,, 426�838 2026 2,488 179,301 4,099 311,513 5,801 429,485 27 2,5©3', 180,412 4,125 313,444 5,837 ; 432,148 2028 2,519 31 4,150 , 315,387 5,873 434,827 2029 2,534 182656 4,176 t '` 317,343 5,910r.. 437,523 2030 2,550 183,789 4,202 j 319,310 5,946 440,235 `2Q31„ 2,566' 184,928 4,228 ; 321,29a x 5,983 442,965 Charge Indifference Adjustment(PCIA) Forecast and True Up to be used as inputs in utilities 2020 Energy Resource Recovery Account(ERRA) Forecast Updates in early November 2020. 570 Kirkland Way Suite 100 Kirkland,WA 98033 425-889-2700 Fax 866-611-3791 www.eesconsulting.com Marietta, GA;Austin,TX;Auburn,AL; Manchester, NH;Madison,Wl;Orlando,FL;Augusta,ME;Seattle,WA and Portland,OR 41 DRAFT Power Costs The largest expense item for a CCA is power supply costs. The power cost forecast assumes OC CCA meets California renewables portfolio standard (RPS) requirements, purchases resource adequacy consistent with California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) requirements and meets requirements for all other applicable regulations. Total all-in RA prices range from$5/kW-month in winter to$11/kW-mo in summer months. The weighted average annual RA prices is approximately $7.50/kW-month. For reference, the market price benchmark shows that 2021 forecast is$6.37/kW-mo for local RA,which is the highest price RA product. Thus,the RA forecast used both reflects current trends and is conservatively high. Market purchases are priced around $38/MWh (all hours), and short-term renewables are an additional $14.49/MWh (PCC1 RECs) per the market price benchmark. PCC2 RECs are priced at an additional $6/MWh. Carbon free energy is priced as an adder of$6/MWh. In addition to these costs, OC CCA will have CAISO costs of approximately $3.90/MWh for transmission related services. Starting in 2021, OC CCA will need to procure 65% of the State mandated RIPS from contracts that are 10 years or longer. Recent long-term contracts have been signed by CCAs for$20-$34/MWh. The pro forma assumes OC CCA will be able to purchase these contracts for$30/MWh which would include a mix of solar,wind,and solar plus storage.This price for long-term renewable power is also conservatively high. Staffing, Consulting, and Overhead Consultant costs were updated to reflect recent consultant agreements negotiated by CCAs with their service providers. Upfront consulting costs for 2021 consist of legal/regulatory assistance,administration, marketing and outreach,financial services,technical consultants and initial CCA staff hires. Staffing costs include salary and benefits for an Executive Director beginning in 2021, Executive Secretary beginning in April 2021,for a total of 5 full time staff members beginning in March 2022 ramping up to 10 full time staff members by January 2023. It should be noted that CCA staff do not typically participate in the State Cal PERS retirement program. Rather, they are offered a traditional 401k-type of retirement program. Start-Up Cost Estimates The amount needed prior to program launch varies depending on the size of the CCA. Table 3 below provides a range of estimated costs based on small, medium, and large CCA scenarios. The pro forma assumes$2.5 million in start-up costs(medium scenario). The actual cost will depend on decisions made by the JPA board and Executive Director such as timing of staff ramp-up, phased launch approach, office space,and any unforeseen changes in implementation due to SCE operational issues with billing and data management. 570 Kirkland Way Suite 100 Kirkland,WA 98033 425-889-2700 Fax 866-611-3791 www,eesconsulting.com Marietta,GA;Austin,TX;Auburn,AL; Manchester,NH; Madison,WI;Orlando, FL;Augusta, ME; Seattle,WA and Portland,OR 42 DRAFT TABLE 3 OC CCA START-UP COST ESTIMATES"PRELIMINARY" Sol at Members/Initiak otach l � $0 $50,000._._. _. _ ..__$150,0000� _....._. Form JPA $0 $100,000 $200,000 CPUC Bondi .$140,000 $100,000 SCE Deposit 1 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 Consultants %f � �� _, .._: ..._.: ........ Legal $150,000 $400,000 $1,200,000 !TechnEcal ;%�% � $33 000 $4dQ,000 r $1 D00,000 ... ._._...: _ Financial Advisor $10,000 $150,000 $250,000 MarketingJOutreach rm $10000 00,QO0 •, CCA Staffing $200,000 $550,000 $900,000 Infrastructure F $300,004 Total 18-Month Cash Outlay $700,000 $2,490,000 $4,700,000 Debt Service Two debt service payments are assumed. The first is for$2.5 million in start-up costs. Repayment of this loan begins in 2025 and will conclude in 3 years. In addition, a total of $8-17 million will be needed to bridge the gap in cash for working capital depending on participation Scenario. This amount is assumed to be financed over 5 years with repayment beginning at program launch. Operating CCAs have typically repaid these in 3-5 years. Table 4 shows the cash needs by participation Scenario. TABLE 4 FINANCING NEEDS "PRELIMINARY" iml Scenario 1EN $2.5 $8 Scenario 2 $2.5 $12 Scenario 3 •,w:,•,•• : $2.5 $17 PCIA As noted in the introduction and key assumptions, the 2021 vintage PCIA for SCE has not yet been determined for 2021, and it is not likely to be known until December 2020 at the earliest. Therefore, the 2021 vintage PCIA is modeled based on an expected level and a high level. The expected level is based on the initial 2021 ERRA filing made by SCE on July 1,2020. The average 2021 vintage PCIA across all customer classes is$0.0161/kWh.2 In subsequent filings, this amount has been estimated at $0.0146/kWh3 based on revenue collection made during the August heat wave. The higher figure of$0.0161/kWh is used as Z Protest of Clean Power Alliance and California Choice Energy Authority to the Application of Southern California Edison. August 5,2020. Table 1. 3 Joint Opening Brief of the Clean Power Alliance and California Choice Energy Authority(the"SoCal CCAs")and the ,California Community Choice Association. October 26, 2020.Table 3. 570 Kirkland Way Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98033 425-889-2700 Fax 866-611-3791 www,eesconsulting.com Marietta, GA;Austin,TX;Auburn,AL; Manchester,NH; Madison,WI;Orlando,FL;Augusta, ME;Seattle,WA and Portland, OR 43 DRAFT the expected PCIA for the 2021 vintage PCIA. This value is increased by the full $0.005/kWh cap for the 2022 calendar year and 5%annually after. OC CCA Revenues Retail rate revenues are calculated based on forecast SCE generation rates and PCIA by class. OC CCA revenue is calculated based on an assumed 4%discount off the SCE generation rate. This translates to a 2%total discount off a CCA customer's total electric bill. Summary It is anticipated the OC CCA will be able to repay the start-up and working capital loans within 5-7 years and likely sooner. OC CCA will build financial reserves over the first 5-7 years of 120 days of operating expenses($50M -$120M)depending on participation Scenario, and subject to JPA Board direction. After debt service is repaid, it is estimated that a significant amount of net income will be available to OC CCA for customer programs or additional rate discounts. All assumptions will need to be updated before the pro forma can populate the OC CCA Implementation Plan. In particular,the PCIA in SCE's 2021 ERRA filings must be finalized and incorporated into the final pro formas. EES is confident in level of all other pro forma estimates in that they are acceptably accurate for feasibility study purposes and overall,financially conservative. 570 Kirkland Way Suite 100 Kirkland,WA 98033 425-889-2700 Fax 866-611-3791 www.eesconsulting.com Marietta, GA;Austin,TX;Auburn,AL;Manchester, NH;Madison,WI;Orlando,FL;Augusta,ME;Seattle,WA and Portland, OR 44 Consulting a GD5 Associates Company TABLE 5 SCENARIO 1 OC CCA PROFORMA, EXPECTED PCIA, ACCRUAL BASIS "PRELIMINARY" .._....... _ Scenario 1.[mine&Fullerton _ n .......I „ 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 , 2027 2028 20 Revenues from.Operations(5) v 3 Electric Sales Revenues for CCE $0 $93,846,393 $157,945,554( $162,534070 $161599,939 $166021835 $170,803823 $175,713,962 $18C Less Uncollected Accounts $0 S469,232 $789,728 i $812,670 $808,000 ,,..� $H30,109.:y $%4,019 $878,570 Total Revenues for CCA ____ ____ ___ _$0 $93,377,161 ____ $157,155,826, $161,721400 $160,791;939 �' $165 191726 '`� $169,949 804 .$174,835,393-- $175 _. ... ... ... ._ .. ... ... ,.., ... ... ... ......,. .......... Cost of Operations .... .. ... ..... ,Block Energy Purchases _ _ $49,382,486 574,558,763 $73 649 078 $68,334,114 $66182,771 $64557,023 _ $58,190,726 $55 ---. RPS Adders and long-Tenn Energy $9,218,686 $20,690,034 j $21,632,286,��. $24;831,539 $28,066,204 $30,304355 $32,723,119- $35 _........ ........... .......... ........... .....__ __ Resource Adequacy $15,254,548 $26,759,096 _$28216354 $29869761 $31,558,177. $33,342,032 $35,226,721 $37 ._...... __. ........ __._.. ... .._. Everything Else $7,238,851 $12,244,142 j $12,605,446 :,$13;059,536 $13,429,090 $14,463,461 $15,335,805 $1E Total Cost of Power Supply $0 $81,094,571 $134,252,035 I $136,103,164 $1*0%950 $139,236,211 S338,662,870 ;$141,476,371 $144 .Operating&Administrative ` Data Management $0 $502232 $2,236,5371 $2,295,447 $2360,%7 .$2423143:. $2,486,967 $2552,473 $2 Scheduling Coordinator 50 $340,000 $516,800 `r_.$527 136 $538,563 $549,334 $560,321 $571,527 SCE Fees(includes billing) $0 $4,827 $21,110 I 521,241;, S21,384 ,#`6;y$21,517 $21,651 $21,785 Consulting Services $586500 $993,582 $923,2511 .5941716 $%0550 $979761 $999357 $1,019344. $1 Staffing $656,370 $1,248,010 $2103,498 $2166460�'1 $2213406 $ 674 $2302,828 $2348884 $i _. ... ... General&Administrative expenses $24,480 $302,548 $207,682 $244446 ', $249743 $254 T38 $259,833 $265029 Debt Service Payment on Financing $0 $1,410,988 $1,693,185; $1;693,185 &tk$2;222,3Q $2,222,3%iE, $811,318: $529,120' 11 Total O&A Costs $L267,350 $4,802,187 $7,702,062j $7889;631 •°�p58,564908, $8708473.'•';•. $7,442,274 $7,308,163 $7 ..... ..... ........ .... .. ...... Total Cost of Operations $1 267 350 $85,896 758 $141 4,097 $143 992 7% $144 661,B59 I $147 944 714; $146 105,144 $148,784,534 $151 Net Income ($1 267 350) $7 480 403 t r $1Sf201 729 $17 728 605 $16 130 081 $17 247 012 $23 844,660 $26 050 859 S2E 1u� ,. Cash From Operations and Financing , a_ u. ,Net,lncome From Operations_..__ ($1,267,350) $7,480403 ....., $15201724 $177286C6 $16,134081 $17,247,012 $23,944,660 __$26,050,859 $2E . _ ._ _. _... Cash from Financing $2,500,000 $8,0040070.",' $0 so $0 $0 $0 $0---. Total Cash Available $1 232 650 S35 480 4lH ,„ $]5 ZOl 729 r $17 728 605 Sl6130 081 $17,247,012 $23 844 660 $26,050859 $2E ., � .. , Net Income Allocation - l E _. ... .. __ ,_ _ _ ......... .. „, _... Reserve Fund Contribution $41b 663. $]5480403 %�`$1520L724 $12728605 SL914868 $0 SO SO ... ..... .,.,_ : .. ,. ..... .... Money Available for Discretionary Programs $475,987, �, so $14,279,213 $17,247,012 $23,644,660 $26,050,859 $2E Total Cash Outlays $14,219,2$ , $48, � 33 $17,247,012 23,844,660 $26 050 859 $2..E3.23Z65o ....Rate Stabilization Reserve Balance $416,fi6 $]5,897,066 $3L0 , $SC827,400 $50,738,268 $50,738,268 $50,738,268 $50,738,268 .. ":`- ..........$48,639,358: $48,034,568 915463 S49 Reserve Balance Target -, i" $416,663 $28,240 030 •$46,669,840 ,,$47 340,097 $47,560,063 .,,......$48 .., „ CCA Total Bill 5256,842,668 _ $462479,175 S476816430 $485,985,463 $500,V%803 $516,519,071 S532,687,627 $549 SCE Total Bill i $262,149083 $471342649 $486 O1L849 $495,389,444 $510,801,172 $526,704,969 $543116626 S56C Difference $5,306475 $8863475 $91%,419 ..,. $9,403,981 $6,621,369 $10,185,798 $10428,999' Sic Total Bill Savings 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% Generation Rate Discount 4% A% 4% 4% 4% 4% .. 4%'. 570 Kirkland Way Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98033 425-889-2700 Fax 866-611-3791 www.eesconsulting.com Marietta,GA;Austin,TX;Auburn,AL; Manchester, NH; Madison,WI;Orlando, FL;Augusta, ME; Seattle,WA and Portland, OR TABLE 6 SCENARIO 2 OC CCA PROFORMA, EXPECTED PCIA, ACCRUAL BASIS "PRELIMINARY" ..... ....... ........ .... Scenario 2:Irvine,Fullerton,Costa Mesa,Huntington Beach,with Expected PCIA i 2021 2022 2023 ] 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2021 Revenuesfrom Operations�$) .............._# ......... .....................................i..... ............. ................ ......... .......... ........... .. .. ........... ....... Electric Sales Revenues for CCE $0 $152,765,727 $261,771,065 i $269,375 842 $268,178,337 .$275,516,563 $283,452,367 $291,600,842 $299 Less Uncollected Accounts 50 $763,829 $1,308,855, $1,346,879: $1,340,892 $1,377,593 $1,417,262 51,458,0D4 $1 Total Revenues for CCA $D $152,001 899 $260 462 210 $268,028 963 $266 837,446 $274 138 980 $282 035 105. $290142 a38, $29E .. _. _. _. ... ..... ..... .... ..... .... ... ... ,.......................................... .... _. Cost of Operations($) ,. Block Energy Purchases $80,128068 $122642050 $121,058894 $112254369 $108692176 $99331,291 $95,325,887' $97 RPS Adders and Lon-Tenn Energy $14,938,156 ... ._.. ... ... _... .... ...... 8 __..... BY„ ......... ..........,9 ......_.. 534,091,.2805 ...._$35,643,761:.......... $4(1936,389 ...._$46.246522.':...... $49,927620 ._.._....$53,919,447: $57 Resource Adequacy $24,633,464 $43,879,284 $46,273,858! $48,980,120! $51,748,767 $54,673,913 $57,764,406: $61 ......._.... .. ......... .. ................ ._.__. .____ ._..._.. .............. ,........... ....... ........... ..._....... Everything Else $11,729,989 $20,175,539! $20,770,885 $21,541,750 $22,147,588 $23,832,467 $25,269,890 $2E .................. .... .......... ......... ____. ___ _._. ...__. ......... ......._ __.._._. ..__._. .: ......... Total Cost of Power$upplyr„ _ $0 $131,429,678 $120,788,153-- $223,747,399, $223,692,627 $228825053 $227,768 292 $232,279,630 $236 Operating&Admmrstrative _...... .......... ......... .._.. ..._._....... .........__. _.. ......... Data Management $0 $979,112 $3,885710 $3,988,057 $4,101,873 $4,209,914 $4,320,801 $4,434,608 $4 __.._... ......... ..... ......_,__ --........, .._.. Sc..h.eduling Coordinator So $3.4.0,000 _..... $5..1...6..,.8_0...0..... 527136 $538,563 .. $549,33_4.._:._... ..... .$...5..6__0..321 $571,527 . .,. g _ _ ,.. 675 $36,903'. $37,152 $37,383 ,,.„.$37 615 $37 849 SCE Fees(includes billing), 50 $8,450 $36, ...._........................................... _.__........._._ .. .. __._ _-.._.._._.._.__......_ Consulting Services _ _ _ $586,500-- $993,582 $923,251 $941,716: $960,550 $979,761: $999,357 $1,019,344 $1 Staffing $656,370 $1,248 010 ,, $2 103 498 l $2 166 460 $2,213,406 ,$2 257 674 $2 302 828 $2 348 894 $2 Gene,_ - - - - _. _.._..................... ,_ ..._.. ,..,.. ral&Administrative expenses $24,480 $302,548 $207,682< 5244 446- $249,743 $254,738 $259,833 $265,029 Debt Service Payment on Financing $0 $2,116,481: $2,539,778 I. $2,539,778 $3,068,898 $3,068,598' $952,417 1 $529,120 Total O&A Costs $1,267,350: $5,888,183-. $10,213,393 $10,444,496 $11,170,185 $11,357,703 $9,433,171 $9,206,362 $S ___... ...._........... _...... ......... _........... ................. ........._.. .........._...... ......... ........ ....- -Total Cost of Operations _ $1,267,350 $137,317,860- $231,001,546 1. $234,191,895 $234,862,812 $240,182,756 $237,198,462 $241,485,992 $24E Net Income ($1,267,350) $14,68 $29,460,664; $33,837,067 $31,974,633 $33,956,225 $44, ,643 $48,656,845 552 __. ......... _.__. _..._. ____. _.._ ____.4,038 .... ......... ........... ..........__... ........... ......... ......... .........836 ....... ...._.. ................ ____ ___- ____. __._ ........ ............_ ......... ... !........ ........... ._._....... .._.._._.... ............_.... __._ Cash From Operations and Financing :Net Income From Operations ($1,267,350) $14,684,038 $29,460,664 1 $33,837,067 $31,974,633! $33,956,225 $44,836,643 $48,656,845 $52 Cash from Financing $2,500,000 $12,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0':. $0 $0 :Total Cash Available $1,232,650 $26,684,038 $29,460,664; $33,837,067 $31,974,633 $33,956,225 $44,836,643 W,656,845 $52' ..._.._._ __._ ____ ____. ._. ........... ........ ....... i........... ............. ............. ......... ....... ____. Net 1.Income Allocation Reserve Fund Contribution $416,663 $26,684,038 $29,460,664 $25,841,739!. $0 $0 90 $0 .Money Available for Discretionary Programs 5475,987 $0 $0 $7,995,328? $31,974,633 $33,956,225 544,a36,643 $48,656,945 $52 Total Cash Outlays $1,232,650 $0 $0' $7,995 328 $31,974,633 $33,956,225 $44,a36,643 $481656,845 552 'R 11 ate$tabilintion Reserve Balance $416,663 $27,100,701 $56,561,3615; $82,403,104 $82,403,104 $82,403,104 582,403,1D14 $82,403,104 $82 Reserve Balance Target $416,663: $45,145,598 $75,945,714 $76,994,596 $77,215,171 $78,964,194 $77,983,056 $79,392,655 58C .......... .. ......... .................. ......... ........._... ............. ............. _.:. CCA Total Bill $418,7818,1764 $767,888,563 $791,685,945 $807,269,313 $932,001,316 $857,969,608 $884,816,311 $912 :SCE Total Bill $427,462,457 $782,621,814". $806,971,796 $823,052,443 $848,663,635 $875,081,921 $902,344,022 $93C Difference $8,673,692 $14,733,251 $15,285 851 $15 793,130 $16,662,318 $17,112 314 $17,527,711 $17 _ _... .. ................ ____ .... ....... ... .. .. :Total Bill Savings 1.9%'2.0%: 1.9w 1.9 , 2.0%'. 2.0%', 1.9%'. __ __..... ......... ___. ____. _.. ....... ...°,6............. ........... , ............... ......... Generation Rate Discount 4%. 4%€ 4%I 4%''. 4%I 4%: 4%. 570 Kirkland Way Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98033 425-889-2700 Fax 866-611-3791 www.eesconsulting.com Marietta,GA;Austin,TX;Auburn,AL; Manchester,NH; Madison,WI;Orlando, FL;Augusta, ME; Seattle,WA and Portland, OR TABLE 7 SCENARIO 3 OC CCA PROFORMA, EXPECTED PCIA,ACCRUAL BASIS"PRELIMINARY" ...... ....... ._. ......... :Scenario 3:Irvine,Fullerton,Costa Mesa,Huntington Beach,Santa Ana,Lake Forest Villa Park with Expected PCIA 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 20ffi 202! :Revenues from Operations($) ...... .... . ........ ....._....... ............: ........... ....... ............. ................................................ ............. Electric Sales Revenues for CCE $0 $217,337,591: $370,764,540[ $381,535,714! $379,755,056 $390,146,381 $401,383,909 $412,922,592 S424 ____. ____. ____ ....... ............ .. ....._.... ................ .......... ....... .........._..... .......... .....:__. ................. ......... ............s. Le55 Uncollected Accounts $0 $1,086,688 $1,853,823 $1,907,679 $1,898,775 $1,950,732 $2,006,920 $2,064,613 $2 :Total Revenues for CCA $0 $216,250,903 $39$368,910,717; $379,628,035 $377,856,280 $398,195,649 9,376,990 $410,857,979 $422 _..... ............. ......_._....._ .,........ ............_._ ..___ ._..... _....... ._.........„.... _..._. ......... ... ........._....... ... ..... , ...... .._..'. .... ....... .... ....... .. Cost of Operations($) ....... .. ...... ... .._.._ ..... ......., Block Energy Purchases $113,722,441 $173,560,356 $171,327,620 $158,880,375 $153,827,673 5140,635,072 $135,002,132 $12S ____. ____ _....... ........ .................. ............ ........ ....... ........... .................. .......... .. ......_:........... ......... _............ ...: ............, RPS Adders and Long Tenn Energy ................ $21,215 345;,,,,......... $48,241,169; $50 438 040 ......... $57,899,549 ......$65 441 918 $70,650 348 $76,299,106 $81 .. ........ ... .... Resource Adequacy $35,0U.146 $62,094,162- ... 6 ,,,, ..... .. ........ ,,,,,,,.,, ,,,, ...... $65,480,142 ........ $69312,424 $73,230,372 $77369786 ..., $81,743,1ffi $SE ......... ,............. ..... ........ Everything Else $16,659,068 $28,549,419!: $29,391,ffi5 $30,491,837 $31,ffi8,401 $33,724,161 $35,758,188 $37 ..__.__. ......... ............... ........................ ....._... .._._.... .....:..... __....... ......... ........: ............. Total Cost of Power 5up,ply ,..„_. .„..,,,. _ $0: $>86606000 S312,445,107` $316637667 $316584185. $323,958,365 $322,379367 5326802611- $335 __.._......._ _____._...... _........ _ �.._.._ _....._.._____ - IOpemnng&Admrmstmnve.....,.. ........ _ Data Management „$0 $1,231,173 $5,357,255 $5,498,362 _ $5,655,281 $5804238 ,. $5957,118 $61114102 11 6i SE Scheduling Coordinator $0 $340,000,......__ $516,800 $527,136 $538,563 $549,334 ..$560,321 SCE Fees(includes billing) .... ..............._ $0 $11,834„ 550,565 $50,879 $51,222 551,540, ,$51,860 .,_ ,$52183 Consulting Services $586,500 $993,592 $923,251 $941,716- $960,550 $979,761: $999,357 $1,019,344 $1 ____ ........... _.._........... ....._............ ,........ __... .........._..... Staffing 56556,370 $1,248,010 $2,103,498 $2,166,460 $2,213,406 $2,257,674 $2,302,828 $2,348,894 $2 General&Administrative expenses $24,480 $302,548 $207,682 $244,446 $249,743 $254,738 $259,933 5265,029 _...... _..........._... ......._.. .......... ___.._. ........ ........ ......... ................. ........ Debt Service Payment on Financing $0 $2,998,349 $3,598,018 1 53,598,D18 S $4,127,139 $4,127,139 $1,128,790 $529,120 Total O&A Costs $1,267,350 $7,125,496 $12,757,068i $13,027,018 $13,795,903 $14,024,424 $11,260,106 $10,900,113 $11 :Total Cost Of Operations_ $1,267,350 $193,733,495 $325,202,175 $329,664,684:- $330,380,098 $337,882,789 $333,639,473 $339,702,724 534E .. ,,. ._.. ........ ,. ,,.....,_ _.., Net Income ($1,267,350) $22,517,408 $43,708,542 549,963,351 $47,476,193 $50,312,860 $65,737,517 $71155,255 $76 ____. __......_ ....... ........ ....:........_ .._.... ....._... ......... ......... .............. ____. ____. ......... .......... ................. ____. ____. __ _..__. ____. ____. ____. _____ .......... ......... Cash From Operations and Financing .. ... .. .......... ......... __ __. __ _._. __ __ ____. ____. ......... ............ ....._....... :Net Income From Operations ($1,267,350) $22,517,408 $43,708,542 $49,963,351` $47,476,193: $50,312,860 $65,737,517 $71,755,255 $7E ____ ___ ..... ....... ......... ......_.. ____. ___ _._ ___ _._. ___ ____. _:__. ____.. ......... ............ ............ Cash from Financing $2,500,000 $17,000,000 $0-, 5o- $0 50 $0 $0 :Total Cash Available $1,232,650 $39,517,408 $43,708,542 $49,963,351''- $47,476,193 M312,860: $65,737,517 $71,155,255 $7E ..............._ .............. .....__. .....___. ...._ _. ____. ____. ____. ____ __.. ......... ___. ____. ........ ............ .. ......... ......._. ___ ___. ___. _... ____. ____ ____. i__. ____. ........ ........ .._...._...... :Net Income Allocation ._..... ........ ... .......... ........_ ._._. ____. ___. __... ____ ___ ___. ___...__ ....... ...... ................................. Reserve Fund Contribution S416,663 $39,517,408 $43,708,542 $32,367,642 $0 $0 $o $0 .... ..... . ;........ .........., ......... .......... :Money Available for Discretionary Programs 5475,987 $0 $0 $17,595,709 $47,476,193 $50,312,860 S65,737,517 z $71,155,255 $7E Total Cash Outlays ! $1,232,650 $0 __$0 _$17,595,709 $47,476,193 __.$50,312,860. S65,737,517 $71155255I .,$7E __.... _ ......... ........ .. ............. ____ _..__ ___.. _._. ____ ____ ____. __.... .... ..... ..... ........ ............ ;Rate Stabilization Reserve Balance $416,663!. $39,934,071 $83,642,613 $116,010,255". $116,010,255 $116,010,155- $116,010,255 $116,030,255 $11E Reserve Balance Target S416,663 $63,693,204 $106,915,784 $108,382,910 $108,618,111 $111,084,752 $109,689,690 $111,683,087 $112 __.... ......... ...... ....._... ....... ......... ._..... ...... ......... __......... _...._......_. ..... .... ......... -CCA Total Bill $593,739,5156 $1,078,436,243 $1,111,894,698 $1,133,627,686 $1,168,393,721 $1,204,903,366 $1,242,649,646 $1,281 __._. ........ 5......,.. ......._., ........_ _....... ....... ....._. ......... .... _....__..... ......... .. ......... --:SCE Total Bill $606,181,535 $1,099,492,625 $1,133,744,430 $1,]56,168,838 $1,192,175,708 $1,229,333,754 $1,2fi7,678,842 $1,307 __..... ........ :._....... ........._.. .... ........ ..... ...... ........ .__.._.... ....:..... ..2......_...... ._._._.. ........ Difference .,.....,. $12,441,969 .............. $21,056,382 $21,849,732 S22,541,151 $23,781,987....... $-24,429788 $25,029,196: $2S ...._...... ,.......... ...... .. :Total Bill Savings : 2.1%, 1.9%', 1.9%- 1.9%', 2.0%. 2.0%!. 2.0% --Generation Rate Discount 4%,, 4%`. 4%'. 4%. 4%I 4%'. 4%' __... -._....... ...... ......... ........ ..... ....._ ....._. ................. .......................... ...:..... ........ 570 Kirkland Way Suite 100 Kirkland,WA 98033 425-889-2700 Fax 866-611-3791 www.eesconsulting.com Marietta, GA;Austin,TX;Auburn,AL; Manchester, NH; Madison,WI;Orlando, FL;Augusta, ME;Seattle,WA and Portland,OR 12/10/2020 City of Huntington Beach Consider Joining the Orange County Power Authority, A Community Choice Energy Joint Power Authority Special City Council Meeting December 10, 2020 HUNTINGTON BEACH Issue Background • During the past few years, Huntington Beach has explored the possibility of engaging a local CCE program o August 5, 2019— City Council directed that staff work to identify firms / costs associated with performing a CCE feasibility study o February 23, 2020— MRW & Associates was engaged to coordinate a feasibility study to analyze the local Huntington Beach electrical power market, with a focus on identifying risks and benefits associated with participating in a CCE SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION NOV—WE a Agenda Item No. 1 12/10/2020 What Is A CCE? • Mechanism authorized by the State in 2002 via AB 117, whereby electrical service customers are provided with an option in determining who they procure their power from • Through a CCE, customers can have their power procured through an existing utility provider, or can opt to have a local government entity procure electrical power on their behalf o CCEs are typically established with larger environmental or social goals in mind, such as increasing power procured from renewable sources o The entities have been shown to provide consumers with slight cost savings (-1- 2%) when compared with traditional investor-owned utility operations, and also provide local jurisdictions with certain economic development tools o Fiscal viability of CCEs depends on the entity's ability to retain power customers 3 Irvine's Efforts • In 2018, the City of Irvine initiated a CCE feasibility study • As those efforts evolved during the past 2 years, Irvine in 2020 invited all OC cities to participate in a CCE Joint Powers Authority that has been named the Orange County Power Authority (OCPA) o Currently, Fullerton has officially signed on with Irvine to be part of the OCPA o Buena Park and Lake Forest are also expected to participate in the OCPA in 2020 o Costa Mesa, Laguna Woods, Santa Ana, and Villa Park have all considered the OCPA formation effort 4 2 12/10/2020 Orange County Power Authority Formation Details • City Council has requested that Huntington Beach consider joining the OCPA in 2020 based on provisions contained in the JPA Agreement o Jurisdictions that join the OCPA in 2020 will be considered a Founding Party member agency o All Founding Party members will automatically be placed on the OCPA Executive Committee o Further, the JPA Agreement notes that any agency joining the group has the right to withdraw for any reason and without any liability or cost prior to March 1, 2021 5 Next Steps • Representatives from Irvine will be providing additional details regarding the proposed OCPA program tonight o If the City Council decides to move forward with joining the OCPA, staff would also recommends that a full financial risk assessment be performed and brought back for City Council consideration at our February 1 meeting 6 3 12/10/2020 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ORANGE COUNTY POWER AUTHORITY UPDATE DECEMBER 10,2020 Mark Steuer,P.E.,Director of Public Works City of Irvine Gary Saleba,Executive Consultant Ryan Baron,Partner HOW DOES • • r fx Energy Source CCE Delivery IOU Customer CCE Potential Offerings and Benefits: • Energy Efficiency Microgrid • Distributed Energy Resources/Local Bulk Power Portfolio Choices for Each City • Electric Vehicle Programs 2 4 12/10/2020 HISTORY . O• ■ CCA spreading rapidly , — Operate ■ Irvine Goals - 2020/2021Launch • Lower energy costs for ratepayers • More renewables, less GHG emissions Exploring/In Progress • Economic development • Local control over resource portfolio options - �Yx�n..GUMe.. ■ Customer choice through opt-out ■ 85%of CA Under alternative by 2025 Sun San 4+ae E kM+. unM • Map courtesy of Lean Energy:http://www.leanenergyus.org/cca-by-state/california/ CITIES THAT RESPONDED ORANGE • • AUTHORITY INVITATION LETTER ,NaYrlt V i s � �111YlTON � �Y•Y•NIO• !�' I•NT,N•�N nn,w o�•�wooes M INTERESTED REQUEST FOR INFORMATION CONTACTED CONSULTANT 5 12/10/2020 STEPS TO FORM ORANGE COUNTY POWER AUTHORITY Collect Interested City SCE Load Data—Now; Due mid-December Negotiate JPA Agreement—October-December 2020 Approve JPA Agreement and Ordinance—November/December 2020 Finalize JPA Evaluation(Pro Forma)—November-December 2020 JPA Board Seated—December 2020 File Implementation Plan with CPUC—December 31,2020 WHAT GOES INTO FINANCIALS? 10-Year Pro Forma that Forecasts SCE Rates vs.CCA Rates Steps in JPA Evaluation Study • Forecast CCA revenue ➢ Power supply costs ➢ Operating and administrative costs ➢ Debt repayment • Difference between CCA revenues and expenses goes to CCA programs 11 Forecast SCE rates and compare v Public Benefits Charge Funds Available to OCPA through CPUC 6 12/10/2020 •A EVALUATION ■ Results of Initial Irvine CCA Feasibility Study 2019—Initial Feasibility=4%savings off generation rate May 1,2020—Peer Review= 1.0%savings off generation rate What has Changed Since Initial and Peer Review Feasibility Studies Assume Costa Mesa, Irvine,Fullerton, Lake Forest,Tustin and Santa Ana -- Recent pro formas show 2% Service Accourits 120,000 120,000 350,000 savings off total SCE bill Power Suppi $48 $48 $32 $32.50 $30 $22 $38 $36 $32 $7.86 $8-$10 $7.50 FUNDING • • CURRENT, • PRE-LAUNCH • , LAUNCH COSTS Current Funding(through Dec. 31) JPA formation,load data/pro forma,CPUC Implementation Plan TOTAL $150,000 Pre-Launch Funding(2021 through Spring 2022) Consultants,legal,office,staffing,CPUC/CAISO bonds TOTAL $2M—$2.5M Launch(Spring 2022) Power purchases collateral; Lead/lag needs TOTAL $8M-$20M(depending on size of JPA) Funding Sources Current Funding—City of Irvine Pre-Launch—City of Irvine loan to JPA Launch—Bank loan w/possibility for Member(Irvine)collateral 7 12/10/2020 OV ERVIEW OF • •A STATUS ■ Cities of Irvine and Fullerton Signed Final JPA Agreement ■ Cities of Lake Forest, Buena Park and Huntington Beach Considering Next 10 Days ■ SCE Providing Verified Load Data for All Cities this Week ■ Financial Proformas Updated Next Week and Included in Implementation Plan to be Filed at California PUC by December 31, 2020 OCPA Board Meetings scheduled for December 16 and December 22 to Finalize Necessary Documents DETAILS OF • •A STATUS Final JPA Agreement Highlights Capital loan • Voting • Resource portfolio options • Early right to withdraw • Executive Committee Financial Proforma/Implementation Plan Update key metrics of SCE generation cost, PCIA, market prices, resource adequacy 2%savings off total SCE bill 8 12/10/2020 WHAT IS NEEDED • • HUNTINGTON BEACH TO BE FOUNDING • ■ Execute JPA Agreement ■ Adopt Resolution ■ Introduce Ordinance for First Reading ■ Select Director and Alternate • • 9 Switzer, Donna From: James Martin <jamesamartin5@outlook.