[00:00:02]
[CALL MEETING TO ORDER]
AT SIX 14.YOU'RE VERY LUCKY I WAS ABOUT TO LEAVE AND LEAVE YOU OUTTA QUORUM.
UH, WE'LL START WITH ROLL CALL.
APPARENTLY YOU'VE GOTTA JUST EAT THE DARN MICROPHONE HERE.
SO FLIP THE SWITCH THE OTHER WAY AND THEN YOU'LL HAVE IT HERE.
COMMISSIONER GARY IS NOT ONLINE.
COMMISSIONER LUKEY IS NOT ONLINE.
COMMISSIONER TI GOOD TO SEE YOU, SIR.
COMMISSIONER SCAFF IS NOT WITH US.
COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN HERE.
WE DO HAVE A QUORUM, UH, PUBLIC
[PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL]
COMMUNICATION.IS THERE ANYBODY WHO HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK THIS EVENING? YES.
UH, IF YOU COULD PLEASE HEAD ON UP TO THE PODIUM, INTRODUCE YOURSELF TO THE CROWD JUST IN CASE.
GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS AND, UH, AUSTIN ENERGY STAFF.
I'M, UH, AL BRADEN, A DISTRICT SEVEN VOTER AND AUSTIN ENERGY SHAREHOLDER, AND TONIGHT REPRESENTING THE PUBLIC.
UH, YOU HAVE TWO VERY IMPORTANT ITEMS ON YOUR AGENDA TONIGHT CONCERNING CRITICAL ENERGY UTILITIES FOR AUSTIN.
THEY COULDN'T BE MORE DIFFERENT IN THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO AUSTIN.
THE GENERATION PLAN BEFORE YOU TONIGHT REPRESENTS A YEAR AND A HALF OF WORK BY AUSTIN ENERGY, THE EUC.
ITS WORKING GROUP MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND ENGAGED MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.
THERE ARE MANY CONTENTIOUS ELEMENTS.
IF YOU ARE AT LAST NIGHT'S, UH, EUC MEETING, IT LASTED FIVE AND A HALF HOURS.
YOU'LL KNOW THAT FULL AGREEMENT IS STILL A WAYS OFF.
HOPEFULLY TONIGHT'S MEETING WON'T LAST AS LONG, BUT THE DEBATE GOES ON, ESPECIALLY ABOUT GAS PEAKERS.
AND IT WILL GO ON TONIGHT AND IT WILL GO ON AT COUNCIL.
BUT I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT THERE IS A DEBATE.
WE DO GET TO WORK AT THE TABLE AND WORK THIS OUT.
AUSTIN ENERGY THROUGH COUNCIL DOES WORK FOR US.
THEY BRING UTILITY EXPERTISE TO THE DISCUSSIONS WHILE WE BRING CONCERNS OF THE CLIMATE CRISIS, ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
TONIGHT'S MEETING IS PART OF THAT.
COMPARE AND CONTRAST THAT WITH TEXAS GAS SERVICE.
A PRIVATELY OWNED UTILITY BASED IN OKLAHOMA.
TRY BEING HEARD ABOUT METHANE LEAKS, CLIMATE CHANGE, EMISSIONS RATE, EQUITY, TRY BEING HEARD AT ALL.
IT'S LIKE WATER ROLLING OFF A DUCK'S BACK.
THEY OPERATE UNDER AN 18-YEAR-OLD FRANCHISE AGREEMENT NEGOTIATED LONG BEFORE CLIMATE AND EQUITY ISSUES WERE FRONT AND CENTER.
IT'S SIMPLY A FINANCIAL AGREEMENT WHERE THE CITY MAKES A MODEST RETURN OF 5%, MUCH LOWER THAN WE MAKE WITH AUSTIN ENERGY.
IT'S NEGOTIATED THROUGH THE CITY LEGAL AND FINANCE DEPARTMENTS WHERE CLIMATE AND EQUITY ARE NOT EXACTLY ON THE FRONT BURNER.
WHOLLY LACKING IS ANY MEANINGFUL CITIZEN AND COUNCIL ENGAGEMENT ON OPERATIONS RATES AND PROGRAMS. THERE ARE NO EYES AND EARS ON TEXAS GAS TO BRING ISSUES TO COUNCIL IN A TIMELY MANNER BEFORE RATES ARE JUST RUBBER STAMPED DOWN AT THE RAILROAD COMMISSION.