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 9, 2020 2:32 PM To: citycouncil@surfcity-hb.org; supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: ATTN Public Comment re: YES TO CCE Dear Mayor Carr and Council, As a resident, homeowner, and voter in Huntington Beach, I am writing to ask you to please vote YES on Approving the JPA agreement, Authorizing the Mayor & City Clerk to sign the agreement, Approving the First Reading of the Ordinance, and Appointing a Board Director to join the Orange County Power Authority and Orange County's first Community Choice Energy Program! I believe the best plan to stop climate change is the fee and dividend plan, as in H. R. 763. Until we can get such a plan passed, local governments should do what they can. From what I have learned, CCE will cost the City nothing, will save residents money, and will reduce fossil carbon use. Jim Martin Huntington Beach, CA 92647 714-847-5744 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Me*V Date. //0 Agenda Item No.- l `aD-- 1-?-0 g'.2 Switzer, Donna From: Gregory Tabat <greg@exceptional.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 9, 2020 3:51 PM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: Public Comment re: YES TO CCE I am asking Mayor Carr and the City Council to please vote YES on Approving the JPA agreement, Authorizing the Mayor & City Clerk to sign the agreement, Approving the First Reading of the Ordinance, and Appointing a Board Director to join the Orange County Power Authority and Orange County's first Community Choice Energy Program! I own and operate a small business within the City of Huntington Beach. I visit friends, shop and recreate within the city. This means so much to business owners and residents. Peace GT (Gregory Tabat) SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION ,, Date:— o 2 )_20 Agent i#em Ala.° / 1 Switzer, Donna From: Jim Stewart <drjimstewart@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 9, 2020 6:46 PM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org;CITY COUNCIL Cc: Hoiyin.lp@California.SierraClub.org Subject: Sierra Club Supports Huntington Beach Joining CCE JPA Attachments: Sierra Club Supports Huntington Beach Joining CCE JPA.pdf Please include the attached letter in which Sierra Club Supports Huntington Beach Joining CCE JPA Thanks, Jim Stewart, PhD, Co-chair Sierra Club California Energy-Climate Committee Cell: 213-820-4345 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION SIERRA CLUB a11/ CALIFORNIA December 10, 2020 RE: Community Choice Energy Joint Powers Authority Honorable Mayor and City Council: The Sierra Club appreciates the City of Huntington Beach's efforts on Community Choice Energy (CCE) over the years. We support you joining the CCE Joint Powers Authority (JPA) with Irvine and Fullerton. We see joining the CCE JPA as a major step toward clean energy and clean air, increased environmental justice and local jobs, while we help slow down climate change. Many citizens, businesses and NGOs have worked toward this goal over the past five years in Orange County. During this time, a number of CCEs have launched successfully in California, so now over 10 million people in 170 municipalities are receiving electricity through CCE. Huntington Beach joining the JPA will encourage other cities to join the California movement toward clean community energy. CCEs work for the benefit of their constituents and serve their communities while improving service and the bottom line. Highlights include: D All California CCEs have succeeded. ➢ All CCEs offer comparable or lower electricity rates. D All CCEs pursue cleaner energy and local sources. D All CCEs are creating good local jobs. ➢ CCEs do not put the City's General Fund at risk if formed as a JPA. Thank you, Jim Stewart, PhD Co-Chair of Sierra Club California Energy-Climate Committee 213-820-4345, DrJimStewarW( gmail.com CC: Hoiyin Ip, Co-Chair of Sierra Club California Zero Waste Committee Hoiyin.lp(o-),California.SierraClub.org Switzer, Donna From: Adam Chung <awchung77@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 8:26 AM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org; citycouncil@surfcity-hb.org Subject: ATTN Public Comment re: YES TO CCE Thanks, Adam, resident SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Mae"Date: ��/D120a2 Agenda Item No., -20 - -20��) . Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 8:48 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:® MyHB-#481402 City Council [39767] From: MyHB<reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent:Thursday, December 10, 2020 7:29 AM To:Jun, Catherine<catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:©MyHB-#481402 City Council [39767] MyHB New Report Submitted -#481402 Status new Work Order #481402 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes No on CCE.This is not an economically good move for our city. Please vote no when this comes up again! View the Report Reporter Name Phyllis Bailey Email SUPPLEMENTAL MikeandphylIis(a)verizon.net COMMUNICATION Phone Meeling Date: 714-960-6834 Report Submitted Agenda Item No.:- DEC 10, 2020 -7:29 AM - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 8:49 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:® MyHB-#481400 City Council [39766] From: MyHB<reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent:Thursday, December 10, 2020 7:28 AM To:Jun, Catherine<catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:©MyHB-#481400 City Council [39766] MyHB New Report Submitted -#481400 Status new Work Order #481400 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes No on CCE! View the Report Reporter Name Phyllis Bailey Email SUPPLEMENTAL Mikeandphyllis(a)verizon.net COMMUNICATION ION1 Phone Date. J//0Z ?�� 714-960-6834 Report Submitted Age(KW Item NO. DEC 10, 2020 -7:27 AM - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 8:53 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:® MyHB-#481349 City Council [39760] From: MyHB<reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent:Thursday, December 10, 2020 6:51 AM To:Jun, Catherine<catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sa nd ie.Fra kes@su rfcity-hb.org> Subject:©MyHB-#481349 City Council [39760] MyHB New Report Submitted -#481349 Status new Work Order #481349 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes Say YES to Community Choice Energy.Vote to become a founding partner of the Orange County Power Authority. Let's look to the future and help our small businesses and residents realize the savings in utilities.There is no fiscal impact to the city's general fund. HB residents and voters since 1985,Cathey and Bob Ryder View the Report Reporter Name Cathey and Bob Ryder SUPPLEMENTAL Email COMMUNICATION the4rvders(Z1)-qmail.com Meellng Date: Phone Report Submitted ! 1 DEC 10, 2020-6:50 AM Agenda Item No.. / C °2� - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Switzer, Donna From: Mark Bixby <mark@bixby.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 9, 2020 5:48 PM To: Agenda Comment; CITY COUNCIL Subject: YES on CCE Hi city council, I urge a YES vote at the 12/10 special meeting to proceed with joining the OCPA JPA as a founding member with right of risk-free withdrawal. Monopolies only benefit the seller(SCE), never the buyer(the city and residents).We can do better as part of the JPA due to its increased purchasing power, and with careful rate setting,we can offer various energy efficiency incentives back to the community. Sincerely, Mark Bixby 714-401-4526 cell SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION MeWngl)ate. /-2I/01,_&2() Agenda Item No.; f/'�—2692) Switzer, Donna From: Lara Neu Von Urff <Ivonurff@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 8:53 AM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: Vote Approval for HB Outreach CCE Iniatiative Hello, Here are our Votes for the "approval" of the HB outreach for CCE initiative. SUPPLENiENTAI. We have lived in Downtown HB Since 2001: COMMUNICATION Alan Brown bought& lives in house since 2001 Meeting Date:_ Lara Von Urff lived in house full-time since 2009 Address: Addre Ad ss: Street AQende Item N0" ! �� -3092) HB, Ca 92648 Everyone in Huntington Beach needs electricity every day, yet Huntington Beach residents do not have any choice on where they get their electricity. SoCal Edison's monopoly on Huntington Beach has resulted in years of steadily rising rates for residents with little to show for it. Now SCE is requesting a 14.4% increase in residential rates for 2021. CCE is the only significant tool our city has to protect residents from these increases. A recent study by the City of Irvine concluded that CCE customers would save .5 to 2%off SCE's comparable rates, with higher savings predicted over time. Income generated by the CCE will be returned to our community to help fund local programs like stabilizing our electricity bills, bike lanes or EV chargers instead of going to pay SCE shareholder dividends or CEO bonuses. The Irvine study also found that CCE will enable the city achieve 100% clean energy by 2035 at no additional cost to customers while reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 360,000 metric tons each year. That's like taking more than 78,000 cars off the road. Environmental benefits would be comparable for Huntington Beach. Irvine's City Council has unanimously voted to create a CCE Joint Powers Authority after multiple recommendations from their Green Ribbon Committee and Finance Commission agreed with their study, which found that CCE will bring the city $10.6 million in annual net revenue, $7.7 million in annual savings for Irvine consumers, and $120,000 in annual municipal electricity savings. Huntington Beach needs to vote to move forward on CCE as soon as possible in order to meet a year-end California Public Utilities Commission deadline that must be met in order to begin service in 2022. If the council misses this deadline, Huntington Beach residents cannot get CCE until 2023. Also, i What Im bringing to the table today is a chance for our Young High School Graduates to have a chance at a career in "Wind Turbine Jobs", Solar Installations/Sales in all new built homes that doesn't necessarily require a 4 year expensive College graduate diploma. At this trying time when people are losing there jobs & Life Savings. Our Community as a Whole can benefit by Renewable Energy in our Local Environment & Save historical Marine Life & add career wise Jobs to our prospering young Adults that can possibly be achieved by a learning Certification, that could be offered by some federal government Grants, if we play our cards right. My thoughts are why cant we Do Both underwater artificial Reef s to preserve marine life & Windmills above platforms on top... While 10 or more of Southern California's 27 offshore oil rigs could be closed in the next 10 years, there's a push to preserve these Platform Rigs & habitat-rich underwater bases as artificial reefs And, so 2 f why no possibly transform the tops into Windmills. There are four rigs within the three-mile offshore state boundary THAT could be converted to reefs under existing law. That we focus on ONE as a Focus trial...we have ten years to change then But federal regulations allow "alternative uses" of decommissioned rigs only if the state has an artificial reef program. Some of this information was achieved from article dated: march 06,2020, OC Register Warmest Regards, Lara Neu Von Urff 3 Switzer, Donna From: Scott Freeman <scott@primalelements.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 9:13 AM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: CCE-Energy Competition To the City of Huntington Beach: When Huntington Beach invests in local energy production,our city officials help us to control our power suppliers. HB is a one of a kind location: beautiful beaches, local mountains and foothills all bathed in beautiful sunshine.Why rely on "far-off" energy sources distributed through an aging 100-year-old electrical infrastructure? I want my City to be energy competitive! I don't want to rely on the whims of far-off energy producers or to be at the mercy of regional distribution agreements. If we allow others to potentially hold our power"hostage", rate payers could see increased power costs and potential limits on supply. Thank you Scott Freeman CEO/Founder Scott@Primalelements.com DL. 714.328.0077 O. 714.899.0757 ext.2070 Fax. 714.794.1064 18062 Redondo Cr. Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Like ut on Facebook CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom addressed.If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager.If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate,distribute or copy this e-mail.Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system.If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing,copying,distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Deft L'2,0zo Ag9fW@ ftM N0-. Switzer, Donna From: Scott Freeman <scott@ prima lelements.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 11:36 AM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: RE: CCE-Energy Competition I hope our council will vote to bring the CCE into the City of Huntington Beach From:Scott Freeman Sent:Thursday, December 10, 2020 9:13 AM To:SupplementalComm@Surfcity-hb.org Subject:CCE-Energy Competition To the City of Huntington Beach: When Huntington Beach invests in local energy production,our city officials help us to control our power suppliers. HB is a one of a kind location: beautiful beaches, local mountains and foothills all bathed in beautiful sunshine. Why rely on "far-off" energy sources distributed through an aging 100-year-old electrical infrastructure? I want my City to be energy competitive! I don't want to rely on the whims of far-off energy producers or to be at the mercy of regional distribution agreements. If we allow others to potentially hold our power"hostage", rate payers could see increased power costs and potential limits on supply. Thank you Scott Freeman CEO/Founder Scott@Primalelements.com DL. 714.328.0077 Fax . 714.794.1064 SUPPLEMENTAL 18062 Redondo Cr. COMMUNICATION Huntington Beach,CA 92648 MN*V Date: �_I J A��ZD 20 11_ ukouson a Agenda 11wn No., � �v ' �4 92 tJ Facebook JI USA CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom addressed.If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager.If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate,distribute or copy this e-mail.Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system.If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing,copying,distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. 1 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 11:46 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:® MyHB-#481710 City Council [397851 From: MyHB<reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent:Thursday, December 10, 2020 11:37 AM To:Jun, Catherine<catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes,Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:®MyHB-#481710 City Council [39785] MyHB New Report Submitted -#481710 Status new Work Order #481710 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes Requesting a no vote on CCE at the special meeting. View the Report Reporter Name Deb Janus Email SUPPLEMENTAL debEmail us(aDgmail.com COMMUNICATION Phone ,` 714-330-4152 Dom. 12 l t)Z 2UZQ Report Submitted �6-- 20, 2 DEC 10, 2020 - 11:36 AM Age !t8►il ! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 11:50 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:© MyHB-#481727 City Council [39787] From: MyHB<reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent:Thursday, December 10, 2020 11:48 AM To:Jun, Catherine<catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:R MyHB-#481727 City Council [39787] MyHB New Report Submitted -#481727 Status new Work Order #481727 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes It is being reported on social media that an "emergency"council meeting is being called for tonight in the absence of members Ortiz and Peterson to consider moving forward on the CCA/CCE issue.An issue of this magnitude deserves full consideration of the full council with informed community input. Do not move forward on this. View the Report Reporter Name Russell Neal Email russneal(&ieee.org SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Phone 714-316-6179 Mee" Date. L16 �d Report Submitted p6 DEC 10, 2020-11:47 AMAgenda A 1 Switzer, Donna From: lindaklaw <lindaklaw@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 10:17 AM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: Say yes to CC CCE will allow the citizens of Huntington Beach to have control over the types of energy it uses and to keep costs low. We do not want to wait and be subject to the 14.4%SoCal Edison rate increase for the next two years. The profits from that go to SCE shareholders abroad and not to HB families. Let Huntington Beach be a leader on the issue of cleaner air and lower costs.Thank you. Linda Law SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meadng Date: Switzer, Donna From: Craig Preston <craigp4444@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 10:53 AM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: 12/10/20 mtg Agenda Item 20-2082 COMMUNITY CHOICE ENERGY Dear City Council, I support all 5 recommended actions to take next steps in joining Orange County Power Authority CCE JPA as a Founding Member. Cost savings to rate payers are immediate and grow over time. Lower emissions are needed now. As of January 2020 there were 21 operational CCEs in California serving over 10 million customers,but NONE in Orange County. Irvine is being heroic to step out, and I am proud of Fullerton, and my city, Costa Mesa, for moving to join. The City of Huntington Beach is sitting on a prime opportunity to shape the future of Orange County's energy future. By voting to join JPA now as a Founding Member, HB will have the ability to influence for the energy sector that is unprecedented, and leave a legacy that determines economic development in OC for decades to come. Note,there is a deadline. The California Public Utilities Commission requires the OC Power Authority to submit its list of cities by December 31 st, 2020 in order for CCE service to begin in 2022. If Huntington Beach decides to wait,then there is a year delay according to CPUC Resolution E-4907. This would mean that Huntington Beach residents and businesses would be paying the 14.4% Socal Edison rate increase for the next two years. The rate increase begins in January 2021, and the profits from that go directly to SCE's shareholders abroad and not HB families. Craig Preston (714)473-2798 CraigP4444@gmail.com SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNRCATION Mw*V Dge: l � /20Z0 Agenda Item NO..,— Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 12:13 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:F] MyHB-#481746 City Council [39788] From: MyHB<reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent:Thursday, December 10, 2020 12:11 PM To:Jun, Catherine <catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:R MyHB-#481746 City Council [39788] MyHB New Report Submitted -#481746 Status new Work Order #481746 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes Let me as a voting citizen of Huntington Beach make two points abundantly clear: (1). Little or no short notice City Council meetings to deal with critical topics are not what we as an electrorate place you as our representatives. (2). I'm completely opposed to the Community Choice Aggregation initiative that seems to find it way back time and again after having a fair hearing and being soundly rejected by our citizens View the Report Reporter Name Ted Ross Email SUPPLEMENTAL tedross 0077(cDmsn.com COMMUNICATION Phone Mee" Date.. �-Z�/f��zy2-0 714-330-3638 Report Submitted Agenda Item No., DEC 10, 2020 -12:10 PM 1 Switzer, Donna From: BETHANY WEBB <bethwebb711 @msn.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 12:43 PM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: Vote yes on CCE Hello Mayor Carr and Council, I am writing you as 40 year resident and homeowner in HB. Please vote yes on Authorizing the JPA agreement,authorizing the city manager to sign it and appointing a board director to join the OCPA and the Community Choice Energy Program. It's got something for everybody from environmentalists to supporters of local control and fiscal savings. Thank you for your consideration Bethany Webb Sent from Mail for Windows 10 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Dft: E 16 f,2v 2y Agenda lWn IVo. �02D - -26 8'.2 1 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 12:58 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:® MyHB-#481769 City Council [39789] From: MyHB<reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent:Thursday, December 10, 2020 12:35 PM To:Jun, Catherine<catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:©MyHB-#481769 City Council [39789] MyHB New Report Submitted -#481769 Status new Work Order #481769 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes Vote Yes on CCE View the Report Reporter Name Bethany Webb SUPPLEMENTAL Email —oMMUNICATION bethwebb711(cDmsn.com ` Phone Ong Date. 1121 171-472-6216 Agenft Item No.: Report Submitted —�° DEC 10, 2020-12:35 PM - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Switzer, Donna From: Greg Kordich <IIk5@ic1oud.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 12:47 PM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: Fwd:CCE Begin forwarded message: From: Greg Kordich <IIk5Ca-icloud.com> Subject: CCE Date: December 10, 2020 at 12:19:20 PM PST To: citycouncil(W-suftity-hb.org MAYOR CARR and all CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, COMMUNITY CHOICE ENERGY is a WIN—WIN—WIN for OUR city. Business will save on electricity costs which will draw more business to the city. Residents will save on monthly electrical bills. The city will generate needed income and jobs for the future. YOUR YES VOTE is necessary for this WIN— WIN—WIN formula. THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION. GREG AND LYNN KORDICH 40YR RESIDENTS SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Date: i z/�o/2o20 Agenda Item,No.;, Switzer, Donna From: Steven C. Shepherd, Architect <steve@shepherdarchit SUPPLEMENTAL Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:04 PM &6#J 110AUNICATION To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org;CITY COUNCIL 1Z //D/W2v Subject: SUPPORT FOR JOINING ORANGE COUNTY ITV - f----r ! Hello HB City Council— Agenda Rem No., lzo gzl My name is Steve Shepherd. I am an HB resident writing in support of the City of Huntington Beach,taking all necessary steps and making all necessary efforts to join the Orange County Power Authority(OCPA). I've appeared before our city council on multiple occasions over the past three years, supporting Community Choice Energy for Huntington Beach.Although I would have loved to have had the opportunity to voice my strong support for CCE in HB in-person again,this email will have to suffice. Looking back at my past comments made in support of Community Choice Energy, I was struck by just how consistent the facts underpinning my support for CCE have been. Even as I've learned more about CCE and millions more Californians have had their energy needs met by local public agencies,the facts remain unchanged. Without getting into a lengthy description of how CCE would benefit our community, let me briefly remind you of the basis for my support: • CCE promotes and is a reflection of Free-Market Economics • CCE increases Consumer Choice • CCE mean Local Control, Oversight, and Accountability of our precious energy supply • CCE is an Economic Development Tool for our city • CCE Increases Local Investment While these bullet points may strike a cynic as little more than "rainbows and unicorns," Community Choice Energy has a quantifiable track record of success to back these statements. 1. There are now more than 21 different CCE agencies operating across California 2. Just since 2018, more than 70 cities have joined or started their own Community Choice Energy Program bringing the total to 180 communities in California 3. CCE agencies provide power for more than 11 million Californians 4. Marin Clean Energy, California's first CCE,just celebrated its 10th anniversary in operation. I understand local governance is hard.There are lots of topics, lots of opinions, and lots of emotions. I get it. Even a seemingly simple issue is rarely straightforward, but that's the job.Although hardly new, CCE would be something new for Huntington Beach, and no matter how much benefit it will bring, anytime there's something new,folks tend to get scared. I'm sure you've received plenty of notes from my fellow residents who are afraid of CCE.Again, I get it. In closing, I'd like to briefly reflect on a quote that puts the fears of my fellow residents in perspective. Shortly after being inaugurated as President of the United States,and in the depths of the Great Depression, Franklin D Roosevelt's 1st inaugural address contained a quote that is often shortened to "... the only thing we have to fear is ... fear itself..." And while this is a great quip, I believe the full quote is particularly instructive for Huntington Beach's new city council as our community faces the difficulties of today.The full quote reads: "So,first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself 1 — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance." In this challenging moment,we cannot and must not allow"nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror" to paralyze Huntington Beach's efforts to "convert retreat into advance. " Community Choice Energy is an opportunity for our community to advance, and we must have the courage to embrace this opportunity. Please vote in favor of CCE for HB by voting to join the OCPA. Steve Shepherd Huntington Beach, CA 92646 2 Switzer, Donna From: Jose Trinidad Castaneda <jose@climateactioncampaign.org> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:11 PM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org; CITY COUNCIL Subject: Public Comment re: 12.10.20 Huntington Beach Council Meeting Item 20-2082 CCE Attachments: Letter to Huntington Beach CCE Vote 12.10.20.docx Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council, Attached is my public comment letter to you all to be submitted into the public record regarding today's special meeting agenda item on Community Choice Energy. Please note that the attached letter includes various information on the CCE timeline, benefits for joining, and evidence-based clarification regarding misinformation circulating in the community. I hope you find this helpful. Thank you, Jose Trinidad Castaneda Jose Trinidad Castaneda (he/him) Orange County Climate & Energy Advocate & Organizer Climate Action Campaign 3900 Cleveland Ave. Suite 208 .San Diego, CA 92103 (619) 419-1222 ext. #708 Schedule a Meeting with me at calendly.com/cleaneneW ose www.cl imateactioncampaign.org Twitter:(a4dclimateaction/@josetcastaneda3 Instagram: (asdclimateaction/@josetcastaneda3 Facebook.com/ClimateActionCampaign Like what we do?Support Climate Action Camaaian today. Our Mission is Simple:Stop the Climate Crisis SUPPLEMENTAL. COMMUNICATION Msei V Dab:_ /.2/io/a26.,M Agenda Item No. CLIMATi fGTIION C A M P A I G N December 10, 2020 Hon. Mayor Kim Carr Hon. Mayor Pro Tern Tito Ortiz Hon. Council Member Barbara Delgleize Hon. Council Member Erik Peterson Hon. Council Member Dan Kalmick Hon. Council Member Natalie Moser Hon. Council Member Mike Posey City Manager Oliver Chi On behalf of Climate Action Campaign, thank you for listening to my public comments. Included in the following documents are informational items for your consideration regarding Community Choice Energy in Huntington Beach. Community Choice Aggregation, also known as Community Choice Energy (abbreviated CCA and CCE by various parties), is a local, not-for-profit governmental program that buys and may generate electrical power on behalf of its residents, businesses, and governmental entities. The agency administering the Community Choice program may also elect to administer energy efficiency programs and other greenhouse gas emission reducing activities. There are many reasons why a community might want to pursue Community Choice energy. Potential benefits include: • enhanced consumer choice • local control • cost savings • expansion of renewable energy portfolios • local economic development • faster progress toward achieving a community's environmental goals. Community Choice programs are opt-out programs, meaning that once a local government votes to form a Community Choice agency, the constituents of that local government are automatically enrolled, and may opt out if they wish. Community Choice is only involved in the electrical generation decision-making and has no involvement with transmission and distribution. The electrical utility also continues the metering and the billing for customers. The Community Choice agency replaces the line item on the electric bill for "generation." Top 6 Benefits and Talking Points for Joining the Orange County CCE Movement 1. CONSUMER CHOICE: Huntington Beach families want and deserve a choice of energy providers. A HB CCE creates competition in the energy marketplace that encourages greater innovation and improved pricing. 2. COST SAVINGS: All CCEs provide a rate savings compared to SCE current rates. The Validation study solidifies that the OC CCE rate savings will range between 0.5-2%. Older CCE programs, such as Marin Clean Energy, now vastly outpace the rates offered by their Climate Action Campaign, 4452 Park Blvd., Suite 209 San Diego, CA 92116 www.climateactioncampaign.org F�F CLIMATE' ACTION C A M P A I G N incumbent utility. Rate savings expected to increase starting 2026-2030 as SCE contracts expire, greater load departure, and changes in wholesale power costs. 3. CLEANER ENERGY: CCE programs provide a higher mix of more affordable clean energy sources, helping us reach our Zero Carbon energy goals. Wholesale renewable solar energy costs are approaching $0.02/kWh compared to SCE's on-peak residential rates of $0.35/kWh or more. 4. COMMUNITY CONTROL: An OC JPA CCE puts HB families in charge of our energy future through local decision-making on rates, programs, and policies. 5. COMMUNITY BENEFIT: CCE programs are centered on the public interest and community benefits.. CCE can advance important equitable and sustainable climate and clean energy goals that are community-focused and community-led. 6. MAXIMIZE ECONOMIES OF SCALE: Given that MRW gave two recommendations, do you want to look at this and be a regional leader and maximize economies of scale. The economies of scale for community choice energy in California are very important, and it's important for Irvine to lead that effort in a JPA. A single-city CCE risks Irvine's General Fund, while a JPA reduces our liability through partnerships. MRW points to lessons learned from San Diego. San Diego will have over $1 B to utilize to develop programs and keep costs down. It's important for Irvine to remember that size is important. Here is additional information to help answer any questions you may have about the details of your agenda packet. Updated Feasibility Study: The Pro Forma included in Irvine City Council meeting for November 10th includes three scenarios that show the growth and estimated timelines for CCE discretionary funds to be made available to Huntington Beach residents. Scenario 1 is specific to an Irvine- Huntington Beach CCE, and Scenario 3 shows that if more cities were to join, then Irvine's loans are paid back sooner, thereby accelerating the ability for program funding to return back to Huntington Beach families. Outreach: Climate Action Campaign has made efforts to conduct community outreach to Huntington Beach residents and received overwhelmingly positive feedback that this is the direction Huntington Beach residents would like the city to go in. We also made specific efforts to host community forums before COVID restrictions moved our work online. Public Comments submitted by Huntington Beach residents on tonight's item should indicate that the community does have interest in CCE. Exit Clause: If Huntington Beach City Council does not vote on the recommended actions to adopt a first reading of the CCE ordinance and appoint a Board Director, then there is a chance that the city will miss out on the opportunity to participate in the Founding JPA meeting. The current JPA Draft Agreement allows Huntington Beach to withdraw by March 1 st, 2021, and again in 2022- onwards (with CCE service stopping the following year) if the JPA decides to submit an amendment to the CPUC. But Huntington Beach should be a founding member on the JPA board to be able to shape discussions on exit clauses should the city decide to leave later. Climate Action Campaign, 4452 Park Blvd., Suite 209 San Diego, CA 92116 www.climateactioncampaign.org 140' CLIMATE ACTION! C A M P A I G N Loan Repayment: The updated pro forma shows that the JPA's projected net revenue and loan repayment schedule is contingent on the number of cities that join over time. Orange County Energy Authority Projected Net Revenue* $120,000.000 Net CCE Annual Revenue for CCE with Irvine and Huntington Beach $90,000,000 Net CCE Annual Revenue for CCE with Irvine,Huntington Beach, Costa Mesa and Fullerton Net CCE Annual Revenue for CCE with Irvine,Huntington Beach, S60,000,000 Costa Mesa,Fullerton,Lake Forest,Tustin,Yorba Linda,Villa Park,and Laguna Woods $30,000,000 After startup costs and loans are repaid and the CCE S0 builds an operating reserve,the JPA Board of Directors can direct net revenue to sustainability,programs such as electric vehicle charging stations,rooftop solar rebates, battery storage,net energy metering,and/or to stabilize electricity prices in participating cities. 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 Source.City of Irvine OC CCA Preliminary Pro Forma.Oct.2020. Projections by EES Consutting Source: https://irvinewatchdog.org/2020/11/13/irvine-city-council-votes-for-three-climate-initiatives- at-nov-10-meeting/ Employee Benefits Provisions: No CCA has formal Retirement Pension obligations with their staff. On Page 8, Section 3, Clause 16 (3.16), the draft agreement has the language referring to this. If Huntington Beach were to approve the JPA draft agreement, then Huntington Beach staff are not employees of the JPA, and that the JPA board would be negotiating with it's own CCE staff on benefits packages separate from CaIPERS obligations the city has with its own employees. For Example. starting on Page 125 of their San Diego Community Power 10.22.2020 Board Packet, you can see a CCA Benefits Comparison sheet between San Diego Community Power, Clean Power Alliance (LANentura), Monterey Bay and East Bay Community Energy. No CCAs have retirement pension agreements. Just 401 Ks or other plans. The new OC CCE will have less than Climate Action Campaign, 4452 Park Blvd., Suite 209 San Diego, CA 92116 www.climateactioncampaign.org t CLIMATE ACTION C A M P A I G N 10 employees. Hardly an expansive bureaucracy. SDCP-CCA Benefits Comparison As of October 13,2020 Benefit Ca San_ffiw CPA he" EBCE Medical $1200/month cafeteria plan Full medical at Kaiser Platinum;dental $1200/month to all employees with 7 For executive employees,100%is $600/month taxable if opt-out of and vision from 3"parry providers. insurance carrier options covered.S1250/month for employees city plans Employees pay the difference if they $600/month taxable added to base who use EBCE coverage-$600/month choose a cliff option.Cash out option salary if opt-out taxable salary for those who opt out.FSA is$500/mo.Flex spending account Also optional health reimbursement also offered l(FSA)is offered as an tion. account and FSA Oallfal Included in monthly amount above As above As above Incl in$1250/month W1011 Included in monthly amount above As above As above Incl.in$1250/month MtllaltMit 10%employer salary match(vested 403(b)plan with 4%employee 401(a);10%mandatory for employee, 401(a);employer pays 8%of earned after 3 years);any excess beyond contribution.Employer contribution 10%match by employer income that is vested immediately. IRS limits go to a 457 up to 6%of employee salary; 10D%vested on day one employer vesting over 3 years. _ 4 WillisMnd Comp See above Employees have the option;max set Employees have the option;max set by Employees have the option;to facilitate by IRS the IRS participation,EBCE matches employee contributions up to 6%of salary 50% westing after 1 year. Llk 11ta1aa11n Equal to 1 year salary Equal to 1 year salary(capped at $2S,000 included in medical plans plus Equal to 1 year salary S5001) $175,000 for all employees Employees can purchase additional OBablBby alf11ra s Equal to 60%of salary L-T insurance equal to 60%of salary L-T:70%of salary up to$10k/mo Now stated S-T disability provided thru CA State S•T:66.66%of salary to max of$2k/wk short term dis.insurance program 7irie off: 4 weeks annual leave,Incl.of sick Start at 80 firs(2 weeks)annually plus PTO inclusive of vacation,sick,etc Vacation-5 hours/pay period or 120 Vacation,Sick law, time last week of December;no cash out of starts at 180 hours/year with an hrs/year plus 8 hours for each year of '.. PTO,Other 2 weeks exec leave(Director and vacation.Aker 3 years of service,one additional 8 hours/year not to exceed employment up to 240 hours max. j above) additional week. 10 years.Balance of PTO is paid to Sick-4 hrs/pay period with max%hrs per CCE Formation on Fast Track: Irvine and Fullerton are leading up to the first JPA Board meeting to stay on track with the CPUC's timeline. Please do not delay! Irvine staff also need time to update the Final Implementation Plan in time for the JPA Board's Public Hearing meeting ahead of the CPUC Deadline. Huntington Beach may feel rushed, but CCE is not a new topic of discussion, with CCAs serving millions of families over the course of the past decade and a Cal-CCA trade organization helping new CCAs every step along the way towards implementation. In fact, this is how all CCAs have formed, cities rush in a mad dash before the deadline to vote on joining. See San Diego Community Power Rate Structure: The City Council does not vote on the rate structure. The JPA will vote to approve a new rate structure and send it for approval at the California Public Utilities Commission. None of the CCE staff across the state of California are organized into unions. Just like any city, the CCE will post RFPs for any work and projects that unions will have to compete for with the private sector. CPUC Rules on CCA https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/general.aspx?id=2567 Consumer Choice: The Customer has choices every step of the way with CCE. The customer can opt-out any time, and go back to Edison and their higher rates. The customer can choose the energy mix of 34% renewable, 50% renewable and 100% renewable energy. The customer can choose all the time. Energy Prices: Renewable energy is cheaper than Oil and Gas. Unsubsidized renewable energy is now most frequently the cheapest source of energy generation - Forbes https://www.forbes.com/sitesh amesel Ismoor/2019/06/15/renewable-ene my-is-now-the-cheapest- option-even-without-subsidies/?sh=161 dl5c15a6b Conflicts of Interests: City employees will have nothing to do with the CCE. The CCE will have to issue RFPs like any city, and will have a fiduciary duty to select the cost-competitive proposals. Climate Action Campaign, 4452 Park Blvd., Suite 209 San Diego, CA 92116 www.climateactioncampaign.org i?CTI10N CLIMATE C A M P A I G N Renewable Energy Laws: The State legislature backs CCAs as the primary pathway towards the 100% renewable portfolio standard goals. The only way to get to 100% is if the Investor Owned Utilities (IOUs) transition to new energy contracts. SCE's plan is to get to 80% renewable by 2045. CCEs are faster and more nimble. They can transition to 100% renewable energy sooner than 2030. Long Term Energy Contracts & Impacts to the General Fund: The City Council does not sign any contracts. The JPA Board approves long-term energy contracts that the CCE CEO will negotiate. The JPA's decisions do not impact any member city's General Fund account, whatsoever. More information can be found at the California Public Utilities Commission www.CPUC.ca.gov, and additional resources may be found at: www.CAL-CCA.org, www.cleanpowerexchange.org, and www.occleanpower.org. Thank you for your consideration. Myself as well as my team at Climate Action Campaign are available to assist you in any way. Sincerely, Jose Trinidad Castaneda III Orange County Climate & Energy Advocate & Organizer CLIMATE ,ACTION Climate Action Campaign jose@clima tea ctioncampaign.org (619) 419-1222 Ext 708 www.climateactioncampaign.org Twitter: CaD-sdclimateaction Instagram: @sdclimateaction Facebook.com/ClimateActionCampaign Climate Action Campaign, 4452 Park Blvd., Suite 209 San Diego, CA 92116 www.climateactioncampaign.org CLIMAe� QiIION C A M P A I G N Summary of Key Findings in Irvine CCE Feasibility Study The Irvine CCE Feasibility Study consists of information across 119 pages. Due to the length of the study, we have provided key takeaways in bullet form. Local Control and allocation of ratepayer revenues and building program reserves Opportunities for long-term procurement to balance/hedge short-term procurement Responsiveness to local environmental, social and economic goals Funding opportunities for local energy programs and new power generation Creating economic opportunities through local jobs, GHG reductions, local renewable developments, supplier diversity, and environmental justice initiatives Lower risk profile The following information is pulled directly from the study. Electric retail rates are predicted to be at least 2% lower than current SCE rates using extremely conservative modelling parameters and assuming participation rates for residential customers of 95% and non-residential customer participation rates of 90%. These assumptions of customer participation are conservative compared with recent CCE program participation. City-wide electricity cost savings are estimated to average about $7.7 million per year for Irvine residents and businesses. Annual City municipal utility account cost savings are estimated at $112,000. CCE start-up and working capital costs (estimated at $10.05 million, and assumed to be financed) could be fully recovered within the first three years of CCE operations while still achieving a 2% rate discount compared to SCE's current rates. The city could also choose to recoup costs associated with the Study development and Implementation Plan. The Study analyzed CCE rate results under scenarios with high and low participation rates, high and low market power costs, and high and low stranded costs. The findings identify key risks with regard to stranded cost recovery via SCE and power supply. The Study's section on Risks and Sensitivity Analysis describes the magnitude of those risks and measures for mitigating risks. The CCE is estimated to have an average, annual $3.4 million revenue stream after start-up and working capital are repaid, as well as financial reserves being met, that can be used for electric customer-related programs. Climate Action Campaign, 4452 Park Blvd., Suite 209 San Diego, CA 92116 www.climateactioncampaign.org WMAT � fillN C A M P A I G N The savings to customers under the CCE's rates would drive additional local economic development benefits, such as 85 new jobs and a total of $10 million in annual economic output. The following is a chart of participation rates across all CCEs in the State of California. Data provided by https://cal-cca.org/cca-impact/ Apple Valley Choice Energy 2S.000 100 89= 37'_, Clearil Clean Power Alliance 972,500 3,600 95% 36% Lancaster Choice Energy SO,000 200 93% 36% Monterey Bay Community Power 277,000 SOS 97% 31% Pico Rivera Innovative Municipal Energy 17,600 60 96% S7 er Community Energy 79,S00 33% Rancho Mirage Energy Authority 14,500 100 99% 35% San Jacinto Power 14,S00 6S 92% 41% Silicon Valley Clean Energy 270,000 800 97% SO% Sonoma Clean Power 22S,000 4SO 87% 48% CaICCA Member Totals .W 10,760 Orange County Energy Authority - Community Choice Aggregation/Energy - JPA Startup Timeline Interest in CCE is Born (2017-2018) 05-16-2017 Irvine Green Ribbon Committee - approved Committee work plan, including Climate Action Plan and CCE Climate Action Campaign, 4452 Park Blvd., Suite 209 San Diego, CA 92116 www.climateactioncampaign.org CLIMATE CTION C A M P A I G N 09-12-2017 Irvine City Council approved the Green Ribbon Committee's recommendation to put out Request for Proposals (RFP) for two studies. After review, City Staff recommended EES Consulting to complete the CCE feasibility study ($77,470). The Green Ribbon Committee confirmed staff recommendations and voted to send favorable recommendations to the Finance Commission and City Council. 05-15-2018 Irvine Green Ribbon Committee - CCE Discussion following SCE Presentation on pathway to 80% clean, renewable energy by 2030 06-27-2018 Irvine Businesses, HOAG Health & Edwards LifeSciences, announce press release in support of CCE 09-04-2018 Irvine Finance Commission - Voted to send Staff recommendations to City Council with a favorable approval. Moved by Commissioner Reyno, seconded by Vice Chair Dressler 09-25-2018 Irvine City Council - Votes to approve funding for Feasibility Study 12-10-2018 Irvine Green Ribbon Committee - Request for Review of Feasibility Study CCE Studies Completed (2019) 06-18-2019 Final draft of Irvine Feasibility Study released 06-24-2019 Irvine Green Ribbon Committee - Unanimous vote in favor to recommend Feasibility Study to Council 08-18-2019 Huntington Beach City Council votes to direct staff to post RFI for Feasibility Study 08-19-2019 Irvine Finance Commission - Feasibility Study review, and Vote to Recommend JPA formation and submit an Implementation Plan to CPUC by December 2020 for Operation by 2022. Moved by Chair Shute and Second by Commissioner Young 10-18-2019 Huntington Beach RFI bid closes with bid from MRW & Associations for $66,000 and EES Consulting for $52,150 12-10-2019 City Council Study Session on CCE • Motion to direct staff to conduct additional analysis internally per staff recommendation, conduct outreach to secure CCE JPA partner cities, including but not limited to Huntington Beach, Costa Mesa, and Yorba Linda, and ask staff to return with recommendations of partner cities and preliminary JPA formation documents no later than May 2020 in preparation to submit a CCE Implementation Plan to CPUC by December 2020. Climate Action Campaign, 4452 Park Blvd., Suite 209 San Diego, CA 92116 www.climateactioncampaign.org CLIMATf CTIOH C A M P A I G N CCE Business Plan & Agency Formation (2020) 01-10-2020 Irvine Sustainability Staff Sona Coffee begins outreach efforts & JPA invitations to jurisdictions. Letters to all City Council members in all 34 cities are sent. 01-14-2020 Irvine Mayor Protein Michael Carroll CCE Stakeholder Advisory Committee meets to discuss implementation timeline 02-09-2020 Deadline for City response to Irvine request for Letters of Intent to be returned. 05-2020 Staff to draft Implementation Plan for City Council approval 06-2020 Partner cities to agendize and vote on approval of Implementation Plan 08-2020 Estimated period of Flnal Approval of proposed Implementation Plan 12-31-2020 Deadline to submit CCE Implementation Plan to California Public Utilities Commission Procurement and Delivery (2021 -2022) 01-2021 The CCE Implementation Plan approved by the California Public Utilities Commission. 01-2021 CCE Agency formed, Board members approved, Staffing begins 02-2021 Solicitation and selection of initial primary power supplier 02-2021 Procurement plan developed and power supplier portfolio expanded 03-2021 CPUC approves Implementation Plan 10-2021 Notice to customers 01-2022 Service to customers begins. Climate Action Campaign, 4452 Park Blvd., Suite 209 San Diego, CA 92116 www.climateactioncampaign.org Switzer, Donna From: Flossie Horgan <horganf@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:21 PM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: CCE JPA City Council will look into joining the CCE JPA. I support such a move as it will benefit the citizens and businesses and not increase the profits of our SCE by a 14.4% rate increase. Flossie Horgan 207 2 l st5 street. SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Deb: /z/io/.2vz0 Agenda nem rb.;_f�-�v- JZ ��1 1 Switzer, Donna From: Linda K <Ikteamtalk@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:33 PM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org; CITY COUNCIL Subject: In Support of Joining Community Choice JPA Now! Hello, Thank You Mayor and City Council and staff for all your hard work in this challenging year. Huntington Beach is my favorite beach since I was 6 years old. I am writing in support of Huntington Beach joining Irvine and Fullerton in the first CommunityChoice JPA in Orange County. SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION I'm a supporter of clean energy solutions that are also good for business! Meellft Date: Please consider some of these financial strengths of Community Choice: It keeps rates competitive, (note SCE plans a rate increase next ye } hem No.� <ao -.2-0gzl A. SCE has requested a 14% increased rate for 2021. Here's the reference for that: https://www.solarmaxtech.com/blog/p.200224000/southern-califomia-edison-sce-plans-144-rate-increase- in-2021/ Community Choice is a revenue builder for every single city in a CCA. Here is one example: Peninsula Clean Energy(PCE) launched in 2016. A 5%savings on electricity on their baseline 50%clean energy rate,and for the average customer it is roughly$2.00 more per month to select 100%clean energy.That ends up to be a cumulative savings for customers of approximately $18 million per year. Large businesses, including Facebook and Visa,get 100%clean energy as a result. Other Financial Highlights(PCE): -They expect a $186 million dollar net position at the end of the year,even with the impact of Covid19. -200 days of operating cash on hand. -$7-$11 million returned for community energy programs (re: 6/15/20 CCA webinar, CRPOQ. https://www.pubIicpower.org/periodical/article/moodys-assigns-investment-grade-credit-rating-cca https://www.peninsulacleanenergy.com/ CCA increases opportunities for New Business in Cleantech: -Early adoption gives Costa Mesa a lead on drawing cleantech business. Cleantech Companies Ride the Sustainable Investing Wave in LA By James Cutchin Monday,July 20, 2020 https://Iabusiness*ournal.com/news/2020/uul/20/cleantech-companies-sustainable-investing-la/ "Local government policies and incentives, however,would likely be key in determining where cleantech hubs eventually develop alongside the new investment, according to Hiatt." 1 If Huntington Beach joins now, the City helps design the JPA: Cities that join Irvine now, have the most say in the design of the JPA. Three reasons why cities join JPA's: - It reduces liability for cities - It allows for economy of scale in operation and procurement, which increases profit. - The amount of time and money to invest in initiation of a JPA would be significant. Four Community Choice Aggregator JPA/Cities Reach High Credit Ratings even during Covid! Central Coast Community Energy (3CE): Oct 16, 2020: S & P's 'A' Rating. Launched 2018 Marin Clean Energy(MCE), May 2018, August 2020, Fitch BBB+ rating. Up from BBB in 2019. Silicon Valley Clean Energy(SVCE),July 15, 2020 Peninsula Clean Energy(PCE), May 2019, Peninsula-awarded Fitch BBB+2020. Launched 2016 I'm happy to share the sources and more information on anything I've shared. Thank You! Linda Kraemer, M.S. OCCleanPower.org 2 Switzer, Donna From: Lisa Swanson <lisainlb@ymail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:43 PM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: Support for Community Choice Energy Dear City Council Members, thank you for your service to our beloved City of Huntington Beach, and thank you for holding a special meeting to consider adopting Resolution No. 2020-87. My name is Lisa Swanson, and I have owned my home at 21332 Compass Lane, Huntington Beach for 11 years. I am a professional chemical engineer registered in the State of California and had a long career in corporate environmental compliance before deciding to take an early retirement in August 2019. I'm a strong proponent of environmental sustainability which is what led me to learn about Community Choice Energy (CCE), but that is not the reason that your vote tonight is so critical and important. CCE can offer economic relief to our property owners, businesses, and the City through lower electricity rates, and it satisfies several key objectives for the City's future vision. You should adopt Resolution No. 2020-87 for the following reasons: 1. CCE is a revenue builder for cities 2. Electricity rate savings of 2% for EVERY customer (residential, commercial, and government) are predicted. 3. Southern California Edison is requesting a 14.4% rate increase starting in 2021. We need relief from these kind of price hikes! 4. Other cities in CA are already benefiting from CCE so it is proven and will be easy to implement. 5. If action is not taken tonight, the City of Huntington Beach will not have an opportunity to implement CCE any earlier than 2023. 6. If the full financial assessment does not support the predicted significant cost savings, the City has the option to withdraw from the agreement by March 1, 2021 without penalty. If Huntington Beach joins Irvine this year, we will be involved in the formation of the first Community Choice Authority JPA in Orange County. That is a legacy that I believe every City Council member should be very proud of and hope for your unanimous support. Regards, Lisa Swanson 714-851-7523 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Mo*V Imo:, _/-Z AgerKiS Wn No.; Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:01 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:® MyHB-#481828 City Council [39791] From: MyHB<reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent:Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:43 PM To:Jun, Catherine<catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sa nd ie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:©MyHB-#481828 City Council [39791] MyHB New Report Submitted -#481828 Status new Work Order #481828 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes Vote NO on CCE or CCA we don't want it, it's been voted down twice! If council members don't listen to Huntington Beach why are you on our council?This is a sneaky start Mayor and we are watching! View the Report Reporter Name Kim Donnelly SUPPLEMENTAL coMMUNICA 1 ION Email Kime106(ai)aol.com nQ per: ��I / ZV Z Phone / /�® ^� Report Submitted 9�1 Nta<• [ _ DEC 10, 2020 -1:42 PM - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Switzer, Donna From: Estanislau, Robin Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:16 PM To: Switzer, Donna Subject: FW: Council Item on CCE 12/10/20 Robin Estanislau, CMC, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 714-536-5405 N. 1-. Please consider the HB City Clerk's office for your passport needs! From: smayl@socal.rr.com <smayl@socal.rr.com> Sent:Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:14 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Cc: Estanislau, Robin <Robin.Estanislau@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Council Item on CCE 12/10/20 Honorable Councilmembers: A decision to join an energy CCE JPA as included in tonight's Council meeting agenda would be a disastrous move. Such an action needs careful study and consideration, and is not appropriate for a special City Council meeting three days after the Councilmembers having been sworn into office. The City can join the JPA at any time if financial analysis and thoughtful consideration finds that there would be benefits to residents. Steve May Huntington Beach, CA SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION i.;)hno 2 2v Agenda Item NO.. • +� City of Huntington Beach INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: File ID #20-2095 FROM: Robin Estanislau, City Cleok-' DATE: December 16, 2020 SUBJECT: COMMUNICATIONS The attached communications for File ID #20-2095 (Ordinance No. 4227) were not included in the supplemental communication attachment published to the website for File ID #20-2082 on the December 10, 2020 City Council Special Meeting Agenda: • Twenty-eight (28) communications received through the MyHB app (agenda comment web link) and/or supplementalcomm(a)surfcity-hb.org email address; and • One hundred ninety-one (191) communications sent to and received by the City Council in real time via the city.council(o-)_surfcity-hb.org email address, but not copied to the City Clerk's Office until Tuesday, December 15 due to an administrative error. Estanislau, Robin From: Maria T. Spain <mtspain1 @yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2020 11:30 AM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org; CITY COUNCIL Subject: Fw: CCE (Community Choice Energy) - so called emergency city council meeting for I RV I N E??? Please advise if the City County Members below have received and read my email below. Maria T. Spain Email: mtspain1(a)yahoo.com, Mobile: 714-600-9992 "Nothing in life is to be feared;it is only to be understood.Now is the time to understand more,so that we may fear less."—Marie Curie ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Maria T. Spain <mtspain1@yahoo.com> To: city.council@surfcity-hb.org <city.council@surfcity-hb.org>; Michael Gates <michael.gates@surfcity-hb.org> Cc: oliver.chi@surfcity-hb.org <oliver.chi@surfcity-hb.org> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020, 06:14:09 PM PST Subject: CCE (Community Choice Energy) -so called emergency city council meeting for IRVINE??? To the City of Huntington Beach Mayor and City Council Members: CC: City Attorney Michael Gates; City Clerk Robin Estanislau As a long-time member of the community; I have been vehemently opposed this horribly, misguided scam of a program since it was first proposed a few years ago. As the facts continue to evolve more and more, like my fellow neighbors, we stand in opposition to this dangerous program. • Please explain to me why? We just had a our City Council Election and yet the first move out-the-gate is an emergency meeting, without the benefit of having ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS in attendance with the express intent to benefit the City of Irvine. Excuse me but since when do we bend to another city's agenda????????????????????? • Why are we "covering the backs" of Irvine's bad decision instead of protecting the best interest of our own city. • The citizens of Huntington Beach did NOT vote for HB City hall to take over the energy business! • Seriously, this requires at a minimum; to be discussed at a council meeting when ALL newly elected City Council members are fully present. 1 • Meanwhile, this city has a high priority of issues we are facing: 1 . The growing homeless crisis, 2. The crumbling infrastructure, 3. The increased budget losses, to the likes HB has never experienced before. 4. A massively unfunded pension debt and, 5. Our Local HB small businesses are collapsing all around us; everywhere we see empty strip malls, and huge loss of business and city revenue. 6. A year-long pandemic crisis, and all the services that been affected for our most vulnerable, children and seniors. 7. And Gruesome Newsome Governor has to GO!!! WE NEED Strong City Leadership is desperately needed to immediately address and come up with solutions to the ISSUES IMPORTANT TO THE CITIZENS....NOT SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS AND THEIR AGENDAS!! I hold our Mayor and City Council wholly responsible to respond to these issues and crisis and show up! Show up to support our City first. Irvine is not our issues. fully expect at a minimum continuous email communication; one that informs the HB Citizens as to How and When will this be seriously discussed for resolution. NOW! Including Quote from another HB Citizen: Last night several things were said regarding the financial aspects of CCE that raised red flags. First. Councilman Dan Kalmick admitted that the savings to ratepayers would be less than 2%. He actually provided an example using 1.5% savings to ratepayers. If you recall, when CCE was first raised as a possibility for our city, the city council members in favor (and staff) were promising a 5% rate savings to us. Earlier in the discussion last night one of the consultants raised the point that there would be plenty of money to pay Irvine back for the upfront costs charged to Huntington Beach to join the JPA (Joint Powers Authority). He said there would be "tens of millions of of dollars of profit generated"by the JPA. If I think of these two comments and try to make sense of them as a whole, several questions arise. 2 • First, most of us have done family budgets. We realize that there is an income side, an expense side and a savings side. For most of us the income side doesn't vary much. But, depending how we decide to live our lives, the expense side can vary greatly. Consequently the savings side (think income less expenses) can also vary. When looking at CCE, we have the income side, the cost of energy, the cost of running the program, the savings to the ratepayers and the amount of profit. • My question is, when the savings to the ratepayers was reduced from 5% to 1.5%, was it because the cost of energy has already increased 3.5% (indicating an unstable energy market)? Or did Irvine decide to retain a larger portion of the savings as profit, to be distributed to the cities making up the JPA? One of my concerns with the concept of CCE is that it infers that the governments will be making profit at the expense of the residents of the cities it supposedly serves. I am diametrically opposed to this. It is nothing more than a tax. Maria T. Spain Email: mtspain1Ca)Vahoo.com, Mobile: 714-600-9992 "Nothing in life is to be feared;it is only to be understood.Now is the time to understand more,so that we may fear less."