WITH THE UPCOMING 2026 FRANCHISE NEGOTIATIONS, WE MUST GIVE AUSTIN THE OPPORTUNITY TO NEGOTIATE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES FOR THE BETTER METHANE LEAK REDUCTIONS, FULL COST ALLOTMENT FOR NEW HOOKUPS, BETTER ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS, BETTER ENVIRONMENTAL AND EQUITY STEWARDSHIP OVERALL COUNCIL NEEDS THE RMC TO TAKE ON THIS TASK AND EVEN FORM A TASK FORCE TO STUDY AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS IN ADVANCE OF THE NEGOTIATIONS.
IT'S URGENT THAT THE RMC BYLAWS BE AMENDED.
ONLY THEN CAN WE DEVELOP A GAS SERVICE PLAN THAT TRULY ALIGNS WITH AUSTIN'S VALUES.
UM, WE'RE JUST GONNA TAKE THIS IN ORDER.
I THINK WHILE WE'RE TRYING TO LOOK UP INFORMATION ON THE SECOND ITEM ON THE AGENDA.
SO WE'RE GONNA START WITH ITEM NUMBER ONE,
[1. Approval of a recommendation on Austin Energy's Resource, Generation, and Climate Protection Plan]
APPROVAL OF A RECOMMENDATION.AUSTIN ENERGY'S RESOURCE GENERATION AND CLIMATE PROTECTION PLAN.
UH, YOU HAVE IN, WELL, IN YOUR EMAILS, AND I BELIEVE YOU'VE BEEN GIVEN PRINTOUTS AS WELL, OF A DRAFT RESOLUTION, UH, AUTHORED BY, UH, OUR VICE CHAIR.
SO I'M GONNA LET HIM SET THE TABLE FOR US.
UM, I HAVE A FEW HARD COPIES OF THIS.
DOES ANYONE NEED ONE? IS IT THE THING THAT I WAS JUST HANDED A MINUTE AGO? THIS, THIS IS THE OTHER ONE, SO NO, I DON'T HAVE IT.
[00:05:01]
WE GO.I HAVE ONE EXTRA HOUR THOUGHT YOU MIGHT BE HERE COMMISSION.
UM, I, AT OUR LAST MEETING, THE PRETTY MUCH EVERY MEMBER THAT WAS IN ATTENDANCE SAID THEY WANTED TO VOTE ON THE RESOURCE PLAN.
AND SO IN AN EFFORT TO, UH, EXPEDITE THINGS, WHAT I'VE DONE IS I'VE CREATED A KIND OF, PARDON ME, CHRISTMAS TREE, UH, RESOLUTION, UH, WHERE WE HANG THE ORNAMENTS ON IT AND WE CAN, UM, DISCUSS THEM ONE BY ONE.
UH, I WISHED I COULD HAVE SENT THEM SOONER, BUT I DID TRY TO GET THIS TO PEOPLE AS SOON AS I COULD SO THEY COULD, UH, SEE IT AND THINK ABOUT IT.
UM, I'M GOING TO, IF IT'S OKAY WITH THE CHAIR, I'M GOING TO READ THE PREAMBLE INTO THE RECORD AND THEN GO DOWN THIS LIST.
THEN, UM, COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ, UH, MAY HAVE SOME ITEMS THAT, UH, HE WANTS TO ADD.
UNFORTUNATELY, THEY CAME TO ME VERY LATE AND I DID NOT HAVE A CHANCE TO DISCUSS THIS WITH HIM, UH, OR, OR TO INTEGRATE ANY OF THEM INTO THE CHRISTMAS TREE RESOLUTION.
UM, AND WITH THAT, LET ME, UH, LAUNCH INTO THIS.
AND, AND THEN I RECENTLY, UH, GOT A FEW COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONER DAVIS AND I HAVE ONLY SCANNED THEM.
UM, UM, AND, AND I'LL START TO, OF COURSE, SHE'LL WANT TO TALK ABOUT THEM, BUT I WILL, UM, CHIME INTO, TO THE EXTENT THAT I UNDERSTAND, UM, HER COMMENTS.
COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN, THANK YOU, UM, AT, DON'T WANNA INTERRUPT THE FLOW, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK AN IMPORTANT, UM, PRELIMINARY AND FRAMING QUESTION OF MS. MARTIN, IF YOU WOULD BE SO KIND.
UM, THANK YOU FOR YOUR, UM, AND, AND TIM AND EVERYONE ELSE.
MS. EVERHART, WHO SAT THROUGH LAST NIGHT'S EXTRAVAGANZA OF AMENDMENTS.