—Marie Curie 3 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 tmjivison@msn.com 801-599-3703 2 Estanislau, Robin From: dad2st@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2020 5:12 AM To: supplementaIcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: Community Choice Energy City Council I Urge you all to shelve and cancel this ridiculous bureaucratic Over Reach. Why would I, as a long time resident think this will even save me a little money. I'm constantly being "nickle and dimed to death" living on a low fixed income pension. Perhaps we all be better served if our dilapidating roads. alleys and sidewalks are repaired. Our increasing crime, homelessness, and of course coyote problems are resolved. Lets not forget our sky high pension liabilities. Good grief* No need I think to even mention the Covid economic FALLOUT which will be with us for YEARS. Vote NO ON THIS ENERGY proposal Thanks Chuck Burns Huntington Beach CA 92649 714 369-7384 1 Estanislau, Robin From: William Hennerty Jr. <billhennerty@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, December 14, 2020 10:45 AM To: CITY COUNCIL; Chi, Oliver; Estanislau, Robin Cc: Gates, Michael Subject: CCA opt out City Clerk, Council, city Manager, Good morning, I wanted to inform all of you that my wife and I would like to opt out of any type of CCE/CCA program now or in the future. Seems like the council has made up it's mind about the subject so just a friendly note letting you know I will not be on board. Thank you, William Hennerty Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 1 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, December 14, 2020 9:23 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: Community Choice Energy (CCE) -----Original Message----- From: Patricia Larkin <patglarkin@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2020 8:49 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Community Choice Energy(CCE) Greetings City Council Members, am in support of the Council discussing and seriously considering the adoption of CCE. It's time to consider alternatives and the environmental/climate challenge we face. Pat Larkin Sent from my Wad 1 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 5:16 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: No On CCE -----Original Message----- From:TW Collins<twc741@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 5:15 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: No On CCE Please do not adopt CCE for H.B. TW Collins 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 11:42 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: no cce From:stevo314@aol.com<stevo314@aol.com> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 11:41 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:Sent to CC- no cce Please stop considering cce for HB. Disastrous for Palmdale and would be for us, too. Sincerely, Tina and Don Stevenson 16871 Stonehaverr .Cir. Huntington Beach, Ca 92649 Estanislau, Robin From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 11:37 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: No on CCE -----Original Message----- From:THEODORE VIERS<theodore.viers@verizon.net> Sent: Friday, December 11,2020 11:13 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: CCE NO ON CCE Sent from my Wad Estanislau, Robin From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 11:34 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: NO on CCE From: Colleen Cavalieri<colleenhb@yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 11:18 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:Sent to CC- NO on CCE Dear City Council members, I have been a resident of HB for 34 years and see no reason for HB to join Irvine in Community Choice Energy. It has failed with other municipalities, let Irvine go it alone and see how they fare. After all Irvine lost over $200 million in Great Park Funds and never found it. Maybe they're better poised than HB for a potential loss. Thank you Colleen Cavalieri Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android Estanislau, Robin From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 10:14 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:® MyHB-#482199 City Council [39822] From: MyHB<reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 9:15 AM To:Jun, Catherine<catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:®MyHB-#482199 City Council [39822] MyHB New Report Submitted -#482199 Status new Work Order #482199 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes CCE-we,as a city,would be absolutely crazy to get involved in this business.The risks are way too high, and the investments not feasible.We have other much more important priorities. Please say No to this. I wish we could be there with you to make our feelings known.Thanks. View the Report Reporter Name Larry Geisse Email LGeisseA_aol.com Phone 714-321-0324 Report Submitted DEC 11, 2020 -9:14 AM 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 9:06 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:® MyHB-#482131 City Council [39817] From: MyHB<reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 8:16 AM To:Jun, Catherine<catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes,Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:®MyHB-#482131 City Council [39817] MyHB New Report Submitted -#482131 Status new Work Order #482131 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes No on CCE! View the Report Reporter Name Holly Conway Email Conway hollyCcilyahoo.com Phone 714-330-6807 Report Submitted DEC 11, 2020-8:16 AM - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please do not change subject line when responding. - - ........I ...... .... 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 9:05 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:® MyHB-#482138 City Council [39818] From: MyHB<reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 8:22 AM To:Jun, Catherine<catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:©MyHB-#482138 City Council [39818] MyHB New Report Submitted -#482138 .Status new Work Order #482138 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes Vote no on CCE. I do not want to give you the authority to change my electricity rates without justification or oversight.You .were not elected to be our nannies.You were elected to serve our best interests and CCE is not in the communities best interest.Vote no. Reporter Name Joseph Dean Email ioedean6(a)-gmaii.com Phone Report Submitted DEC 11, 2020 -8:21 AM - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 7:37 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:® MyHB-#481975 City Council [39811] From: MyHB<reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent:Thursday, December 10, 2020 6:57 PM To:Jun, Catherine<catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:®MyHB-#481975 City Council [39811] MyHB New Report Submitted -#481975 Status new Work Order #481975 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes Stay out of Selling electricity , it is not in our city's best interest.Allow the private utilities do there job.You can't even buy real estate ,we are exposed to trust you with running the power to the city?Take your socialist plan and focus on something more important. View the Report Reporter Name Erik Mohler Email ewmohlerRearthlink.nrt Phone Report Submitted DEC 10, 2020 -6:57 PM - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Switzer, Donna From: Frakes, Sandie Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:53 PM To: Switzer, Donna Subject: FW:H MyHB-#481919 City Council [39809] Another CCE comment From: MyHB <reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent:Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:29 PM To:Jun, Catherine<catherine.jun@surfcity-hb.org>; Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org>; Frakes, Sandie <Sandie.Frakes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:©MyHB-#481919 City Council [39809] MyHB New Report Submitted -#481919 Status new Work Order #481919 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes I can not believe that an EMERGENCY MEETING is needed to discuss something that doesn't pertain to HB residents health or safety.... by holding this meeting and participating...YOU ARE NOT FOR THE PEOPLE OF HB!!!!!!!! you owe your loyalty to some other interest and should be ashamed of yourselves. Andrissa Dominguez View the Report Reporter Name Andrissa Dominguez Email andrissahb(&gmail.com Phone 714-369-3107 Report Submitted DEC 10, 2020-4:29 PM 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Roger Gloss <rogergloss@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:57 PM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: ATTN Public Comment re:YES TO CCE Dear Mayor Carr and Council Members, I am a 50-year resident of Orange County and have been advocating for Community Choice Energy since 2016. Please approve agenda items as necessary - and before December 31 - so that the City of Huntington Beach can join Irvine and other cities in the Orange County Power Authority JPA. This action will help accelerate Orange County's transition to clean, renewable energy and a healthy, livable future. Respectfully, Roger Gloss Rancho Santa Margarita (949) 300-5600 i Switzer, Donna From: Estanislau, Robin Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:45 PM To: Switzer, Donna Subject: FW: Opposition Letter to CCE Supplemental Communication for Special Council Mtg Robin Estanislau, CMC, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 714-536-5405 ON a r r' Please consider the HB City Clerk's office for your passport needs! From: pacj <pacj_03@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:37 PM To: Estanislau, Robin <Robin.Estanislau@surfcity-hb.org>; CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Opposition Letter to CCE Supplemental Communication for Special Council Mtg Dear Council members We are opposed to Huntington Beach joining the OCPA, a CCE JPA. Please postpone a vote on this item until ALL council members can be in attendance. Sincerely, Julio and Patricia Quintana i Estanislau, Robin From: pacj <pacj_03@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:37 PM To: Estanislau, Robin; CITY COUNCIL Subject: Opposition Letter to CCE Supplemental Communication for Special Council Mtg Dear Council members We are opposed to Huntington Beach joining the OCPA, a CCE JPA. Please postpone a vote on this item until ALL council members can be in attendance. Sincerely, Julio and Patricia Quintana 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 3:47 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: CCE -----Original Message----- From: Carol Robertson<carolr2020@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 3:31 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: CCE Dear honorable council members, I am opposed to signing onto a Community Choice Electric contract.We don't need to use it as a middleman and it could potentially bankrupt the city in the future.We already have enough unfunded pensions, let's not start the new year hastily entering contracts with the CCE. Thank you, Sincerely, Carol Robertson Estanislau, Robin From: Chris Wacaster <cwacaster@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:51 PM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: ATTN Public Comment re:YES TO CCE Dear Mayor Carr and Council, Please vote YES on Approving the JPA agreement, Authorizing the Mayor& City Clerk to sign the agreement, Approving the First Reading of the Ordinance, and Appointing a Board Director to join the Orange County Power Authority and Orange County's first Community Choice Energy Program! thanks, Chris Estanislau, Robin From: Bev Sansone <drsansone001 @gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:22 PM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: CCE To Mayor Carr and City council members: I would very much like to have access to CCE. I strongly encourage you all to vote Yes on approving the JPA agreement, authorizing the mayor and city clerk to sign the agreement,approving the first reading of the ordinance, and appointing a board director to join the Orange County Power Authority. We are losing precious time in the battle against Global Climate Change. This is one small step that needs to be done as soon as possible. Thank you for your time and all that you do for us in Huntington Beach. Beverly Sansone 201 20th St. Huntington Beach, CA Switzer, Donna From: MyHB <reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:45 PM To: Jun, Catherine; Fikes, Cathy; Frakes, Sandie Subject: © MyHB-#481902 City Council [39801] MyHB New Report Submitted -#481902 Status new Work Order #481902 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes I am requesting you vote no on tonight's speech ial meeting regarding CCE.This will not be good for our city. View the Report Reporter Name Kathee Miller Email Katheej58@yahoo.com Phone Report Submitted DEC 10, 2020-3:44 PM ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Switzer, Donna From: MyHB <reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:37 PM To: Jun, Catherine; Fikes, Cathy; Frakes, Sandie Subject: MyHB-#481900 City Council [39800] MyHB New Report Submitted -#481900 Status new Work Order #481900 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes A great big no to community choice energy(CCE) View the Report Reporter Name Lon Page Email lonpage388@yahoo.com Phone 904-704-5217 Report Submitted DEC 10, 2020-3:37 PM ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Estanislau, Robin From: H Meyers <hmeybsan@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:27 PM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: ATTN Public Comment re:Yes to CCE Dear Mayor Carr and Council members, Please vote YES on Approving the JPA agreement, Authorizing the Mayor& City Clerk to sign the agreement, Approving the First Reading of the Ordinance, and Appointing a Board Director to join the Orange County Power Authority and Orange County's first Community Choice Energy Program! This is critical to a sustainable future and is the smart thing to do for businesses and residents in Huntington Beach. Thank you, Hildy Meyers Switzer, Donna From: john wacaster <johntwacaster@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:00 PM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: ATTN Public Comment re:YES TO CCE Dear Mayor Carr and Council, Please vote YES on Approving the JPA agreement, Authorizing the Mayor& City Clerk to sign the agreement, Approving the First Reading of the Ordinance, and Appointing a Board Director to join the Orange County Power Authority and Orange County's first Community Choice Energy Program! john Switzer, Donna From: MyHB <reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:58 PM To: Jun, Catherine; Fikes, Cathy; Frakes, Sandie Subject: 0 MyHB-#481884 City Council [39797] MyHB New Report Submitted -#481884 Status new Work Order #481884 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes I understand there will be a special meeting regarding implementation of CCE in HB for energy use. I want to let you know that I oppose this move. I don't see how this will benefit anyone with the electricity bills. It has been shown by other cities that it does not work, City council should be focusing on more urgent matters like the economic crisis due to the Covid lockdowns and the homeless and robberies going on all over the city. View the Report Reporter Name Christina Silva-Salgado Email krica256@aol.com Phone Report Submitted DEC 10, 2020-2:57 PM ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Switzer, Donna From: Audrey Prosser <prosserga@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:26 PM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: Community Choice Energy I support Huntington Beach joining the OCPA and the execution of a JPA. Joining the OCPA will save money for the City and the individual rate payers as has been proven by Irvine's feasibility study and other Cities. Thank you, Audrey Prosser 9382 Sunridge Dr Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Switzer, Donna From: MyHB <reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:25 PM To: Jun, Catherine; Fikes, Cathy; Frakes, Sandie Subject: © MyHB-#481866 City Council [397941 MyHB New Report Submitted -#481866 Status new Work Order #481866 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes CCE vote is not a good idea, please vote no! View the Report Reporter Name Darrin Horowitz Email DLwitz@aol.com Phone Report Submitted DEC 10, 2020 -2:25 PM ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Switzer, Donna From: MyHB <reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:24 PM To: Jun, Catherine; Fikes, Cathy; Frakes, Sandie Subject: 0 MyHB-#481865 City Council [39793] MyHB New Report Submitted -#481865 Status new Work Order #481865 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes I am urging a no vote on CCE.We do not need the city to be involved in the energy business.The city is in debt now.We do not want more expenditures.This is a boondoggle and has not worked to lower costs in other areas. No, no and no! View the Report Reporter Name Julia Truitt Email juliactruitt@gmail.com Phone 714-883-5359 Report Submitted DEC 10, 2020 -2:24 PM ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Switzer, Donna From: MyHB <reply@mycivicapps.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 11:41 AM To: Jun, Catherine; Fikes, Cathy; Frakes, Sandie Subject: 0 MyHB-#481716 City Council [39786] MyHB New Report Submitted -#481716 Status new Work Order #481716 Issue Type City Council Subtype All Council Members Notes CCE agenda item -PLEASE VOTE NO This was defeated twice already. Do not support this. View the Report Reporter Name Deborah Janus Email debjanus@gmail.com Phone 714-330-4152 Report Submitted DEC 10, 2020-11:40 AM ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please do not change subject line when responding. 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Patricia Larkin <patglarkin@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2020 8:49 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Community Choice Energy (CCE) Greetings City Council Members, I am in support of the Council discussing and seriously considering the adoption of CCE. It's time to consider alternatives and the environmental/climate challenge we face. Pat Larkin Sent from my Wad 1 Estanislau, Robin From: slhatch <slhatch@twc.com> Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2020 1:18 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO ON CCE Dear City Council Members of HB, Thank you for taking the time to hear my concern for our city. I strongly urge you to Vote NO on Community Choice Energy! Our city of Huntington Beach does not need CCE, it would be financially devastating to our great city, and HB residents simply do not want it. Do what's right for our city...NO ON CCE!!! Thank you! Concerned HB resident, Sonya Hatch Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S8, an AT&T 5G Evolution capable smartphone i Estanislau, Robin From: Maria T. Spain <mtspain1 @yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 6:14 PM To: CITY COUNCIL; Gates, Michael Cc: Chi, Oliver Subject: CCE (Community Choice Energy) - so called emergency city council meeting for I RVI N E??? To the City of Huntington Beach Mayor and City Council Members: CC: City Attorney Michael Gates; City Clerk Robin Estanislau As a long-time member of the community; I have been vehemently opposed this horribly, misguided scam of a program since it was first proposed a few years ago. As the facts continue to evolve more and more, like my fellow neighbors, we stand in opposition to this dangerous program. • Please explain to me why? We just had a our City Council Election and yet the first move out-the-gate is an emergency meeting, without the benefit of having ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS in attendance with the express intent to benefit the City of Irvine. Excuse me but since when do we bend to another city's agenda????????????????????? • Why are we "covering the backs" of Irvine's bad decision instead of protecting the best interest of our own city. • The citizens of Huntington Beach did NOT vote for HB City hall to take over the energy business! • Seriously, this requires at a minimum; to be discussed at a council meeting when ALL newly elected City Council members are fully present. • Meanwhile, this city has a high priority of issues we are facing: 1 . The growing homeless crisis, 2. The crumbling infrastructure, 3. The increased budget losses, to the likes HB has never experienced before. 4. A massively unfunded pension debt and, 5. Our Local HB small businesses are collapsing all around us; everywhere we see empty strip malls, and huge loss of business and city revenue. I 6. A year-long pandemic crisis, and all the services that been affected for our most vulnerable, children and seniors. 7. And Gruesome Newsome Governor has to GO!!! WE NEED Strong City Leadership is desperately needed to immediately address and come up with solutions to the ISSUES IMPORTANT TO THE CITIZENS....NOT SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS AND THEIR AGENDAS!! I hold our Mayor and City Council wholly responsible to respond to these issues and crisis and show up! Show up to support our City first. Irvine is not our issues. I fully expect at a minimum continuous email communication; one that informs the HB Citizens as to How and When will this be seriously discussed for resolution. NOW! Including Quote from another HB Citizen: Last night several things were said regarding the financial aspects of CCE that raised red flags. First. Councilman Dan Kalmick admitted that the savings to ratepayers would be less than 2%. He actually provided an example using 1.5% savings to ratepayers. If you recall, when CCE was first raised as a possibility for our city, the city council members in favor (and staff, were promising a 5% rate savings to us. Earlier in the discussion last night one of the consultants raised the point that there would be plenty of money to pay Irvine back for the upfront costs charged to Huntington Beach to join the JPA (Joint Powers Authority). He said there would be "tens of millions of of dollars of profit generated"by the JPA. If I think of these two comments and try to make sense of them as a whole, several questions arise. • First, most of us have done family budgets. We realize that there is an income side, an expense side and a savings side. For most of us the income side doesn't vary much. But, depending how we decide to live our lives, the expense side can vary greatly. Consequently the savings side (think income less expenses) can also vary. When looking at CCE, we have the income side, the cost of energy, the cost of running the program, the savings to the ratepayers and the amount of profit. • My question is, when the savings to the ratepayers was reduced from 5% to 1.5%, was it because the cost of energy has already increased 3.5% (indicating an unstable energy market)? Or did Irvine decide to retain a larger portion of the savings as profit, to be distributed to the cities making up the JPA? 2 -One of my concerns with the concept of CCE is that it infers that the governments will be making profit at the expense of the residents of the cities it supposedly serves. I am diametrically opposed to this. It is nothing more than a tax. Maria T. Spain Email: mtspain 1 0)yahoo.com, Mobile: 714-600-9992 "Nothing in life is to be feared;it is only to be understood.Now is the time to understand more,so that we may fear less."—Marie Curie 3 Estanislau, Robin From: TW Collins <twc741 @gmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 5:15 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No On CCE Please do not adopt CCE for H.B. TW Collins Estanislau, Robin From: Carol Robertson <carolr2020@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 3:31 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Dear honorable council members, I am opposed to signing onto a Community Choice Electric contract.We don't need to use it as a middleman and it could potentially bankrupt the city in the future.We already have enough unfunded pensions, let's not start the new year hastily entering contracts with the CCE. Thank you, Sincerely, Carol Robertson Estanislau, Robin From: americanconnection@verizon.net Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 3:02 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: emergency meeting just more bullshit from the city 1 Estanislau, Robin From: mhobler dslextreme.com <mhobler@dslextreme.com> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 2:40 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Cc: mhobler @dslextreme.com Subject: CCE Importance: High Huntington Beach City Council: Please vote NO on the CCE (Community Choice Energy) that would enter Huntington Beach into such an agreement with Irvine. It did not bide well with Palmdale (who has stopped their CCE) and it will not bide well for our city of Huntington Beach. The negatives far outweigh any possible positives. Please do your homework on this issue before casting your vote. Thank you. Michael and Ann Hobler i Estanislau, Robin From: stevo314@aol.com Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 11:41 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: no cce Please stop considering cce for HB. Disastrous for Palmdale and would be for us, too. Sincerely, Tina and Don Stevenson 16871 Stonehaven Cir. Huntington Beach, Ca 92649 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Colleen Cavalieri <colleenhb@yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 11:18 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO on CCE Dear City Council members, I have been a resident of HB for 34 years and see no reason for HB to join Irvine in Community Choice Energy. It has failed with other municipalities, let Irvine go it alone and see how they fare. After all Irvine lost over $200 million in Great Park Funds and never found it. Maybe they're better poised than HB for a potential loss. Thank you Colleen Cavalieri Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android i Estanislau, Robin From: Chris Berry <chris92646@yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 10:12 AM To: CITY COUNCIL; Elaine Berry Subject: No on CCE We don't need to get into the power business to fund previous errors in dealing with the unions on their rampant funding for their gold plated exorbitant retirement benefits. The city council needs to look at the funding of the council members unofficial take money for re-election from these No on CCE. Sent from my iPad i Estanislau, Robin From: Price <pricegrandy@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 10:00 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Please do no implement this CCE program. I am a long time HB resident and I think that this will lead to very large problems initially and down the road.! I AM COMPLETELY AGAINST THE CCE PROGRAM!!!!! Huntington Beach resident for nearly 40 years, Earl Price Grandy 6721 Country Circle Huntington Beach CA 92648 Phone — 714-964-6686 Estanislau, Robin From: The Grandys <thegrandys@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 9:49 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Please DO NOT involve our city in this program!! Surely there are better ways. Carolyn Grandy Sent from Mail for Windows 10 1 Estanislau, Robin From: JAN GARNER <jpgarn@aol.com> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 8:51 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Dear City!! NO ON CCE!!! Jpgarner in Huntington Beach. Sent from my Phone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Stacey Coburn <stacey@Irsrm.com> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 4:04 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO on CCE I'm a resident of Huntington Beach California. My address is 90915 Harbors Drive, HB 92646 I'm requesting information by mail on this CCC plan and an option to opt out of this plan and immediately thank you i Estanislau, Robin From: Darrin &Julie Curry <hbcurrys@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 10:43 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Dear City Council, I am writing to ask you to vote NO on the CCE proposal. We as a city cannot afford this program nor does it provide the energy efficiency it promises. If you vote yes I will be opting out of the program. Thank You, Julie Curry Huntington Beach resident i Estanislau, Robin From: Robert Gregg <laserdoc8@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 10:25 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Stop CCE No on CCE!! Sent from AOi,Mobile Mail Get the new AOI,app:mail.mobile.aol.com 1 Estanislau, Robin From: bigpinestar@aol.com Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 10:14 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE The citizens of Huntington Beach are not interested. Please do not try to sell us something that is not good for our city. Thank you. Lynn Johsz 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Stewart Deutschle <sndnmytoes@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 9:48 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO ON CCEH! Dear Huntington Beach City Council, Where the citizens of Huntington Beach energy/electricity comes from is not a responsibility that our local government should get involved in. There is no scenario under which that situation would not increase our energy costs. Myself and every other citizen of Huntington Beach I have spoken to about this are against the our city joining the CCE. NO ON COMMUNITY CHOICE ENERGY FOR HUNTINGTON BEACH! Stewart Deutschle 20322 Colonial Cir, Huntington Beach, CA 92646 i Estanislau, Robin From: BRENDA SALAS <bsalas5261@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 8:50 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE No On CCE Sent from my Whone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: BRENDA SALAS <bsalas5261@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 8:49 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCD Voting No on CCD Sent from my iPhone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Thom Doney <thomdoney@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 8:23 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Dear City Council, Please do NOT vote in favor of CCE. We don't have the startup costs and it's not a priority for our city. Focus on the homeless problem, keeping our small businesses open and figuring out how to pay for a half billion dollar pension fund liability. This is typical of government "representatives". Promise big pensions and then a few years later, you're out of office and somebody else has to figure out how to fix the problem. Make the most important things the most important things! Thank you, Thom Doney Resident for 33 years thomdoney@yahoo.com 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Martinez Mario <mmcolonial@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 8:15 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE Please represent me, a long time HB resident and vote no on CCE. The city council has many other pressing issues to deal with than embarking on a new venture that is not proven to be beneficial. Let's support residents and businesses out if work due to Covid, address the increasing homelessness In or community, and other priorities before heading down this path. Thank you for your consideration Mario Martinez HB Tax Payer and voter i Estanislau, Robin From: Sarah Valdez <jsarahrv@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 7:52 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE! Hello, I am a resident of Huntington Beach and I do not support the engagement of CCE by the City Council. Formulating a deal with CCE is an overstep of the City Council and risks funds for an unnecessary change to power delivery. Public utilities are aptly called so, "public".There is no need for an intermediate party to facilitate the purchase of electricity between the users and source,SCE. As one of the largest providers of electricity in Southern California, SCE is able to achieve economies of scale to maintain their infrastructure, including repairs and expansion,through customer revenue.On the other hand, government oversight protects consumers from being overcharged and mitigates mismanagement of funds. Because of this balancing effect,SCE must leverage their purchasing power in order to charge users a fair market rate while generating a profit from their operations. Inserting another level of bureaucracy is ill-conceived.CCE is not a source of electricity and users do not need a broker for this simple transaction. More over, as a 3rd Party in this exchange, customers will be charged more than going through SCE directly. After all, CCE will want to be compensated for their involvement. If there were additional electrical providers serving Huntington Beach, a 3rd Party could possibly help in advocating for transparent, competitive pricing to the residents. But this not the case.There is only SCE. What mechanism is available to ensure that ANY fees paid to CCE would be justified?Customers are fully capable of ordering electricity and paying their bills directly. What are the user's protections if CCE raises their fees? If these fees are claimed to benefit users, how could this be fairly proven? What if CCE prices out SCE through large-scale, expansive solar panel deployments(ie Palmdale)?Will SCE not have the funds or resources to properly maintain their facilities,which would have safety ramifications? Since resident users would ultimately shoulder the cost of the solar panel deployment,would they have a say in how much CCE should deploy?Or will they be unwittingly forced to subsidize the cost? Please do not take a such simple matter away from your constituents.There are bigger issues that need to be addressed in the City that have farther reaching implications than how the residents pay an electric bill. Sincerely, Sarah Valdez (949) 873-3514 Sent from my iPhone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Diane Miller <dzmillerhbca@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 7:39 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCD Sent from my Wad. Please vote NO on ccd Diane Miller A Huntington Beach resident since1976. 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Hallie Murray <halliemurray@usa.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 7:27 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO ON CCE!!! I say "NO" to CCE! My name is Marie H Murray. I have lived in Huntington Beach since 1993. One of the reasons I moved here was the city's "conservative", sensible, residents who believe in implementing only reasonable, financially smart projects that improve the lives of the city's residents. Prioritizing "renewable energy projects" is right up there with the push to stick an industrial desalination plant on our beautiful beachfront. Few in HB will support this and anyone on the City council who moves ahead with support for CCE should know that their term on the Council will be a short lived. I think these "woke" individuals would be happier in Portland where their leftist policies and their distain for their own residents is increasingly evident. If this is being prioritized my only question is who is really behind it and how much are they paying to override the sentiments of our HB population? Marie H Murray 9850 Garfield Ave. Huntington Beach, 92646 1 Estanislau, Robin From: janet perry <jlperry54@msn.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 7:12 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE No on CCE! Sent from my Whone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: h20wwilly@aol.com Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 7:07 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Please vote NO on CCE !! ! Sincerely, William Shofstall Shelley Shofstall Whitney Shofstall 6304 Sunnyside Circle Huntington Beach, CA 92648-6643 i Estanislau, Robin From: virginia audette <audette100@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 6:41 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO ON CCE Why don't you deal with more serious issues such as homelessness and pension liability rather than spending money on this? I plan to stay with SCE. Virginia Audette 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Phi!Ventura <phi!ventura@verizon.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 6:36 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE NOOOOO!!!! ON CCE 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Gene Haberl <ghaberl@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 6:32 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE Please vote NO on CCE. Thank you. 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Mary Brackett <mgbracket8@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 6:02 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE -Vote NO!! Dear Huntington Beach City Council, Where the citizens of Huntington Beach energy/electricity comes from is not a responsibility that our local government should get involved in.There is no scenario under which that situation would not increase our energy costs. Myself and every other citizen of Huntington Beach I have spoken to about this are against the our city joining the CCE. We do not need a poorly run, extremely costly enterprise similar to the disaster that is the LA DWP. NO ON COMMUNITY CHOICE ENERGY FOR HUNTINGTON BEACH! Sent from my iPhone. 1 Estanislau, Robin From: debraputnam@reagan.com Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 5:52 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE NO NO NO NO NO NO NO ON CCE! I've lived in HB for over 60 years. Progressive ideologies have no place here. You WILL be watched how you govern. 1 Estanislau, Robin From: vince <planmybike@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 5:44 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO on CCE 1 Estanislau, Robin From: sam_i_am_92646@yahoo.com Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 5:38 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No CCE HB city council I am not in favor of proceeding with CCE. DO NOT SCHEDULE MEETINGS WITH LESS THAN 72 HOURS NOTICE IN THE FUTURE. Especially during the holidays! Sam McMillen 18941 Crimson Circle HB 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Kevin Anderson <kpanderson@socal.rr.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 9:07 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Re:VOTE NO ON CCE Wow! You allow an un-masked lobbyist to speak in council chambers, but you won't allow the citizens you are trying to screw have any public comments???? Do any of you know what the word hypocrisy means??? Last I checked,this is still a democracy, and even you HBPOA money grabbers still have to listen to us. You truly do not represent me, and I will be opting out of your socialist boondoggle ASAP. You YES voters will hear from us. Sent from my iPhone >On Dec 10, 2020, at 2:33 PM, Kevin Anderson <kpanderson@socal.rr.com>wrote: > By a show of hands, how many of you realize that our city has 100's of millions of dollars in un-funded liabilities? > Do any of you understand what the term bankruptcy means? > In a pandemic,with our local business's being shutdown,families out of work not being able to pay rent-you want to vote yourselves the right to raise our energy rates on us any time you want,without asking for our permission? >The high desert city of Palmdale canceled CCE after 4 years, because it was an expensive failure. >Who ever votes yes on this DOES NOT represent my family or the city of HB-you only serve yourself. > Please think of others who are struggling to live there lives here instead of your own political connections. > Kevin Anderson >Sent from my iPhone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Dale Faubert <faubdj@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 9:06 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE! This is a disaster,vote no on this! Sent from my Wad i Estanislau, Robin From: Toni Smalley <tones4u@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 5:36 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: electricity NO on CCE! Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Jill Bankey <jbanke3@netscape.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 5:26 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO on CCE! As a concerned citizen of HB, please vote against the Community Choice Energy agenda! We don't need this in our city and have much bigger issues that need attention and funds - like rising crime, homelessness and small business being forced out of business by unnecessary Covid closures. VOTE NO ON CCE!! Thank you. i Estanislau, Robin From: Charles Rowlette <rowlettecg@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 5:23 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE City Council Members I urge you to vote no on CCE. The community needs to be better informed on this issue and its ramifications. I just learned about this emergency meeting to vote on this topic today. Sincerely Mrs. Charles Rowlette i Estanislau, Robin From: James Cavener <merjimbo28@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 5:09 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Program To HB City Council Members, i was appalled when i became aware that an emergency meeting was called for Thursday, 12/10/2020 to discuss entering into a Community Choice Energy Program. When any issue that effects the citizens of our city needs to be considered, it should be done in the light of day so we can voice our opinion on the subject rather skulking in the dark of night. I am opposed to entering into a CCE for a number of reasons, a few of which are: You are creating another bureaucracy that will require increasing our currently bloated $1 billion plus unfunded liability. You will need to increase the our rates to pay for this The State of California already requires the use of renewable energy I would ask that you do the responsible thing for your constituents and vote no on CCE James E. Cavener i Estanislau, Robin From: Michelle Larsson <misunsetca@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 5:07 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Upcoming vote on CCE Dear Council Members, As a long time (over 40 years)resident and home owner in HB (I vote in EVERY election), I urge you to discontinue your pursuit of Community Choice Energy. There is NO reason for our council to consider another level of City Government at this time. There is no one on the council qualified to even consider this proposal. Please remember that you work for US. Thank you &God Bless, Michelle Larsson 17132 PCH Huntington Beach CA 92649 1 Estanislau, Robin From: cabobi112@verizon.net Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 5:07 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Please so no to the CCE Estanislau, Robin From: Gloria Rankin <hbgurl77@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 5:05 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE I absolutely DO NOT WANT CCE! Sent from my iPad 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Johnny Salas <Johnny@t1 ins.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 5:05 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO On CCE HI, I'm a concerned citizen, homeowner, and business owner here in the City of Huntington Beach. Please vote no on CCE. Johnny Salas CEO/Broker Insurance Services 2134 Main St. Suite 290 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Tel: (714) 962-5300 1 Fax: (714) 908-2775 COVERAGE DISCLAIMER:Please note that coverage is not applied or bound until Trinity One Insurance Services receives all required documentation and notifies the insured that coverage is in force CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message is intended to be viewed only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.Any dissemination,distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited without our prior permission. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, or if you have received this communication in error,please notify us immediately by return e-mail and delete the original message and any copies of it from your computer system 1 It's a fallacy that CCE will use strictly renewable energy. Instead,they will purchase Renewable Energy Certificates to appear that they do but those certificates will be used to buy traditional energy sources, i.e.through natural gas power plants, as renewable energy is intermittent and cannot be stored on the power grid.All we are doing is subsidizing the renewable energy industry that is already heavily subsidized as it cannot be self-sufficient in the private sector. Of the 1,000's of residents I met on the campaign trail these last 3 months, not one said that H.B. needs to get into the energy business. You're telling me that this issue is a priority over dealing with the homelessness crisis, small business closures, decaying infrastructure and refinancing our$500 million in unfunded pension liabilities debt? Please email City Council at city.council@surfcity-hb.org right now and tell them NO ON CCEM You can also call in tonight at 5:00 p.m. 669-900-6833, enter webinar ID 971-5413-0528 Thank you everyone. Don 2 Estanislau, Robin From: tj laitar <Iabatt50beer@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 5:02 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Cc: email Subject: NO ON CCE Deb Pannell Copy and pasted from Casey McKeon Dear friends, supporters and fellow H.B. residents. The new City Council has been sworn in less than 3 days and they are already implementing their Agenda to "fundamentally transform" Huntington Beach. First on their list is scheduling and emergency meeting tonight at 5:00 p.m. with only 24 hours' notice to ram through a vote to enter H.B. into a CCE (Community Choice Energy)with Irvine.This is a government created and controlled middle-man that brokers energy contracts (supposedly)on behalf of consumers under the guise of using"renewable energy". Instead of paying Socal Edison directly, residents would pay the CCE.This false premise is analogous to opening a mini mart(CCE) and thinking you could buy and sell goods cheaper to your consumers than Costco (SoCal Edison) could with their massive purchasing power.This is absurd. CCE was first brought to our City Council in 2017. During that time, a compelling case was made that implementation would end in financial disaster for Huntington Beach. CCE was scrapped because of that effort. 2 years later,the truth of CCE is worse, not better. While this issue of CCE is complex, it boils down to these points: 1.The City Council will set your power rates.Your rates can be increased with no oversight and whenever the City wants more of your money, as CCE's bypass statutory requirements for pricing approval. 2.The customer has no "choice"with CCE. Renewable energy costs will rise when state and federal subsidies are taken away. 3. Despite claims to the contrary, CCE customers cannot directly buy renewable energy. 4. CCE will create a very expensive new bureaucracy with pensions for all employees.The City of H.B. currently has over $500 million in unfunded pension liabilities, CCE will make that crisis worse. 5. CCE creates conflicts of interest between politicians, City employees, consultants, brokers and energy retailers. 6.The State of California has mandated use of renewable energy.There is no need to take this risk locally. 7. If the City Council guesses poorly in signing the long-term energy contracts,the CCE could bankrupt the City. 8.The City would have to invest$10 million in startup costs. I'm on the Finance Commission and we don't have the capital to invest the$10 million in startup costs.We are currently facing budget deficits for the foreseeable future if we do not refinance our$500 million+in unfunded pension liabilities debt. We cannot be looking to make up that shortfall on the backs of taxpayers through this CCE boondoggle. Look at the City of Palmdale,who after only 4 years have cancelled their CCE. Palmdale is the prototypical landscape for quote un-quote renewable energy with sunshine 300 days a year and vast open desert area to install solar panels. If they cannot make a CCE work under those conditions how could H.B?Just another slush fund under the guise of renewable energy. i Estanislau, Robin From: Eric Barnes <barnes.ericm@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 5:00 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO ON CCEH! I'm a Huntington Beach resident and I emphatically say NO ON CCU --Eric A Barnes i Estanislau, Robin From: Rocio Griley <rgriley@griley.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:55 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO ON CCE!!! NO ON CCE 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Beth O'Roark <beth.carlson2@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:53 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO on CCE! Hello City Council Members, My husband and I are tax paying, Huntington Beach property owning constituents and are pleading with you to vote NO on this CCE proposal. It is a money grab by the City of Irvine,greedy unions and unscrupulous lobbyists.A similar project was so disastrous that they had to abandon it in the City of Palmdale.Are you really ready to send your constituents to the same fate?As great as it may sound to you, it will be devastating for the HB citizens that will pay the higher rates. Now is NOT the time to change things up and roll the dice on this project. People have lost theirjobs and are barely making ends meet. We just received a notice that our trash rates would increase, again. Every single one of our utility rate have increased exponentially in the past 2 years. Please think of the ordinary citizens already being overtaxed by the State of California, adding more costs, giving us no choice on CCE, with no government oversight at the present time would be disastrous. CCE was brought to our city council in 2017 and was voted down because it would spell financial ruin for HB, a city that is already in a debt of over$1,000,000,000 in unfunded liabilities.The thought of our city council setting our energy rates is terrifying. I am also perplexed as to why an emergency session for this was deemed necessary?Was it to slip one by the constituents in a push to get it quickly and quietly passed? Please do not forget who you work for;the residents of Huntington Beach.We matter and your choices greatly affect our abilities to pay our bills and live our lives. 1 Estanislau, Robin From: StaTru Master <statru@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:53 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO on CCE Thanks Bill Hencke Estanislau, Robin From: Elle Mason <ellebmason@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:52 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE!!! Please vote no on CCE.Not a good idea at all! Please focus on small business and homelessness that are much more immediate needs! Thanks, Elizabeth Mason i Estanislau, Robin From: David Cavener <decavener@verizon.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:48 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO on CCE! Dear Council Members, As a resident of Huntington Beach since 1976, 1 am writing to tell you to vote NO on the implementation of a CCE program at tonight's improperly called "emergency" meeting. I am stunned that you would call such a meeting only 3 days into a new session. HB citizens were not informed of this meeting - it is not on your calendar, nor was a notice put out on the city's Twitter feed. I understand that this will not be broadcast, and no citizen will be allowed to voice their support or opposition. You are choosing to do this unilaterally. When I called the City Clerk today, she informed me she was only made aware of the meeting this morning. Which City Council members decided this topic was an "emergency" that needed to be discussed tonight?We have far bigger issues: crime, homelessness, etc. that require more immediate attention. I expect my City Council to be transparent and not attempt to circumvent its citizens who you are supposed to support. I expect you to vote NO on CCE! David Cavener Estanislau, Robin From: Chris Perez <mrs.chris.perez@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:47 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE NO ON CCE NO ON CCE NO ON CCE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Iraida Perez 6706 Montford Dr Huntington Beach 92648 ChrisPerez i Estanislau, Robin From: Chris Perez <mrs.chris.perez@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:46 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE NO ON CCE NO ON CCE NO ON CCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ChrisPerez i Estanislau, Robin From: Cindy Newman <cnewman@socal.rr.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:44 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE! Noon CCE! Thank you. Cindy and Chuck Newman Sent from my ipad. Estanislau, Robin From: Riggs, Carole <Carole.Riggs@cnb.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:43 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Cc: Riggs, Carole Subject: No on CCE I have been a resident of Huntington Beach for 47 years. This idea is ludicrous, please vote NO on CCE. We have more pressing issues in this city to take care of, please focus on those. This has failed in other cities and is a waste of tax payer money. NO on CCEM Carole Riggs i Estanislau, Robin From: Ibenedetto2@aol.com Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:41 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE I vote NO ON CCE. WE ALREADY HAVE 1BILLION IN UNFUNDED LIABILITIES. CCE WILL MAKE IT WORSE. LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE FOR @ CHANGE!!!!!!!! Sent from AOL Mobile Mail Get the new AOL app:mail.mobile.aol.com 1 Estanislau, Robin From: j j <jodyoneil@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:41 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Dear City Council, I am a resident of Huntington Beach. I am OPPOSED to the city utilizing the services of/doing business with CCE. Please register my opinion accordingly. Thank you very kindly, Jody Riddell O'Neil 8325 Padrino Circle Huntington Beach, CA 92646 1 Estanislau, Robin From: gcox4@socal.rr.com Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:32 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE To: HB City Council Members Please do not in favor of using Community Choice Energy. I have been a resident of HB for 55 years and do not want our city to be entangled in another energy company. Gary COX 1 Estanislau, Robin From: seament4@aol.com Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:31 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE No on CCE! The city does not need this. William McCormick 17045 Edgewater Lane, HB 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Joanie Wiseman <jwiseman3@mac.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:30 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE NO ON CCEM 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Anna Reynolds <seeheim12@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:29 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE program Dear city council. The idea of CCE is totally insane. Do something about the homeless that attacked me at the Assistance League Thriftstore on Slater while I was volunteering there. The homeless problem is a political problem not a police matter. Also where do senior citizens fit into this CCE program. They don't, ignored as usual and we live on a fixed income. Energy rates are high enough from the energy companies. Sincerely Anna Reynolds 714-356-4276 AR Sent from my iPad 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Diane Haynes <diane.haynes6@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:29 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO on CCE I am disheartened and disappointed that our City council is trying to rush through something so serious and impactful to our community. NO ON CCE A concerned resident! Diane Haynes 16521 Rhone Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92647 i Estanislau, Robin From: Ann McCormick <amccormick@outtook.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:29 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE No on CCE! Ann McCormick 17045 Edgewater Lane, NB 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Lara Anderson <Ia@Iaraanderson.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:28 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE This needs way more notice and discussion. Personally I am happy with SCE and their rates after having been in SDG&E territory for 15 years. We also installed solar and it's working very well in conjunction with SCE. Why mess up a good thing and add yet another thing to the city's plate? There are enough things needing attention in HB without creating more issues right now...and do you really want to get in bed with Irvine...? Might want to think a bit more on that. Lara Anderson Huntington Beach i Estanislau, Robin From: Ernie <hbern65@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:24 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO ON CCE!!! Please get your priorities straight and be fiscally responsible to the residents of Huntington Beach. Lisiten to the residents. This is a sham 1. The City Council will set your power rates. Your rates can be increased with no oversight and whenever the City wants more of your money, as CCE's bypass statutory requirements for pricing approval. 2. The customer has no "choice" with CCE. Renewable energy costs will rise when state and federal subsidies are taken away. 3. Despite claims to the contrary, CCE customers cannot directly buy renewable energy. 4. CCE will create a very expensive new bureaucracy with pensions for all employees. The City of H.B. currently has over $500 million in unfunded pension liabilities, CCE will make that crisis worse. 5. CCE creates conflicts of interest between politicians, City employees, consultants, brokers and energy retailers. 6. The State of California has mandated use of renewable energy. There is no need to take this risk locally. 7. If the City Council guesses poorly in signing the long-term energy contracts, the CCE could bankrupt the City. 8. The City would have to invest $10 million in startup costs. I'm on the Finance Commission and we don't have the capital to invest the $10 million in startup costs. We are currently facing budget deficits for the foreseeable future if we do not refinance our$500 million+ in unfunded pension liabilities debt. We cannot be looking to make up that shortfall on the backs of taxpayers through this CCE boondoggle.-- NO ON CCE * Ernie* i Estanislau, Robin From: Frank Jacinto <fmjacinto@msn.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:23 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE To the HB city council, I strongly oppose the CCE proposal, I do not want the council to dictate how much I should pay in utility costs. Thank you Sent from my Whone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Laura Cavener <Icavener@verizon.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:22 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO on CCE! Dear Council Members, I am writing to inform you that as a resident of Huntington Beach, I do NOT support a vote to enter our city into a Community Choice Energy (CCE) program. I am dismayed to learn you have scheduled an "emergency" meeting for this evening to vote on the implementation of such a program without giving the community an opportunity to voice its opinion on the matter. My particular issues with this change are as follows: 1. The State of California already mandates the use of renewable energy-we do not need to assume this responsibility at the local level. 2. Implementation of a CCE will create a new bureaucracy, increasing pension obligations when the city is already in the red with over$1 billion in unfunded liabilities. 3. The CCE will allow you to set power rates for HB residents, and you will no doubt increase prices in an attempt to cover these liabilities. In the midst of COVID-19, HB residents are already struggling to keep their families afloat. Raising prices on power will harm your citizens further. Please do the right thing and vote NO on CCE! Laura Cavener 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Michael Gioan <digithings00@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:21 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: December 10, 2020 Special Council Meeting, Item 20-2082. Importance: High To Mayor and City Council, This is what I posted yesterday in an online forum. I think and mean every single word of it. You can still do the right thing, but if you don't, HB citizens will be waiting for you at the next election. I have already notified the City Manager that I want my power utility account to remain with SCE. I will tiredlessly, and ceaselessly encourage others to do the same. With no customers, your disastrous project will fail, I mean it will fail faster, because there is no way it can succeed. We HB citizens, are reaping what we sowed. Having wasted our votes on polarizing, divisive candidates, instead of electing reasonable, independent(and level-headed) citizens, we end up with an almost guaranteed 5-2 vote for this disaster in the making. Our City Management Team, including the Council, City Manager and Financial Planners have shown to be incapable to handle a tough year, and to plan for a strict budget, instead kicking the financial can down the road again. And now they want to shoulder the added burden of becoming a Power Utility Company. All this to save a measly 25vo on electrical bills and for an elusive 'green power-mix"that exists only on paper. You think 2020 was bad? Wait until the cost of energy increases and HB and Irvine can't negotiate good rates because they represent a measly 600,000 people when the real players on the energy market represent tens of millions. I know this is a battle that we have already lost, but please let's make our voices heard, we just cannot support this terrible idea, and we will be left holding the bag when the City uses its newly acquired power to control electricity rates as a piggy bank to offset its ineptitude at managing our finances. I'm going to be real honest, I'm thoroughly disgusted and at this point would welcome a bankruptcy for HB, so at least we would have an opportunity to start over with a clean slate, instead of sinking deeper ano deeper into this mud. Sincerely, Michael Gioan -HB homeowner since 1999 1 Estanislau, Robin From: ROBERT GALLUCCI <rgallu2000@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:14 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Please vote no on CCE. Sent from my Whone Bob Gallucci 714-981-7873 Rgallu2000@aol.com 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Katherine H Nakai <kaylanakai@mac.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:10 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE Hello, My name is Katherine Riddle, HB resident and I am contacting City Council to vote NO on CCE. Thank you! Best Regards, Katherine Riddle Zip code 92648 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Berit Hayden <berithayden@icloud.