APPRECIATE YOUR TOLERANCE AND, UM, EXPERTISE AND STAMINA THROUGH ALL OF THAT.
THE QUESTION THAT I WANT TO ASK IS, GIVEN THE WIDE RANGING AMENDMENTS PROPOSED OR REQUESTED BY THE EUC AND THOSE WE'RE ABOUT TO WALK THROUGH TONIGHT, WHAT HAPPENS TO THOSE? DO YOU ALL CONSIDER WHICH YOU WISH TO MODIFY THE EXISTING DRAFT GENERATION OR RESOURCE PLAN? DO THEY AND, AND MAKE SOME OF THOSE CHANGES AND SEND THE REST UP TO CITY COUNCIL WITH, UH, THE OTHER GUYS ASKED FOR THESE AND WE'RE NOT READY TO BUY 'EM? DO YOU SEND UP ALL OF THE COMMISSION REQUESTED CHANGES AS A STANDALONE WITH IN COMPANION WITH THE DRAFT GENERATION OR RESOURCE PLAN WITHOUT ANY MODIFICATIONS? I MEAN, WHAT HAPPENS TO EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENED LAST NIGHT INTO WHAT WE'RE ABOUT TO DISCUSS TONIGHT, PLEASE.
I'M GONNA, UH, LISA MARTIN AUSTIN ENERGY CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER.
I'M GONNA LOOK TO AMY AND NATASHA FOR SOME PROCEDURAL, UM, SUPPORT HERE.
I, I WILL SAY THAT, UM, THE CITY COUNCIL, RIGHT, THE, THE ELECTRIC UTILITY COMMISSION, UH, HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF RECOMMENDING, MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS ON AUSTIN ENERGY ITEMS. AND SO WE PRESENTED THE PLAN TO THEM IN ITS DRAFT FORM LAST NIGHT.
UM, AND THERE WAS A, A MOTION TO ACCEPT THAT PLAN A SECOND.
AND THEN THEY WENT THROUGH A SERIES OF AMENDMENTS.
UM, THOSE AMENDMENTS, SOME OF THEM GOT ADOPTED AND SOME OF THEM DID NOT.
THEY WERE EACH TAKEN UP ONE BY ONE.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, AS THE BODY RESPONSIBLE FOR ADVISING THE COUNCIL ON THIS RESOURCE GENERATION PLAN, THEN THAT WILL GO TO COUNSEL AS A RECOMMENDATION TO, TO COUNSEL.
[00:10:01]
THEY VOTED TO RECOMMEND THE PLAN WITH THE AMENDMENTS THAT PASSED.UM, AND SO THOSE WILL GO TO COUNSEL, UH, YOU KNOW, AS, AS FOR CONSIDERATION WHEN THEY LOOK TO VOTE ON THE A RECOMMENDED DRAFT PLAN, UM, NEXT TO NEXT FRI THURSDAY, EXCUSE ME, ON THE 12TH.
SO, DOES THE FACT THAT YOU WERE EFFECTIVELY NEGOTIATING WITH THE EUC LAST NIGHT IN TERMS OF THE MAGNITUDE OR RELEVANCE OF DIFFERENT AMENDMENTS, ARE THERE ANY OF THOSE THAT YOU GUYS WOULD SAY, OR POTENTIALLY THE ONES THAT WE DISCUSSED TONIGHT WHERE YOU ALL WOULD SAY, YEP, THOSE ARE GOOD.
WE'RE GONNA MODIFY THE PLAN BEFORE WE SEND IT UP, OR POTENTIALLY, OR, SO THERE'S, THERE'S, WE'RE GONNA WALK THROUGH ALL OF THIS AND AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GONNA ACCEPT, BUT IT'S POSSIBLE THAT YOU'LL ACCEPT SOME OF THEM, AND THEN THE REST OF THEM WILL BE, SO, SO THERE'S GONNA BE THIS GIANT LIST OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS FROM THE TWO COMMISSIONS AND, AND WHATEVER PLAN YOU'VE INCORPORATED, WHETHER YOU'VE INCORPORATED ANY AT ALL.
SO ALL OF THOSE ARE GONNA GO AS COMPANION PIECES NEXT WEEK, IS THAT CORRECT? YES.
SO BECAUSE WE ARE OFFICIALLY WORKING WITH THE EUC ON THIS PLAN, WE MAY INCORPORATE THEIR AMENDMENTS INTO THE DOCUMENT ITSELF.