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:10 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE I am a resident of Huntington Beach and I am asking you to vote no on CCE Thank you, Berit Hayden Sent from my Whone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Kevin Kron <65kevingkron@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:07 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Dear Huntington Beach City Council, Where the citizens of Huntington Beach energy/electricity comes from is not a responsibility that our local government should get involved in. There is no scenario under which that situation would not increase our energy costs. Myself and every other citizen of Huntington Beach I have spoken to about this are against the our city joining the CCE. NO ON COMMUNITY CHOICE ENERGY FOR HUNTINGTON BEACH! Sincerely, Kevin and Suzanne Kron 7601 Quebec Dr, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 i Estanislau, Robin From: crouchie@linkline.com Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 4:07 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Why has this warranted a special meeting, scheduled for when 2 of your council members known to oppose this issue, will not be able to attend? Why are we not waiting for further research to be done before moving forward? Please take the appropriate time to do your due diligence, listen to the residents who elected you, and make fiscally responsible decisions. Anything less is unacceptable. Cathi Crouch 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Rose Shannon <rosie1559@verizon.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:56 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE To whom it may concern, I'm voting NO on the CCE!!! Sincerely, R. Shannon 21 yr resident of HB Sent from AOL Mobile Mail Get the now AOL app:mail.mobile.aol.com 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Blake Rose <blaketyblake@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:56 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO ON CCE Please! No on CCE please! Thank you, Blake Rose Sent from Mail for Windows 10 1 Estanislau, Robin From: joe totaro <jetotaro@outlook.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:51 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: Community Choice Energy We are not sure why an emergency council meeting was necessary. Please vote NO on the CCE proposal. Joe and Gayla Totaro 16251 Wayfarer Lane Joe Totaro 562.310.8072 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Gino J. Bruno <gbruno@socal.rr.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:49 PM To: CITY COUNCIL; Chi, Oliver Subject: Why tonight? Who set the arbitrary deadline for this vote tonight,with two Council members absent? Why are you afraid of a full, robust discussion of an issue that will cost the City millions, and perhaps . . . repeat PERHAPS . . . save ratepayers one percent on their monthly bills? Why? Gino J. Bruno Huntington Beach 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Eric Shields <hotrodes@earthlink.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:49 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE proposal and vote Importance: High As a long time resident of Huntington Beach I urge the city council to vote no on the CCE proposal. The residents of this wonderful city have not been provided with a full analysis of this proposal and how it will impact the current service as well as taxes/fees. It is premature to vote on this very important topic without full disclosure and transparency. I trust you will allow the residents a real voice in this before a quick"under the radar"vote is considered. Eric Shields 7112 Starlight Cir. Huntington Beach i Estanislau, Robin From: Dorothy Boesch <dorothyone@verizon.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:46 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE NO on CCE Dorothy Boesch 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Mary Lundin <mary@scubaphoto.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:44 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO ON CCE I hope the new City Council will go right into the issues that really affect Huntington Beach by tackling the ever growing issues of homelessness, small business closure, decaying infrastructure and our unfunded pension liabilities. We don't need to be in the energy business and it's the last thing that this city council should be focused on at the moment. Thank you, Mary Lundin 3742 Nimble cir c: 714-642-1864 mpagscubaphoto.net i Estanislau, Robin From: Janet Bean <janetbeandesigns@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:43 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE NO ON CCE!!!!! Wen CCE was first brought to THE City Council in 2017, a compelling case was made that implementation would end in financial disaster for Huntington Beach. Other than electing progressive individuals o the city council who have no concept of the financial crisis it would bring, what has changed that would not make this a financial boon doggle?? WE SAY NO TO: 1.The City Council setting our power rates with no oversight and whenever the City wants more of our money, as CCE's bypass statutory requirements for pricing approval. 2. We the customer having no "choice" with CCE. Renewable energy costs will rise when state and federal subsidies are taken away. 5. Our city does not need a very expensive new bureaucracy with pensions for all employees.The City of H.B. currently has over$500 million in unfunded pension liabilities,CCE will make that crisis worse. 5. We do not want what the CCE conflicts of interest between politicians, City employees, consultants, brokers and energy retailers. 6.The State of California has mandated use of renewable energy.There is no need to take this risk locally. 7. If,you,the City Council guesses poorly in signing the long-term energy contracts,the CCE could bankrupt the City. 8.The City would have to invest$10 million in startup costs. I'm on the Finance Commission and we don't have the capital to invest the$10 million in startup costs.We are currently facing budget deficits for the foreseeable future if we do not refinance our$500 million+in unfunded pension liabilities debt. We cannot be looking to make up that shortfall on the backs of taxpayers through this CCE boondoggle. Look at the City of Palmdale, who after only 4 years have cancelled their CCE. Palmdale is the prototypical landscape for quote un-quote renewable energy with sunshine 300 days a year and vast open desert area to install solar panels. If they cannot make a CCE work under those conditions how could H.B?Just another slush fund under the guise of renewable energy. NO ON CCE Janet Bean Sent from my iPad Estanislau, Robin From: Steve Amundson <samundson001 @socal.rr.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:42 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Cc: Semeta, Lyn Subject: NO CCE for Huntington Beach Mayor Semeta and Members of the City Council, As a longstanding resident of Huntington Beach, I do not want to see us get involved with CCE. Getting involved in this would mean hiring people with energy experience, management ability and a financial background. We do not need to get involved with a new program which will cost the city more money to fund. With small businesses hurting, people out of work during this COVID period we need to help residents and business owners first. This would only add to the huge liabilities we already face. Regards, Steve Amundson C: 714 658 0060 i Estanislau, Robin From: Tom <mot00@sbcgloba1.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:34 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Cc: casey4hbcc@gmail.com Subject: No CCE Put the homeless in the new shelter instead. Get them out of our neighborhoods please! We're all pretty tired of the open drug use and theft around Edison. Thomas Kilsby Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy 59+. 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Arlene Bonner <arlenebonner@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:34 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE Please vote NO on CCE ! 1 Estanislau, Robin From: LAWRENCE HAIGHT <Invhaight@msn.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:31 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Please don't put our city in jeopardy. Vote NO on cce. Sincerely, Vivian Haight Get Outlook for Android i Estanislau, Robin From: Gino J. Bruno <gbruno@socal.rr.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:31 PM To: CITY COUNCIL; Chi, Oliver Subject: NO on CCE . . . NO on CCE . . . It's a fallacy that CCE will use strictly renewable energy. Instead, they will purchase Renewable Energy Certificates to appear that they do but those certificates will be used to buy traditional energy sources, i.e. through natural gas power plants, as renewable energy is intermittent and cannot be stored on the power grid. All we are doing is subsidizing the renewable energy industry that is already heavily subsidized as it cannot be self-sufficient in the private sector. Gino J. Bruno Huntington Beach i Estanislau, Robin From: Kathy Dowling <kathy1dowling@msn.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:29 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE NO on CCE !! What are you NOT thinking ! No more crazy messes, please ! Get Outlook for iOS i Estanislau, Robin From: Sharon Hyder, CIVIC, CRM <hyder@hyderandassociates.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:28 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Vote NO on CCE Sharon Dorris Huntington Beach resident Estanislau, Robin From: Gino J. Bruno <gbruno@socal.rr.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:28 PM To: CITY COUNCIL; Chi, Oliver Subject: NO on CCE . . . Please do your due diligence before voting for this CCE boondoggle . . Look at the City of Palmdale, who after only 4 years have cancelled their CCE. Palmdale is the prototypical landscape for quote un-quote renewable energy with sunshine 300 days a year and vast open desert area to install solar panels. If they cannot make a CCE work under those conditions how could H.B? Just another slush fund under the guise of renewable energy. Gino J. Bruno Huntington Beach i Estanislau, Robin From: Traci Russell <tracigina@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:28 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO ON CCP! I am a resident in Huntington Beach, CA and what we are all hearing you are trying to do to us is insane!!M We DO NOT want CCE, you are trying to destroy our city!!! Traci Gina Russell//Sent from my iPhone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Gino J. Bruno <gbruno@socal.rr.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:25 PM To: CITY COUNCIL; Chi, Oliver Subject: NO on CCE . . . In a word, CCE is a boondoggle!! As Council candidate Casey McKeon said, here are some reasons: 1. The City Council will set your power rates. Your rates can be increased with no oversight and whenever the City wants more of your money, as CCE's bypass statutory requirements for pricing approval. 2. The customer has no "choice" with CCE. Renewable energy costs will rise when state and federal subsidies are taken away. 3. Despite claims to the contrary, CCE customers cannot directly buy renewable energy. 4. CCE will create a very expensive new bureaucracy with pensions for all employees. The City of H.B. currently has over$500 million in unfunded pension liabilities, CCE will make that crisis worse. 5. CCE creates conflicts of interest between politicians, City employees, consultants, brokers and energy retailers. 6. The State of California has mandated use of renewable energy. There is no need to take this risk locally. 7. If the City Council guesses poorly in signing the long-term energy contracts, the CCE could bankrupt the City. 8. The City would have to invest $10 million in startup costs. I'm on the Finance Commission and we don't have the capital to invest the $10 million in startup costs. We are currently facing budget deficits for the foreseeable future if we do not refinance our $500 million+ in unfunded pension liabilities debt. We cannot be looking to make up that shortfall on the backs of taxpayers through this CCE boondoggle. Gino J. Bruno Huntington Beach i Estanislau, Robin From: Paula <pickypaula8@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:24 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE Please vote no on The CCE program. There are far more pressing issues to concentrate on. Other CCE programs have not be successful and not good for the citizens of the city. No on CCE Thank you Paula Montgomery Resident Sent from my Whone 1 Estanislau. Robin From: rcw6422@ 163.com Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:23 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE vote Hello council members: I am against the captioned initiative on CCE, I wonder also if I can join the meeting scheduled at 5 pm today, at city hall I guess? Thank you Raymond Wang Resident of FIB Sent from my iPhone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Gary Burns <garyb1486@gmai1.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:20 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE! Recently informed of an emergency city council vote to consider committing Huntington Beach to the Community Choice Energy initiative. If true this is an affront to every citizen in this city. Such an important and consequential matter necessarily requires a cost benefit analysis and should be done in full transparency of your constituency. While I hope I have received incorrect information regarding this as an actionable item for tonight's CC meeting, make no mistake that the overwhelming majority of HB residents would consider this a betrayal by not soliciting public opinion. I for one, would have very strong opposition to joining this purchasing alliance. Gary Burns 6872 Nyanza Drive i Estanislau, Robin From: dougsjohnson@verizon.net Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:20 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Community Choice Energy Dear Council Members, It has been brought to my attention that you are voting on a energy program that will increase our electricity rates without oversight, predominantly after the state subsidies are eliminated. In addition, this program will add to HB's budget deficit and increase our unfunded liabilities leading to a financial crisis. Please vote no on CCE. Best regards, Doug Johnson 15 Year HB Resident 8102 Dartmoor Dr. 1 Estanislau, Robin From: CLARK COLLIER <clarkbetty@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:18 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE vote I strongly urge all of the Huntington Beach City Council members to vote NO on the CCE proposal. Clark Collier 6712 Calpe Cir. Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Sent from my Phone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Rob Pool <rob.pool.oc@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:18 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE/CCA Mayor Carr and Fellow Council Members: When I received the agenda for tonight's special meeting I should have been surprised. But I wasn't. I knew,the the addition of two progressive members,that the war on liberty would begin. I do have to say it began a bit sooner than I expected. You won the election. You come out of the gate with your guns loaded. I completely understand. But don't think that the common sense citizens are giving up or backing down. We aren't. Everyone on this council, with the possible exception of Mr. Ortiz, knows that I have been ardently opposed to the city either forming its own CCE program or joining with Irvine under a JPA program. But the first step you take as a new city council is to lunge towards a highly leftist ideological program like CCE? Really? And then for you to schedule the meeting at a time when two council members cannot be present is simply unacceptable.You have postponed votes in the last several years for other council members for building project approvals.There is no deadline that says this could not be postponed a week or two. will not give you a list of all the reasons our city should avoid a program like CCE. It is enough to say that government should not be entering territory previously handled by the private sector. Our city manager and staff has badly bungled the Pipeline project and the Cameron Lane project. But now we are to believe that they have the experience to handle a project that makes those to fiascos appear as small potatoes? So you will win this battle. But the war is not over. I will personally be leading an effort to inform our residents that they are able to opt out of this program-and will be providing them the reasons that they should. And, when enough residents remove themselves from this program, it will fail.And every one of you will be exposed as the incompetent bureaucrats that we all know you are. Rob Pool Estanislau, Robin From: Lynn Unger <lynnungerhb@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:14 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE NO NO NO CCE i Estanislau, Robin From: Tim Hennings <tymmerz@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:12 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCEH This is an outrage to hike prices when city council feels like it!!! No way!! Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android i Estanislau, Robin From: dougwb2@aol.com Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:10 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on Community Choice Energy(CCE) Contract We are writing this email to firmly state that we are adamantly opposed to Huntington Beach entering into a Community Choice Energy (CCE) contract with Irvine or any other city. It is a concept that has been looked at before and after thorough analysis was shown to be a financial disaster. We don't need more government involvement in our energy business. In addition, I am very upset about the"emergency" nature of this meeting. Why does this issue need to be addressed immediately without thorough analysis and community discussion? At best this seems like middle of the night political maneuvering and at worst outright corruption. Douglas & Heidi Wood 1 Estanislau, Robin From: jaime mayfield <java1923@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:07 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE NO on CCE Jaime Mayfield 9571 Erskine Dr HB Ca 92746 714-625-6898 Sent from my Whone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: william Stewart <wstewart580@gmaii.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:06 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: EMERGENCY MEETING FOR CCE I am completely against the CCE. Our city has plenty of issues to keep busy with already.This is a terrible time to do this. Sent from my iPhone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Jenny Ayala <jwayala@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:06 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE Please vote no on CCE. Thanks, Jenny Ayala 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Deb Janus <debjanus@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:05 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE City Council, An emergency meeting to try to shove this in when it was voted down before ??? NO on CCE. Deborah Janus 9451 Candlewood Drive 92646 714.330.4152 mobile i Estanislau. Robin From: Lily Jacinto <lilycabrera@icloud.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:01 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: 12/10/2020 CC Meeting - CCE Dear Major Kim Carr and City Council members, I'm writing to you as I understand you called an emergency meeting regarding CCE (Community Choice Energy). Why? Two of our CC members are out of town. I adamantly opposed CCE for our community. I do not want City Council members setting the power rates for our community. Kind regards Lily Jacinto HB Resident Sent from my Phone Estanislau, Robin From: Ava Berzsenyi <aberzsenyi@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 3:00 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO on CCE! I object and want to opt out of this sham! Ava Berzsenyi 17142 Treehaven Lane, HB, Ca 92647 P.S. How is the homeless shelter coming along? Sent from my Wad 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Melissa Zaiden <melissazaiden@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:59 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE Thank God we have Tito and Eric on the council to keep with traditional HB values and way of life. Stop with the liberal/ progressive agenda! No on CCE. Thank you, Melissa Zaiden Lifeling HB resident i Estanislau, Robin From: Susan Willauer <susandcc3@att.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:54 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: OBJECTION TO CCE VOTE To All Members of the Huntington Beach City Council: I understand a vote has been scheduled tonight,with less than 24 hours notice to the public, to enter Huntington Beach into a Community Choice Energy program with Irvine. As a 50-year resident of Huntington Beach, I strongly object to such an agreement without the consent of the citizens of the City who will be most affected by this agreement without a thorough vetting and understanding of the implications being made available to all residents. This is not an inconsequential matter and it troubles me a vote is being undertaken with the shortest possible notice and, thereby, under a veil of secrecy. This is not an appropriate course of action for the new City Council to gain confidence they are acting on behalf of their constituents. We need more information and time to study the ramifications before we can appropriately comment on the proposed program. Thank you for consideration, Susan Willauer Charles DeGroodt i I i i i i Estanislau, Robin From: dklejos1 @aol.com Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:54 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on cce proposal Please vote NO on CCE proposal. We,ve been through this before--Produce evidence that this will positively save H.B. citizens money before any action is taken. 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Mrdi <mrdi2003@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:52 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Resident home owner NO CCE!!l no cce NO NO NO for CCE 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Holly Hanes <hhanes@verizon.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:52 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO on CCE Vote NO on CCE. HB Should not be in this business. It is an expensive endeavor as well. Fiscal responsibility is crucial right now. We have already made poor decisions and been fiscally irresponsible on the new homeless shelter that will cost us dearly we do not need more taxes and costs pushed down to us. With all of the lockdowns and small businesses hurting, closing and also losing revenue from cancelling events these things will only cost us taxpayers more and potentially put our HB citizens more at risk. If it is true that you placed this emergency meeting on the calendar when you knew the 2 people who would vote no were out, you should be ashamed of yourself. Why is this such an emergency to vote on. Vote NO, this makes no sense... Holly Hanes HB resident Sent from AOI_Mobile Mail Get the new AOL app:mail.mobile.aol.com 1 Estanislau, Robin From: dabeconley@aol.com Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:50 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO ON CCE VOTE NO ON CCE !! DAVID CONLEY 18412 CARNABY LN, H.B 92648 i Estanislau, Robin From: Violet Cueva <violetcueva@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:49 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Cc: Violetemail Subject: NO! on CCE Good Afternoon, As a resident of HB for many years I am outraged the issue of CCE is brought up yet again. I am especially concerned that all of sudden a " emergency" meeting has been called. This is not an emergency, quite frankly it is political back scratching once again. My household says "NOW' to this measure. Regards Violet 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Bifulco, Linda <Linda.Bifulco@gexpro.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:49 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO ON CCE I'm writing to tell you NO ON CCE! Thank you Linda Bifulco 20331 Bluffside Circle#422 Huntington Beach, Ca. 92646 Estanislau, Robin From: Sherry Kennedy <dksmrs5@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:45 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO CCE HB city council, NO on CCEM Sherry Kennedy 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Denise Dyer <denise.dyer@mcbreo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:44 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE I don't know why we are even considering CCE again. Huntington Beach has far bigger issues that need attention. NO ON CCE!l l Denise Dyer Huntington Beach, CA 92649 714-720-3776 cell This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered safely by Mimecast. For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Brent Haner <Brent@t1 ins.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:43 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No On CCE Hello, I am a concerned citizen and want to implore you to vote NO on CCE. Thank you for your time Brent Haner Agent/Broker Tri,v4t� 0M Insurance Services 2134 Main St Ste 290 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Tel: (714) 962-5300 1 Fax: (714) 908-2775 COVERAGE DISCLAIMER:Please note that no coverage is applied or bound until Trinity One Insurance Services recieves all required documentation and notfies the insured coverage is inforce. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message is intended to be viewed only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed.It may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.Any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited without our prior permission.If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient,or if you have received this communication in error,please notify us immediately by return a-mail and delete the original message and any copies of it from your computer system 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Ayn Craciun <ayncraciun@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:41 PM To: CITY COUNCIL; Peterson, Erik; Posey, Mike; Brenden, Patrick; Carr, Kim; Delgleize, Barbara; Ortiz, Tito; Kalmick, Dan; Moser, Natalie; Hardy,Jill Subject: SCE rate/dividend increase graphics Attachments: EIX dividends per share jpg; SCE rate base and core earnings to 2018 jpg Dear HB City Council, Thank you for considering energy choice for HB residents. I've attached some graphics from recent SoCal Edison annual reports that illustrate their history of rate base and dividend increases. I think it's fair to ask what HB has to show for these increases. Also, SCE has announced plans to increase rates by another 14.4% in 2021. Hopefully CCEcompetition and rate relief will soon be on the way for HB ratepayers. Thanks again and please let me know if I can help in any way. Sincerely, Ayn Craciun Irvine resident 1 EIX Annual Dividends Per share Fifteen Consecutive Years of Dividend Growth $2.42 $2.451 $2.17 $1.92 $1,67 $1.16 $1.22 $1.24 $1.26 $1.28 $1.30 $1.35 $1.42 $1.08 $1.00 $0.80 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 -- Target dividend growth target payout r i of , r a of earnings 1. 2019 dividend annualized based on December 6, 2018 declaration May 1, 2019 Energy for What's Ahead ( 8 SCE Historical Rate Base and core Earnings ($ billions, except per share data) $29.6 $27.8 $24.6 $25.9 $23.3 $21.1 CpGg.?a/o 2013 2014 205 201E 2017 2018 Care $3.88 $4.68 $4.20 $4.22 $4.58 $4.42 EPs Note.Recorded rate base,year-end basis.See SCE Core EPS Nan-GAAP Reconciliations and Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures,Since 20I3, rate base excludes SONGS. May 1, 2019 Energy for What's Ahead, 12 yMW ro. Estanislau, Robin From: Linda Nickerson <keyedupp@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:42 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: City council special meeting for tonight I am completely opposed to having the CCE being used by City of HB. It seems the costs are far greater than what we will get back as city. We have unfunded pensions and a homeless problem that needs IMMEDIATE attention. We cannot take on anymore debt. I expect the city council to vote NO to using the CCE for renewable energy!!! Linda Nickerson 30-year HB resident This electronic mail (including any attachments) may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and/or otherwise protected from disclosure to anyone other than its intended recipient(s). If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply email of the inadvertent transmission and then immediately delete the original message (including any attachments) in its entirety. i Estanislau, Robin From: redd112003 <redd112003@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:41 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE We should not be in the energy business by ourselves or in partnership with other cities. NO ON CCEH Donna little 17132 PCH #202 HB 92649 Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Nancy Buchoz <nancybuchoz@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:41 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Please say no to CCE Dear Madam Mayor and City Council, We have commented before on this subject and want to reiterate the following.... We do not support the city going into the electricity business because of these reasons. 1) The City Council will set your power rates. Your rates can be increased with no oversight and whenever the city wants more of your money. CCEs bypass statutory requirements for pricing approval. 2) The customer has no *choice* with CCE. Renewable energy costs will rise when state and federal subsidies are taken away. 3) Despite claims to the contrary CCE customers cannot directly buy renewable power. 4) CCE will create a very expensive new bureaucracy with pensions for all employees. City of HB currently has over $1 billion in unfunded liabilities, CCE will make that crisis worse. 5) CCE creates conflicts of interest between politicians, city employees, consultants and energy retailers. 6) The State of California has mandated use of renewable energy. There is no need to take this risk locally. 7) If the City Council guesses poorly signing long-term energy contracts the CCE could bankrupt the city. For these reasons, I respectfully disagree with pursuing this now and cannot see it benefitting the city in the future. We have much bigger fish to fry. Sincerely, Nancy & Tad Buchoz 9001 Rhodesia Dr HB. CA. 92646 i Estanislau, Robin From: Jerry Griffin <jgriffininsurance@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:40 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE don't do it ! Please don't tie HB into a green energy subsidizing city. Let's see what happens in other cities that do this before getting tied into a potentially expensive and difficult to extract situation. Jerry Griffin HB resident since 1977 714-960-5658 i Estanislau, Robin From: Gary Ray <skirays@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:40 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Why did the city council schedule an emergency meeting regarding the CCE? Is that really a priority for HB? No on CCE! Gary& Donna Ray HB residents for over 25 years Sent from my iPhone Estanislau, Robin From: Kelli Boyer <sunseahbca@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:39 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO NO NO NO ON CCE!!!!! Sent from my Whone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Larry Fidance <Ifidance@msn.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:37 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO CCE The people of Huntington Beach DO NOT want CCE in our city! VOTE IT DOWN!!! Earn the votes you received from the people...not special interests! Larry Fidance Sent from Outlook i Estanislau, Robin From: Christine <caschlag42@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:36 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE council vote I am not in favor of CCE. I think this should be a project elected by the majority of the citizens of H.B. Estanislau, Robin From: John Gorman <jgorman@southernstarz.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:35 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO ON CCE!!!! Absolutely not supporting this. I vote we stick with what we have. Fix the homelessness issue rather! Thank you. John Gorman—VP Sales & Marketing Southern Starz Inc. 5973 Engineer Drive, Huntington Beach, CA 92649 i4orman(o)_southernstarz.com www.southernstarz.com 800-504 9463 -TF 714-403 0988 - CELL johngorman67 - SKYPE @africajohn - INSTAGRAM Please consider the environment before printing my email. 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Kevin Anderson <kpanderson@socal.rr.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:34 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: VOTE NO ON CCE By a show of hands, how many of you realize that our city has 100's of millions of dollars in un-funded liabilities? Do any of you understand what the term bankruptcy means? In a pandemic,with our local business's being shutdown, families out of work not being able to pay rent-you want to vote yourselves the right to raise our energy rates on us any time you want,without asking for our permission? The high desert city of Palmdale canceled CCE after 4 years, because it was an expensive failure. Who ever votes yes on this DOES NOT represent my family or the city of HB-you only serve yourself. Please think of others who are struggling to live there lives here instead of your own political connections. Kevin Anderson Sent from my iPhone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Drake Sales <repdudes@verizon.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:32 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Its not enough the economy is in the tank Now you want to raise our power rates To bail out your union pension liabilities That's about as welcome as defunding the police NO ON CCE John M. Drake H.B. resident since 1965 H.B. business owner since 1990 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Rebecca Castillo <becky.c13@icloud.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:31 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO ON CCE This would be a disaster for HB. We vote "NO" on CCE! Sent from my iPhone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Gary Tarkington <garytarkington@msn.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:31 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Power rates Importance: High To all concerned...Absolutely NO ON CCET We don't want nor need this!! Ann Tarkington Huntington Beach i Estanislau, Robin From: hapie2cu@aoLcom Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:27 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE As a Huntington Beach resident, taxpayer, and legal voter, I say ABSOLUTELY NO ON CCE. Donna Farr 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Lori Moseley <jimlori52@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:27 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO ON CCE Please vote no on CCE. Thank you, Lorraine and Jim Moseley Sent from my iPhone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Audrey Prosser <prosserga@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:27 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: OCPA on the Dec 10th Agenda Dear Mayor and Council, I support Huntington Beach joining the OCPA and the execution of a JPA. Joining the OCPA will save money for the City and the individual rate payers as has been proven by Irvine's feasibility study and other Cities. Thank you, Audrey Prosser 9382 Sunridge Dr Huntington Beach,CA 92646 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Kristen Shearer <kristenshearer1 @gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:24 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Vote Tonight Dear City Council Members, After reading you have scheduled an emergency meeting I would like to urge you all to vote NO on CCE for our city. Huntington Beach does not need to be in the energy business. Thank you, Kristen Shearer 18141 Brentwell Circle Huntington Beach, CA. 92647 i Estanislau, Robin From: JASON RUHLAND <jnruhland@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:23 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE It's absurd to hold an emergency meeting to vote for this. Every resident will tell you this is absolutely crazy. Please vote NO! Our city cannot afford this. Thank you Jason Ruhland Sent from my iPhone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Penny Kyle <penny.kyle@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:22 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: 12/10/2020 Special Meeting As a resident of 40+years, please know that I Oppose the CCE. It has not proven to be in the Huntington Beach residents best interests. I also question why this is being considered in a special meeting. Something so significant should be vetted fairly by its citizens. Sincerely, Penny Kyle 9191 Sherry Circle HB Sent from my Wad 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Jim Guthrie <hartguard@msn.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:21 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE Please preserve our city and our way of life. NO ON CCE Jim & Nora Guthrie 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Nicole Smith <nicmich0608@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:19 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: regarding emergency meeting tonight I am a 20 year resident& I hope you will take my input into consideration,vote NO ON CCEM! Thank you in advance for your consideration. Sincerely, Nicole Adams Sent from my Whone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Mike Dearborn <spcymd@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:18 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE This speed in which you are trying to implement this change without community buy in is completely improper. i Estanislau, Robin From: Judith M Clark <judithmclark@verizon.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:15 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Dear City Council Members, I have just finished reading about a proposed possibility that you may/will be voting on a proposal tonight on joining the City of Irvine in an energy coalition named CCE. There is absolutely no reason/business for any government authority to be in the energy sector when we have private enterprise already offering such services, such as SCE. My electricity bill for last month was $91.98. 1 have been noticing how the cost of everything is going up as I pay my bills every months. When private enterprise offers a service/product, governments should stick to what they do best, eg. library services, maintaining roads, streets, beaches, parks; providing social services to seniors, the homeless; encouraging and supporting local businesses as they struggle to re-open or remain open during this "pandemic". The City should be tightening its expenditures, looking to see what costs it can cut, reduce, postpone. I know how cities operate. I was a Department Head for a nearby city for eight years. The City of Huntington Beach has the reputation of being the last,truly conservative City in Orange County. Wear the mantle proudly. Sincerely, Mrs. Judith M. Clark 20952 Beachwood Lane, Huntington Beach, CA 92646 1 Estanislau, Robin From: smayl@socal.rr.com Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:14 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Cc: Estanislau, Robin Subject: Council Item on CCE 12/10/20 Honorable Councilmembers: A decision to join an energy CCE JPA as included in tonight's Council meeting agenda would be a disastrous move. Such an action needs careful study and consideration, and is not appropriate for a special City Council meeting three days after the Councilmembers having been sworn into office. The City can join the JPA at any time if financial analysis and thoughtful consideration finds that there would be benefits to residents. Steve May Huntington Beach, CA 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Dorothy Newbrough <dnewbr@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:13 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE Dorothy Newbrough Huntington Beach i Estanislau, Robin From: Travis Wasson <hbimpala@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:12 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE As a once again resident of Huntington Beach I urge you not engage in the CCE arrangement. Travis Wasson 14401 Elmhurst Circle Huntington Beach, CA 92647 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Teresa V. Gonzalez <brainnrse@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:11 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE I have been a resident of hb for the last five years and I am begging you to vote NO on CCE. It is too expensive of a start up too high of a risk from what I have read about it. Thank you. Teresa V. Gonzalez, BSN, RN, OCN, PHN 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Diana Henderson <diana@thehendersongroup.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:11 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO on CCE Hello City Council members I strongly oppose entering into a CCE for the wonderful city that my family has lived in for over two decades. I trust that you will listen to the citizens of HB. Regards, Diana Henderson Diana B. Henderson, ARM, CPDM, WCCP, CPFI The Henderson Group Tel: 949-417-5 722 www.TheHendersonGroup.net Author of the book -- "Employers Behaving Badly; Change Your Behavior and Change your Workers' Comp Pain. " i Estanislau, Robin From: Betty <bettyinhb@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:10 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Good evening Mayor and Council, CCE was first brought to our City Council in 2017. During that time, a compelling case was made that implementation would end in financial disaster for Huntington Beach. CCE was scrapped because of that effort. 2 years later,the truth of CCE is worse, not better. While this issue of CCE is complex, it boils down to these points: 1.The City Council will set your power rates.Your rates can be increased with no oversight and whenever the City wants more of your money, as CCE's bypass statutory requirements for pricing approval. 2.The customer has no "choice" with CCE. Renewable energy costs will rise when state and federal subsidies are taken away. 3. Despite claims to the contrary, CCE customers cannot directly buy renewable energy. 4. CCE will create a very expensive.new bureaucracy with pensions for all employees.The City of H.B. currently has over $500 million in unfunded pension liabilities, CCE will make that crisis worse. 5. CCE creates conflicts of interest between politicians, City employees, consultants, brokers and energy retailers. 6.The State of California has mandated use of renewable energy.There is no need to take this risk locally. 7. If the City Council guesses poorly in signing the long-term energy contracts,the CCE could bankrupt the City. 8.The City would have to invest$10 million in startup costs. I'm on the Finance Commission and we don't have the capital to invest the$10 million in startup costs.We are currently facing budget deficits for the foreseeable future if we do not refinance our$500 million+in unfunded pension liabilities debt. We cannot be looking to make up that shortfall on the backs of taxpayers through this CCE boondoggle. Look at the City of Palmdale, who after only 4 years have cancelled their CCE. Palmdale is the prototypical landscape for quote un-quote renewable energy with sunshine 300 days a year and vast open desert area to install solar panels. If they cannot make a CCE work under those conditions how could H.B?Just another slush fund under the guise of renewable energy. It's a fallacy that CCE will use strictly renewable energy. Instead,they will purchase Renewable Energy Certificates to appear that they do but those certificates will be used to buy traditional energy sources, i.e.through natural gas power plants, as renewable energy is intermittent and cannot be stored on the power grid.All we are doing is subsidizing the renewable energy industry that is already heavily subsidized as it cannot be self-sufficient in the private sector. You're telling me that this issue is a priority over dealing with the homelessness crisis, small business closures, decaying infrastructure and refinancing our$500 million in unfunded pension liabilities debt? Thank you, Betty Flynn Sent from my iPhone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Elizabeth Burke <eelaineburke@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:09 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE No on CCE Sent from my Whone EEB 1 Estanislau, Robin From: courtney gillett <gillettfam@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:01 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Please I beg you to vote NO on CCE!! This is something that we as residents do not want! Please put your attention towards topics that are more pressing at the moment. Stephen and Courtney Gillett i Estanislau, Robin From: Pam Kamps <pamkamps@gmaii.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 2:01 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: In Support of Community Choice Energy(CCE) Hello, My name is Pamela Kamps. I am a 45 year resident of Huntington Beach. I am writing to support voting in favor of Community Choice Energy and joining with Irvine as a founding member of the Orange County Energy Authority JPA. I want you to join this year because CCE is a revenue builder for cities (not tax based). A rate savings of 2% for every customer is predicted upon launch (2022). Community Choice allows customers to choose the amount of renewable energy they use, and at a significantly lower cost than utilities. If an OC City joins Irvine this year, that City will be involved in the formation of the first CCA JPA in Orange County! The City of Irvine has done all of the due diligence and made their decision based on this investigation. Our city will greatly benefit by joining the Orange County Energy Authority JPA. Please vote today so we don't miss our opportunity to help both our residents and the environment. This opportunity will not come around again for 4 more years. Thank you for your vote in favor of this decision. Sincerely, Pamela Kamps 21861 Summerwind Ln Huntington Beach, CA 92646 i Estanislau, Robin From: Lolly Mchardy <mchardypg@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:58 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE No on CCE Sent from my iPad 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Mike Wichman <mdubya@me.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:58 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE As a resident of HB for 20 years and a voter in every election- I am demanding that a review and full hearing be held before Any decision on a CCE with Irvine be voted on. No on CCE is the position of a large group of my fellow voters.!!! Sincerely Mike Wichman Lake street 92648 Sent from my Whone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: John Ochs <anchor81 @hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:55 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Community Choice Energy Adamantly appose this concept. 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Kathy Carrick <carrick92647@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:52 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Today's emergency meeting Since some of us are not able to comment at today's meeting because of other obligations and we were given unreasonably short notice, I respectfully request that emails submitted be read at the meeting. Thank you. Kathy Carrick 45 year HB resident 1 Estanislau, Robin From: hammerfp@socal.rr.com Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:50 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE City Council Members, As a resident of Huntington Beach since 1967 (53 years) I am always concerned about major changes that may have underlying ramifications than explained? I am against any change in my utility choices because if its isn't broke don't fix it. This looks like a bureaucracy-play on the citizens of Surf City. We don't need more liabilities with the city currently in hock with unfunded liabilities of$1 billion(with a "B"). We need to cut pensions and add a 401-(k) retirement system for all public union employee's. As a private citizen with no choice of a pension, I have a 401-(k) and I believe we all should fund our own retirement plans. This is a conflict of interest between politicians who were backed by public union's, consultants and the energy retailers. No more under-the-table favors. No on losing control of our utility rates. Scott A. Willingham 16742 Sea Witch Lane HB 92649 (714) 625-1205 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Richard Rowe <rrowe3@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:50 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Energy change My husband and I Do Not Support changing our electric provider and will do what we can to help stop this ridiculous change! Jeannine and Dr. Richard Rowe Sent from my iPad Estanislau, Robin From: Casey McKeon <casey4hbcc@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:49 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Vote NO on CCE, Agenda Item 20-2082 Good evening council members. I represent thousands of our H.B. residents in voicing our opposition to joining the Irvine CCE. Please vote no on Agenda item 20-2082. Thank you. Casey McKeon 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Randy Harris <lakepowell01@verizon.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:49 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE HB City Council I am a resident of HB and I do not want CCE to happen. Thanks Randy Harris 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Lisa Swanson <lisainlb@ymail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:49 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Fw: Support for Community Choice Energy ----- Forwarded Message----- From: Lisa Swanson <lisainlb@ymail.com> To: SupplementalComm@Surfcity-hb.org <supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020, 01:43:24 PM PST Subject: Support for Community Choice Energy Dear City Council Members, thank you for your service to our beloved City of Huntington Beach, and thank you for holding a special meeting to consider adopting Resolution No. 2020-87. My name is Lisa Swanson, and I have owned my home at 21332 Compass Lane, Huntington Beach for 11 years. I am a professional chemical engineer registered in the State of California and had a long career in corporate environmental compliance before deciding to take an early retirement in August 2019. I'm a strong proponent of environmental sustainability which is what led me to learn about Community Choice Energy (CCE), but that is not the reason that your vote tonight is so critical and important. CCE can offer economic relief to our property owners, businesses, and the City through lower electricity rates, and it satisfies several key objectives for the City's future vision. You should adopt Resolution No. 2020-87 for the following reasons: 1. CCE is a revenue builder for cities 2. Electricity rate savings of 2% for EVERY customer (residential, commercial, and government) are predicted. 3. Southern California Edison is requesting a 14.4% rate increase starting in 2021. We need relief from these kind of price hikes! 4. Other cities in CA are already benefiting from CCE so it is proven and will be easy to implement. 5. If action is not taken tonight, the City of Huntington Beach will not have an opportunity to implement CCE any earlier than 2023. 6. If the full financial assessment does not support the predicted significant cost savings, the City has the option to withdraw from the agreement by March 1, 2021 without penalty. If Huntington Beach joins Irvine this year, we will be involved in the formation of the first Community Choice Authority JPA in Orange County. That is a legacy that I believe every City Council member should be very proud of and hope for your unanimous support. Regards, Lisa Swanson 714-851-7523 i Estanislau, Robin From: MJ Baretich <mjbaretich@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:47 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: URGENT CCE ITEM ON DEC. 10TH CITY COUNCIL MEETING Dear City Council members, Please do not vote on this issue until the residents of Huntington Beach (rate payers) have a chance to review all the issues. Please make available the facts and alternatives online. Thank you, Mary Jo Baretich 21752 Pacific Coast Hwy #23A Huntington Beach, CA i Estanislau, Robin From: Mark Betance <jiII beta nce@verizon.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:47 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Vote down CCE tonight at this last minute City Council meeting or we will be voting you out as soon as possible. i Estanislau, Robin From: Kathy Carrick <carrick92647@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:46 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Emergency meeting 12-10-20 regarding CCEs Let me begin by saying how shocked and disappointed I am that you would schedule this meeting. It seems like there was barely 24 hours notice. It's impossible for people to change their plans to be able to watch a meeting with this little amount of notice. It also appears that you intentionally scheduled it when two city council members would be unable to attend, so their voices couldn't be heard. All members of the council are our representatives and should be heard at all times on every issue, particularly on one as controversial as this. I think the decision to call this meeting was very intentionally timed and I think that action is shameful. Here are just a few of the questions I have regarding this issue. 1. Why was an emergency meeting necessary? 2. Why couldn't residents have been given more notice for and information on this meeting? 3. Why is it a good idea for HB to get into the electricity business? 4. Where's the proof you will be selling us green energy? 5. Where's the proof my energy costs will be lower? 6. Where are the energy experts that are going to run this business? 7. Isn't creating green energy going to increase the demand for fossil fuels? 8. Are you going to buy "renewable energy credits" so you can relabel fossil fuel energy as clean? This is just the very beginning of the questions I have. Since I'm under a deadline to even get this email to you, I don't have nearly enough time to pose all of my questions. I'm quite sure other residents also have questions that are important and need to be addressed. Since you work for the people of Huntington Beach, it seems that it would be appropriate for you to answer our questions and explain to us exactly why you are making this proposal. Therefore, I am respectfully requesting that this item be tabled and opened at a later date for full explanation and discussion. Thank you. Kathy Carrick 45 year HB resident 1 Estanislau, Robin From: John Thobe <thobe@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:44 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Good afternoon. We are residents of Huntington Beach.We would like to go on record stating that we are against the CCE.We do NOT want city council members dictating rates for power and HB does NOT need to be in the power business. Sincerely John and Carolyn Thobe Sent from my iPhone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: David Morgan <MORGANDM@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:43 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No CCE NO ON CCE art From HB Home Owner! Sent from my Whone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: mary drucker <mscottdrucker@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:42 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Emergency meeting? Is this city council thinking about entering into a community choice energy agreement During a pandemic that is causing thousands to loose their income?This is not a priority. I certainly hope this motion will die before even voiced as a consideration..... Please vote NO on any further obligations for the city of Huntington Beach at this time. Let's focus on your obligation to the citizens...... Sincerely, Mary Drucker 21921 Harborbreeze Lane Sent from my Wad 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Tom Van Dyke <drgo4@outlook.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:42 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE! No on CCE! Tom Van Dyke Homeowner and resident for 22 years. i Estanislau, Robin From: Cari Swan <cswanie@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:41 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO CCE Dear City Council Members, I have stood solidly in opposition to this dangerous, misguided scam of a program since it was first proposed a few years ago. Not only have I not changed my position, the facts continue to evolve more and more in opposition to this dangerous program. Interestingly, we just completed our city council election....and the first move out-the-gate is an emergency meeting, without the benefit of having ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS in attendance with the express intent to benefit the City of Irvine. When this subject last came before council, many people, including me suggested stepping back and waiting to see the results of Irvine's endeavor and if they could actually achieve the lofty promises being marketed by the consultants.. Now it appears this council is more committed to "cover the backs" of Irvine's bad decision than to look out for the best interest of our own city. Not to mention that NOT ONCE during the election, did the citizens of HB call out for city hall to take over the energy business! It really should go with saying, but clearly something this council needs to hear. Our city has a myriad of issues we are facing: the homeless crisis, crumbling infrastructure, budget losses the likes we have never experienced, massively unfunded pension debt and our small businesses are collapsing all around us thanks to a never-ending pandemic crisis. We need leadership to address the ISSUES IMPORTANT TO THE CITIZENS....NOT SPECIAL INTEREST DRIVEN AGENDAS!! Add to all of this the high cost and personal risk to the city...this is a catastrophically BAD IDEA. NO, NO, NO CCE!!! Sincerely, Cari Swan 1 Estanislau, Robin From: WENDY BAUGH <wbaugh123@aoi.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:37 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE Dear Members of the Huntington Beach City Council, I am sending this email asking that you oppose the measure to enter Huntington Beach into a CCE (Community Choice Energy) with Irvine. Thank you, Wendy Baugh 6662 Blue Heron Drive Huntington Beach, CA 92648 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Martha Morrow <marthamorrow67@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:34 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE NO ON CCU! 1 Estanislau, Robin From: LORRAINE LADD <LOVELADD@msn.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:36 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Hello City Council, I understand that you are holding an emergency meeting tonight at 5:00 p.m. with only 24 hours' notice to vote to enter H.B. into a CCE(Community Choice Energy) with Irvine. I am opposed to this and I would like you to VOTE NO on CCE! Why don't you guys try to focus on more pressing issues here in Huntington Beach!! We've got plenty to choose from!!! Thanks Lorraine Ladd 22212 Wood Island Lane HB, CA 92646 1 Estanislau, Robin From: raysten@aol.com Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:36 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO CCE Please include our names as we are politefully requesting NO CCE in the City of Huntington Beach, or at least let the citizens vote on this measure since it will so drastically affect all of us. Thank you, Tamara and Darin Raysten 1 Estanislau, Robin From: SHARON & ROB OTT <ottcamp@verizon.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:32 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO ON CCE Dear City Council, I urge you all to vote no on bringing CCE to H.B. I and most other residents feel strongly that this is not in HB's, or mainly it's residents' best interest. Estanislau, Robin From: Stan <Ievasheffco@verizon.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:32 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." Thomas Jefferson "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. " Benjamin Franklin "The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not. " Thomas Jefferson "Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian." Henry Ford LEVASHEFF CO. 8222 Drybank Drive Huntington Beach, CA 92646 USA Ph/Fax: 714-968-9278 e-mail: levasheffco@verizon.net Stan Levasheff Mechanical Engineer 1 Estanislau, Robin From: BRENDA DANIELSON <bdanielsonhome@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:30 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE I vote NO on this CCE meeting the new City Council members are having tonight.Stop spending money when other issues are not fixed!! NO, NO, NO! Brenda Danielson 19412 MacGregor Circle Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Sent from my Wad Estanislau, Robin From: P One <trishyonline@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:27 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE NO ON CCE From Patricia Kelly Huntington beach resident Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android i Estanislau, Robin From: Marty Golden <goelver1 @gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:15 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: re CCA Community Choice Aggregation - a big NO I am very opposed to the City adopting the CCA in any form - especially not in an Emergency meeting (today) This concept will give Council ability to set/increase fees without consulting the voters of the city in an appropriate manner Martin Golden 5201 Mcfadden Ave. Huntington Beach, CA 92649 -Marty Golden i Estanislau, Robin From: William H. Haas <whaas2@socal.rr.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 1:10 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE I am a long time resident of Huntington Beach. There in no benefit for the residents of Huntington Beach for the city of be in the energy business. Please vote NO! on any CCE involvement. Will Haas 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Rick Minato <rmhoops@gmaH.