IF WE'RE GOOD WITH THEM, YOUR, AND ANYTHING WE DON'T WOULD GO TO COUNSEL WITH AS A RECOMMENDATION BY THE UC.
ANYTHING YOU RECOMMEND WILL GO TO COUNSEL AS A RECOMMENDATION BY THE RMC, BUT NOT INCORPORATED INTO THE DOCUMENT.
VICE CHAIR, UH, WHERE I'M GONNA READ THIS INTO THE RECORD.
WHEREAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN HAS PARTICIPATED IN THE REVIEW AND DEVELOPMENT OF A PROPOSED GENERATION PLAN FOR AUSTIN ENERGY.
THAT WILL BE A GUIDING DOCUMENT THROUGH 2035.
AND WHEREAS THE FINAL DOCUMENT WILL BE PIVOTAL IN DEVELOPMENT IN IMPLEMENTATION OF CLEAN ENERGY PROGRAMS THAT ALLOW THE UTILITY TO GREATLY REDUCE AND POSSIBLY ELIMINATE CARBON EMISSIONS AND AIR POLLUTION WHILE SAVING CONSUMERS MONEY AT THE SAME TIME.
AND WHEREAS SOME PARTS OF THE DRAFT GENERATION PLAN CAN BE IMPROVED, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE COMMISSION MAKE THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO MODIFY THE GENERATION PLAN.
THE FIRST ITEM, LEASING, INSTEAD OF OWNING COMBUSTION TURBINES TO AVOID STRANDED INVESTMENT OF NEW COMBUSTION TURBINES THAT MAY NOT BE USED MUCH BEYOND 2035, AND TO AVOID INCREASED COST OF IMPORTING ELECTRICITY UNTIL SUCH TIME AS TRANSMISSION LINE UPGRADES ARE MADE, COUNCIL SHOULD CONSIDER LEASING INSTEAD OF OWNING COMBUSTION TURBINES.
UM, THIS WAS A COMPROMISE, UH, THAT TRIED TO DEAL WITH BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE.
UH, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR COMMISSIONER DAVIS, BUT IN HER COMMENTS THAT I'M LOOKING AT, UH, SHE'S ASKED, SHE'S COMMENTED SEVERAL TIMES, GREAT IDEA, BUT WHY IS THIS IN THE GENERATION PLAN? AND MY RESPONSE TO ALL OF THE TIMES SHE SAID, THIS IS BECAUSE I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THIS BECAUSE I WANT TO PUT EMPHASIS ON THIS.
I WANT THIS TO BE PART OF A POLICY DOCUMENT.
I HOPE THAT SUFFICIENTLY CONVINCES YOU, BUT IF IT DOESN'T, AT LEAST YOU KNOW WHY.
UM, AND WITH THAT, UH, I WILL TAKE, UM, UH, I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT AT LEAST FOR PURPOSES OF DISCUSSION.
UH, THE FIRST ITEM, LEASING INSTEAD OF OWNING COMBUSTION TURBINES.
AND IF THERE'S A SECOND, THEN, UH, WE CAN DISCUSS IT.
SECOND, I'M, EXCUSE ME, I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK IF THIS IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO DO THIS, OR IF WE SHOULD, YOU KNOW, PUT IT UP FOR PEOPLE TO MAKE AMENDMENTS AND CONSIDER ON THE, THE RESOLUTION AS A WHOLE.
AND SO I'M KIND OF LOOKING FOR FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMISSION.
[00:15:01]
REALLY LONG FOUR AND A HALF HOUR WAY, OR IF WE GENERALLY LIKE WHAT WE SEE HERE, AND THEN WE WANT TO DO A FEW INSERTS OR CHANGES, THAT MIGHT BE A MORE, UH, EFFECTIVE WAY TO DO THAT.I'M GAME, BUT, UH, I, I THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE SIMPLER AND QUICKER, BUT IT, I I, I WILL, UM, DEFER TO YOUR JUDGMENT.
COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN, YOU HAVE THOUGHTS BEFORE? WE, I, I, I WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE TAKE THESE ONE AT A TIME, SOME OF THE ONES IN, UM, COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ'S COM COMMENTS, AND THOSE, UM, SOME OF THE ONES IN, IN COMMISSIONER ROBBINS AND AND LIST, WHICH INCLUDES SOME FROM MS. COMMISSIONER FARMER, SEEM WERE ALREADY ADDRESSED LAST NIGHT.