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 12:59 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE I strongly urge all of you to vote against CCE. It is a really bad idea, will bankrupt the city, and is otherwise a boondoggle. Rick Minato Resident i Estanislau, Robin From: Ray Raines <rayraines@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 12:56 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE Dear city council members, I am writing to express my opposition to the Community Choice Electricity (CCE)program being being considered by the council tonight. This program exposes our city to a tremendous and unacceptable financial risk, which we can ill afford, since we are still struggling to recover from the pandemic. CCE should be tabled until such time as the financial picture for the city becomes clearer and the citizens of Huntington Beach have the opportunity to express their opinion on the issue. Sincerely, Ray Raines President Surf City TEA i Estanislau, Robin From: Anthony Palumbo <apalumbo3@verizon.net> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 12:47 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Community Choice Aggregation (or Energy) Dear City Council Members I am distressed to hear that you are ignoring the welfare of the citizens of this city to help special interests. You are taking my right to a fair energy rates without my input to enrich the union interest of the city. Under this proposal there is no limit to the energy rates that the city could apply without votes or input from the city's citizens. We will remember the city council members that vote favorably on this measure against the welfare of the city's citizens Anthony Palumbo (714) 274-5018 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Brian White <bwrecondo@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 12:34 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE No to CCE! This would be disastrous for the residents of Huntington Beach. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone i Estanislau, Robin From: Natalie Stewart Elder <nataliestewartelder@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 12:23 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Community Choice Energy Hello! I am writing in support of Community Choice Aggregation. This program would give Huntington Beach citizens increased local control of their utilities, in both pricing and renewable energy sources. While the initial cost of making this change could be substantial, this is a long-term investment in the future of our city and our environment, and I believe it's well worth the money. Natalie Elder www.nselder.com i Estanislau, Robin From: dj4realtrucks@aol.com Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 12:13 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE I am a 30 year resident and 25 year property owner, 5881 San Souci circle, 92647 This meeting tonight is being pushed with almost no notice for the meeting and no recent chance for resident imput D.J. Martin, cell 714-349-6663 i Estanislau, Robin From: Austin Edsell <ajedsell@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 12:09 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Regarding Special Meeting on 12/10/2020 Good morning, My name Is Austin Edsell and I am a resident of Huntington Beach. I write this email to voice my opposition to agenda item 20-2082: Consider joining the Orange County Power Authority (OCPA), a Community Choice Energy (CCE) Joint Powers Authority (JPA) by adopting Resolution No. 2020-87, approving for introduction Ordinance No. 4227 and authoring execution of a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA). There is no need to add another burdensome layer of bureaucracy on the backs of the hard working people of this City. Not only will this make energy more expensive for our residents, but it will also put the City at great financial risk. Further, it is ridiculous that the Council is proposing to join the OCPA without doing proper risk assessments, but it's even more ridiculous that the Council moves to complete the risk assessments AFTER joining the OCPA. At a time of great economic uncertainty for so many residents and for our City's tax revenues, it is not prudent to make such a consequential decision on a whim, especially when the Council has given such short notice to the public. Please make the right decision and vote against joining the OCPA. Thank you, Austin J. Edsell i Estanislau, Robin From: Michael Hoskinson <mikehosk@me.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 11:42 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Special Meeting/CCE Dear Mayor Carr and city council members, As you know, I have been intimately involved in the fight against CCE for 4 years. During that time the positive selling points have steadily diminished to the point where vanguard cities like Palmdale have recently decertified their massively expensive CCE. If a city that has 300 days of sunshine and unlimited space to install solar farms can't make CCE work no city can. 1 4MW z cal(�hoice me tCi Ilir tar for EnvTV and'f hmalte Policy t�lli:�•PISc€)tiJ[Sa�s Gvrn�3:csia�t Sills Van<NftS Averlue Sacs fr=dsm CA 94102 Dftr ter.Raid 1pht i rm wrcit ,�ct If aftt ,C§tl?.af Palrndalr{ lttar is rspot to yaurlttor, dawod AixiSr 21,.2Ci2p,iat vriticls yua Starod that xlt Y wta$Frssrrlde writrsl caatmitiai�atLo# to y+au uct ar l 3clnnept@i, .&.2020 od its iatt3 ru6tltt drrllaratidty a rtttonity t'tt�a[ct ltrarder.tciaddrt�seciiullfn ceAd issacsdes6eil,i�:yauc after. e,iAicy.itjr�id+ "tiurttcdaGiiat�rsttoatuariss ona�5� �mzrnityt,.. rand t®sttlise,qur«nclyse�t i!lptta3a: iintt r # r. €a tlh4 n WOO rai siawmall bdom sach as$"them Calltvrrd;A €diwn CommoVs'Cwtorner Senlix Re-Plaxrorm balling sy gem Upgrade;tht rAvol coca virus pandcrteir,and other rxud w coactmis.: if thetrare anya �tit regard€ng flat tn�fit�tiait,plobse eantaer i<�At>s�Sliy.C9ty Munagtr�, ar661-267-S104.or,Cahy0-Walwataifs-2�o, a47_ Sincerely, t r*[tot"ak*-- CathyDeFalcnc Uifomla Chaim Elxiw AsqWty On bebalfofCity 'Patmdale €s, l.Umurphy" Y • eT,EityofPalmdale lrlitclueh SUffAtromey,Calitamia Public utilizl CunIMislon Dina flit,orgy plvisldn catildrttia PuWkUtilltiascamflamiaiit mactftew lhib nw,Etta4 Divisiart Catifern4a Public tltflitips Commission llcaristo.E4ff yDi•vkAwkcallfor tia Public LtdlidesCsm isslaft Eft.bethDkrnwa.M61clp�'lCaunsol,CaiefnM4 Public UtiH esCOMMIXODA 4a=n0a Nkr1y,Manager;Southern Califamia Edmn Ca mp=y Service last P,19-21-009` 44M Fwe kWI4o l tAftlaw.,to 93W 1 lout 64%2411 l The main sale pitches for CCE are: • Lower electrical rates. •Ability for consumers to purchase "Green Energy". • "Choice" • More jobs for HB. • Gives commercial customers huge savings thus keeping and growing the commercial property base. Lets debunk each point. Lower Rates: When CCE first came up in 2017 the proponents promised customers "5% savings" overall. By the time CCE came to the HB City Council the publicly offered "savings" had dwindled to 2%. In the last two years many cities that formed CCEs found that there were no savings and that costs Increased for all customers. SCE purchases massive amounts of energy for their customers, the thought that one city or a small group of cities could ever match SCE's buying power is absurd. 2 Purchasing "Green Energy": CCEs are not competitive, nor can they provide "Green Power" to customers. Electrical power is delivered in bulk; the grid can't determine what is "green" or not. CCEs purchase fossil fuel generated energy and are able to call it "green" or "renewable"through a process called "greenwashing". Greenwashing happens when a renewable energy provider like a solar farm produces energy. When 1 megawatt of clean energy is produced the solar farm operator can issue a REC (renewable energy certificate),they can then sell the REC to a CCE which purchases fossil fuel energy and applies the REC to the purchase, thereby "greenwashing" that megawatt of power into "renewable", or "green" energy. The concept and pricing are a scam and will only continue to be viable as long as renewable energy is subsidized. After that the game is over and taxpayers will be stuck with wildly escalating energy bills. Think of RECs as a taxpayer subsidized "discount coupon" allowing CCEs to purchase cheaper fossil fuel and pass it off to ratepayers as "Green" energy. Again, the scam of Greenwashing allows the CCEs and the politicians behind it to claim they're delivering renewable power in definable amounts...the reality of physics says differently. "Choice": The word"Choice" in CCE is very misleading. The only"choice"the consumer is offered with CCE is whether to allow the default inclusion in CCE or Opt-Out back to SCE. More Jobs For HB: Proponents of CCE claim they will create many high paying local jobs. The only jobs being created are for the new government operation required to mandate the CCE and smaller jobs installing taxpayer-subsidized solar farms. The new government jobs all come with lifetime pensions that HB cannot afford. Gives commercial customers huge savings thus keeping and growing the commercial business base: As shown, "savings"with CCE are non-existent and rate increases are the norm. Recently, Ventura split their commercial service back to SCE because the CCE, Clean Power Alliance, attempted to increase commercial rates by 37%-47%. CCE has failed both times the HBCC brought it up because it would be a disaster for our town, the possibility of bankruptcy after joining or creating a CCE is very real, especially in these financially precarious times. Joining Irvine in this experiment will only prolong and amplify the inevitable financial and political failure. Please vote NO ON CCE. Michael Hoskinson 3 Estanislau, Robin From: Jimmy Osuna <jimmy.osuna@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 11:41 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on CCE Sent from Mail for Windows 10 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Barbara Shepard <NRDKMOM@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 11:41 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE Please vote NO on CCE.This is definitely not the time to put this into effect. Sent from my iPhone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Kathey <kathey_haas@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 11:37 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: CCE City Council Members, As a 46 year home owner and happy resident of Huntington Beach, I am writing you to state my STRONG OPPOSITION to our city entering into to any CCE arrangements!!! Our city MUST NOT get into the energy business!!! We have many other more pressing issues to resolve and have no business getting in to the energy business! I cannot urge you strongly enough to OPPOSE CCE for Huntington Beach! Thank you! Kathryn R. Haas Sent from my iPhone 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Cathey Ryder <the4ryders@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 10:28 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: YES to CCE Say YES to Community Choice Energy. Become a founding partner. There is no fiscal impact to the city's general fund. Let's look to the future and help our small businesses and residents realize the savings available by voting to join the Orange County Power Authority. HB residents and voters since 1985, Cathey and Bob Ryder Cathey Ryder " Optimism is the faith that leads to achievement. Nothing can be done without hope and confidence." Helen Keller i Estanislau, Robin From: Craig Frampton <cframpton143@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 10:11 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Emergency meeting. Well that didn't take long for our union controlled council and mayor to make a power grab with the residents money. How convenient to do this without much notice. We will see more government power grabs with our sold out 5 council members for 2 years now. Craig Frampton Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android i Estanislau, Robin From: lindaklaw <lindaklaw@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 9:56 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Say yes to CCE CCE will allow the citizens of Huntington Beach to have control over the types of energy it uses and to keep costs low. We do not want to wait and be subject to the 14.4%SoCal Edison rate increase for the next two years. The profits from that go to SCE shareholders abroad and not to HB families. Let Huntington Beach be a leader on the issue of cleaner air and lower costs.Thank you. Linda Law Estanislau, Robin From: TRICIA IVISON <TMJIVISON@msn.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 9, 2020 12:20 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Concerned citizen Hello all Council members, Thank you for taking the time to read this email. I have been a resident of Huntington Beach for nearly eight years now. I am a wife and mother of 3 children who currently attend both Dwyer middle school and Huntington Beach high school. We own a home very close to First Christian Church just off of 14th street and have loved being so close to schools, shops, and or course the beautiful beach. I am writing this letter to express my deep and sincere concern over the recent government overreach of which I have been made aware. Just north in the county of Los Angeles, Major Eric Garcetti recently ordered significant restrictions on businesses such as restaurants and bars. In some cases, forbidding altogether the opening of a downtown restaurant immediately after the owner had complied with and payed for every guideline the city deemed necessary amid the pandemic. When the owner drove to her business the morning of the mandatory shut down, she noticed just across the street temporary tents with tables and chairs set up for a movie set which the city of LA had approved to take place for the next several weeks. The city of LA was completely comfortable with receiving money from the entertainment industry and hosting a gathering with a sizable crowd, but not for a small business owner to open and attempt to make a living wage. This is completely wrong and illogical. The city of LA believes that COVID can't be spread at a movie set, but can get spread in an outdoor restaurant with distance seating and servers complying with all the restrictions. We as California residents have been exposed to the constant hypocritical leadership of Gavin Newsom and now Eric Garcetti. We deserve better leadership. This is why I am writing this letter today. I am asking that you as committee members do everything and more to protect the rights and liberties of business owners as well as citizens of Huntington Beach. We cannot allow the example of cities like Los Angeles to have any influence over us, or even worse, intimate us into complying with excessive and illogical restrictions that kill businesses and livelihoods. I know we are in the midst of a pandemic that has negatively affected so many. I myself have had extended family members in other parts of the country test positive for COVID and fallen ill because of it. However, we cannot use fear of an illness as an excuse to restrict civil liberties and freedoms to the point of no return. Once governments (even our great one) see that they can control and define us as citizens, we have lost the most precious aspect of our great nation. It is "We the people" not "We the government" Please commit to upholding the constitution and protecting against tyrannical rule. Thank you, Tricia Ivison 822 San Nicolas Cir 1 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Friday, March 12, 2021 1:29 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: CCE with OCJPA -----Original Message----- From: Ginny Bean <ginnybean1969@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2021 3:31 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: RE: CCE with OCJPA Dear HB City Council, Please do not enter into this agreement for our electricity. After reading the pitfalls of this agreement and the chances of the costs, this is not something our city needs. Also the vague language in acquiring land via eminent domain is very troubling. As a homeowner in HB for over 40+years it's about time our City council members "really" listen to our concerns and evaluate what this could cost to our city. After seeing what has happened in Texas,this should be a real wake up call and take more review. Sincerely, Ginny Bean Sent from my Wad 1 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Friday, March 12, 2021 1:33 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: Reconsider Community Choice Energy (CCE) From: Holly Hanes<hhanes@verizon.net> Sent:Thursday, March 11, 2021 8:24 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Reconsider Community Choice Energy (CCE) To: HB City Council Members & City Manager Reference: Community Choice Energy I am writing to ask you to reconsider the Community Choice Energy program at this time. Lets look at a couple of items of significant concern: No significant change to rates and increase in GHG emissions according to UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs study. Comparison made to the City of Lancaster CCE as they are an SCE customer-others in the study were PG&E customers. 1. There really is no cost benefit to the consumer. The sales pitch states there is about a 2% savings but actual data for SCE customers and the CCE in Lancaster does not show this. Renewable energy is identical at .202/kwh Source: "The promises and challenges of Community Choice Aggregation in CA" - UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs. HB Flnance Commission projects less than $1 savings on the energy bills. That is IF the CCE achieves a 2% savings which is unlikely. 2. There was an increase in Green House Gas (GHG) emissions by 1% Source: "The promises and challenges of Community Choice Aggregation in CA" - UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs. H6 Finance Commission Findings and considerations: 1. 884,000,000 yes 884 Million Dollar liability written in the contract. 2. if we voluntarily or involuntarily terminate the contract the OCJPA can go after the city's general fund. for the 884M liability 3. of great concern is the OCJPA can also acquire property in the city via eminent domain -this section is vague which is very concerning. Does this mean they can acquire my home, you home, the entire strip on PCH and Main or other areas that generate revenue for the city ? 4. SCE is already compliant to CA Renewable energy requirements Recently, Lake Forest and Costa Mesa have withdrawn their membership. "The way it is designed doesn't give us a benefit as a founding member at all, It doesn't hurt us to withdrawl and rejoin at a later time." Mayor Moatezedi, Lake Forest "...Most cities take 6 to 9 months and some a couple of years to adequately assess the feasibility of entering a CCE, and the particulars of of such an important endeavor. Unfortunately, due to the unprecedented impact on OC cities created by COVID-19, the region has not has the opportunity to conduct a thorough cost/benefit analysis of joining the Irvine CCE." - Taken from the Costa Mesa City Council Agenda Report Item # NB-4 San Diego-" I'm not convinced a 2% reduction in rates is good enough reason to put the county at risk or begin a business that is not a core county function. It is critical we get this right and that we get it right the first time and not be in a hurry to do that." Santa Ana also decided to wait a few years before taking action. t In summary, I believe we should reconsider this CCE at this time. Timing is everything. Can we afford to have this liability and eminent domain hanging over our head ? The city is still not yet recovering from the COVID pandemic, we have a long way to go. We need to focus on getting our businesses and tourisim back up and running consistently so we can begin to generate more revenue. We already have a large pension liability and I don't think we should be adding more liability to the city. My recommendation would be to postpone joining the CCE until it is up and running and has proven to effectively deliver energy that does reduce GHG surpassing SCE and has proven to decrease rates below SCE. Once there is a proven track record we should join. Thank you for your consideration. Holly Hanes HB citizen. 2 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Friday, March 12, 2021 1.44 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:CCA/CCE opting out reminder From: William Hennerty Jr. <billhennerty@yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, March 12, 2021 6:35 AM To:CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org>;Chi,Oliver<oliver.chi@surfcity-hb.org>; Estanislau, Robin <Robin.Estanislau@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: CCA/CCE opting out reminder Council, Leming about CCA/CCE the past year and what happened in Texas my family and I wanted to remind you that we will be opting out of this program. There are to many questions that council seems not to be asking and puts our city at risk. I would love to see more council members debate issues and ask tougher questions. Thank you all for serving on council. Have a great weekend. Thank you, William Hennerty Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android t Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Friday, March 12, 2021 5:07 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: HB & CCE -----Original Message----- From: Michelle Larsson <misunsetca@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, March 12, 2021 5:03 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: HB & CCE First I would like to thank the 2 members of the council with sense enough to oppose HB joining the CCE. Thank you Mr Ortiz & Mr Peterson for your levelheaded NO vote. Ms. Carr, Ms. Delgleize, Ms. Moser, Mr. Posey& Mr. Kalmick: WHY did you vote yes? Why weren't the residents given the information before you "decided" for us? This is a huge deal! Perhaps you don't understand what you voted for? It would benefit the residents and HOMEOWNERS&VOTERS to have a say. Please pull out of this "agreement" so as not to force it on the good people of Huntington Beach. This may cost us dearly. Thank you, The Larsson Family 17132 PCH HB 92649 1 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Friday, March 12, 2021 S:08 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: OCPA From: Eric Halsey<ehalseyhb@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, March 12, 2021 5:05 PM To:CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:OCPA Pls take in to consideration concerns raised by Casey before committing our city to the OCPA. Thanks, Eric F. Halsey MCP, MCTSJ ehalsey@,a-cto.com I mobile(657) 845-0703 1513949397317 PastedImage A CTO, LLC 116292 Arlington Ln, Huntington Beach, CA 92649 IM ehalsevra-cto.com I fax 928-244-1024 Bridge 605-475-4350 Access Code: 225-560 t Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Friday, March 12, 2021 6:49 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: OCJPA contract From: Dorothy Newbrough <dnewbr@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, March 12, 2021 6:42 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: OCJPA contract Please do not move forward with the OCJPA contract. This will put Huntington Beach City in a financial crisis. Listen to the Huntington Beach citizens and do your jobs....protect them! Dorothy Newbrough Huntington Beach, CA t Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, March 15, 2021 8:32 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: Community Choice Energy (CCE) and Orange County Joint Powers Authority (OCJ PA) From: Nick Mestanas<nmestanas@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 15, 2021 6:58 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Community Choice Energy (CCE) and Orange County Joint Powers Authority (OCJPA) have spoken out before against joining the other cities in this venture. I do so now again. Looking at the math, the massive liability taken on for an estimated 2% reduction far outweighs the benefits. There's not even a guarantee of reduced rates.. This new agency would wield a significant amount of power through the application of eminent domain. The thought that an unelected public agency can seize property for whatever purpose they require, quite frankly scares me. The whole notion of"voting shares" is confusing and on the surface, sounds specious. Based on a formula? Really? No wonder other cities have dropped out. I strongly recommend we do the same, monitor the progress and determine suitability for HB residents once we have real world data. My final point is, regardless of outcome, if FIB goes forward with OCPJA, I will OPT-OUT as a payer. Sincerely, Nicholas Mestanas Huntington Beach Resident t Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, March 15, 2021 8:47 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: OCPA -----Original Message----- From: Christine <caschlag42@aol.com> Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2021 9:11 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: OCPA I'm in favor of withdrawing from the OCPA or changing the terms of the contract per Casey McKeon's rewrites of the contract. Christine Schlager 9391 Breakwater Circle Hunt. Bch. 92646 1 Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, March 15, 2021 8:49 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: CCE agreement From: Teresa Kennedy<tkennedy31@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, March 12, 2021 11:24 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: CCE agreement Dear FIB City Council: I'm hoping you will all take a deep hard look at the specifics in the CCE Agreement as laid our before your committee by Mr Casey McKean. Several items cause concern for us as members of the FIB community. We are hoping you will re-evaluate ALL of the specifics in this contract and do what's BEST for us residents of 1-1 B. There are more drawbacks than positives. Mainly the high cost that will inevitably be passed down to FIB residents. As members of the city council you took an oath to make decisions based on the best interest of the citizens of FIB. As a citizens of HB. we feel it's time to withdrawal immediately from the contract agreement prior to April I deadline. Please do what's best for us citizens- Withdraw NOW before it's too late and we get penalties and/or increase rates. Now is NOT the time to choose this "trial" at the expense of FIB residents. We are all suffering in one way or the other from these difficult financial times so now is the worst time to "experiment" At the FIB residents expense. As taken from Mr McKeon: "CCE (Community Choice Energy) contract with the OCPA(Orange County Powers Authority). The language in this agreement is very troubling as it relates to the roughly$884 million liability we will incur by purchasing our PPA's (Power Purchase Agreements), which is the energy we purchase. This massive liability makes exiting the program, should the program fail, nearly impossible as it will be financially untenable to do so as the fees and penalties will be too large." Please vote to cancel our partnership/contract ASAP Thank you for your time Sean and Teri Kennedy t HB Ca Sent from my iPhone z Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, March 15, 2021 10:19 AM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW: Electricity From: Dawn Crawley<older.than.dirt@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 15, 2021 10:18 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Electricity Stick with Southern California Edison. Do NOT further encumber the city of Huntington Beach with needless financial obligations! t Switzer, Donna From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Monday, March 15, 2021 1:06 PM To: Agenda Alerts Subject: FW:Tonight's Council Meeting - Commissioner McKeon's Amendment to the OCPA Agreement Attachments: V2-HB_Opt Out Language for Huntington Beach.pdf From: Austin Edsell<ajedsell@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 15, 2021 1:05 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Tonight's Council Meeting-Commissioner McKeon's Amendment to the OCPA Agreement Good afternoon, My name is Austin Edsell, and 1 am a resident of Huntington Beach. I write this email to voice my support for Finance Commissioner Casey McKeon's proposed amendment to the OCPA Joint Powers Agreement. Please see the proposed amendment attached. I oppose the City of Huntington Beach participating in the Orange County Power Authority as the risks far outweigh the minimal benefits that this program can provide. 1 fear that the City Council is making a short- sighted and Flippant decision as they will not have to deal with the long-term consequences of joining this program. That being said, if the City Council has determined to commit Huntington Beach to this expensive and long- term program, I move that the City Council provide greater protection for the City's general fund, property, and ultimately taxpayer dollars. Huntington Beach residents have elected the City Council to make decisions for posterity, not just the short-term. Amending the Joint Powers Agreement with the attached amendments will offer future Huntington Beach residents the necessary protections they need for a prosperous future. Thank you for your time and attention. Regards, Austin J. Edsell t Recommended Joint Powers Agreement Amendment v2 Suggested supplement to Joint Powers Agreement doc if city council is determined to join OC CCA and lash city to value proposition of assuming power contract liability of$884 million* in exchange for 1 savin for HB consumers on their monthly electric bill (while SCE already complies with California clean energy mandates) The terms and conditions stated in this Joint Powers Agreement(JP Agreement)amendment and the JP Agreement document effective November 20, 2020, including subsequent versions of the November 20, 2020 version,constitute the total agreement between the City of Huntington Beach (HB) and the Orange County Power Authority(OCPA)(including Change County Community Choice Aggregation(OC CCA. HB shall retain the right to depart from OCPA and OC CCA at any time without incurring any costs or liabilities, including costs for power purchase agreements,bond liability,debt service,etc., in the event that: (i) OC CCA fails to achieve and continually maintain a minimum 2%savings compared to Southern California Edison(SCE)prices; the calculation of OC CCA prices(S per KWh)shall include SCE costs levied on HB ratepayers for PCL4, Franchise Fee Surcharge,etc. OC CCA total price per KWh shall be a minimum of 2%lower than SCE prices for each rate class. This 2%shall be achieved without incurring any debt or issuing debt instruments,and/or (ii) OCPA, OC CCA, or any of its members,agents, representatives, legal representatives, etc.,attempt to invoke eminent domain within HB jurisdictional boundaries or within view of those jurisdictional boundaries, and/or (its) HB is involuntarily terminated from OCPA and or OC CCA,and/or (iv) any party introduces modified language,documents, or takes action that attempts to override or obviate this amendment. Items(i)and(ii) and(iii)and(iv)are each referred to as"breaches." In the event HB is deemed to have accepted a breach(s),that acceptance shall not be construed as waiver of the city's right to exercise departure powers for any past or present breach. All terms and conditions included in this amended JP agreement shall remain intact and in force into perpetuity and shall not be modified or deleted without a"yes" vote to modify by each individual member of HB's city council(currently 7 members). Huntington Beach's Power Purchase Agreement(P_AI Liability Total annual electric load,per Exhibit B of Implementation Plan = 1,046 GWh = 1,046,000 MWh. Assume blended PPA contracts average 13 years long and blended PPA prices =$65 per megawatt-hour: PPA liability= 1,046,000 x 13 x$65 = $883,870,000.00