UM, SO I THINK IT WOULD BE USEFUL FOR US TO DO THESE ONE AT A TIME AND, AND SET LIKE A, JUST FOR YS A 10 MINUTE LIMIT ON ANYONE, ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT ON THIS ITEM.
'CAUSE I MEAN, I, FOR ONE, DON'T HAVE A LOT OF CHANGES.
WHAT I DO IS GONNA BE A PRETTY CRISP BASK, AND I PROMISE NOT TO WAX ON TOO LONG.
AND I ENCOURAGE ALL OF MY, ALL OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS TO, TO RIP THROUGH THIS AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN WITHOUT VIOLATING YOUR PRINCIPLES AND INTEGRITY.
SO, BUT YOU DON'T NEED TO SHARE EVERYTHING YOU KNOW, ON EVERY TOPIC.
COMMISSIONER TI FOR THOSE WHO ARE AT HOME, YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP.
DID, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO WEIGH IN ON HOW WE HANDLE THIS AS WE GO FORWARD? I WAS GONNA SUGGEST SOMETHING SIMILAR, BASICALLY THAT WE JUST TRY TO SCAN THE RESOLUTION HERE AND TRY TO IDENTIFY THE AREAS THAT WE LIKE, THINK ARE MOST IMPORTANT TO TALK ABOUT AND START THERE.
SO IF WE LIKE ALL AGREE ON AN ITEM, WE PROBABLY SHOULDN'T REALLY WASTE TIME TALKING ABOUT IT, BUT IF SOMETHING IS VERY STRONGLY CONTENTIOUS ACROSS MULTIPLE PARTIES, THEN WE SHOULD SPEND ENERGY THERE.
SO I THINK LIKE A QUICK SCAN FIRST, AND THEN LIKE A GO BACK AS THE STRATEGY.
I WOULD RECOMMEND COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN.
DO, DO YOU WANNA DO LIKE A NON-BINDING TEST VOTE ON EACH OF THESE, PAUL OR WHOEVER THE SPONSOR IS, READ THE ITEM AND, AND WE DO A HOW MANY YESES, HOW MANY WANNA DISCUSS THIS, HOW MANY NOS 'CAUSE THAT'LL, THAT'LL TELL US WHERE TO SPEND THE TIME.
AND, AND YEAH, I THINK THAT MIGHT BE, MIGHT WORK A LITTLE BIT BETTER.
'CAUSE I MEAN, A LOT OF THIS STUFF IS JUST GONNA, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO RAISE YOUR HAND.
UM, THE, THAT WAY, LIKE I SAID, YOU CAN KIND OF GET THROUGH THINGS A LITTLE BIT FASTER.
UM, AND IF THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, EASY FRIENDLY AMENDMENTS, IF I COULD JUST SAY, YEAH, I'M GONNA HAVE ONE ON THAT, AND WE JUST KEEP RIGHT ON CHUGGING ALONG.
UM, AND THAT MAY BE AN EFFECTIVE WAY TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS.
EVERYBODY FEELING SPRY? ALL RIGHT, LET'S GIVE IT A TRY.
VICE CHAIR ROBBINS NUMBER ONE.
DO YOU WANNA DO THE SHOW OF HANDS? WE JUST, WE JUST DO THAT.
SO, UH, ITEM ONE LEASED INSTEAD OF OWNING COMBUSTION TURBINES, UM, HOW ARE WE FEELING ABOUT THIS ONE AS A GROUP? WELL, I'M FOR IT.
IF I COULD JUST GET THE FOLKS AT HOME TO AT LEAST RAISE A HAND, WHAT
AND I'M JUST WANT TO TAKE THE TEMPERATURE ON P PEOPLE FEELING LIKE, SHOULD THIS JUST SAY LIKE, NO COMBUSTION TURBINES, OR IS THAT JUST GONNA BE LIKE, IS THAT GONNA GET US NOWHERE AND NOT BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY? I'M TRYING, UH, THIS IS THE, THE, THE MOST, AS AL BRADEN SAID, IT'S THE MOST CONTENTIOUS ITEM THAT WE WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH.
AND THIS IS A COMPROMISE BETWEEN THE TWO SIDES.
UH, YEAH, I JUST WONDER LIKE WHAT IS GONNA BE THE MOST, IF, IF, IF WE, I ASSUME WE WOULD ALL PREFER THERE, LIKE THEY'RE JUST NO ADDITIONAL COMBUSTION TURBINES WERE PURCHASED OR EVEN LEASED, LIKE, OR USED.
SO IS IT A BETTER USE OF OUR POWER TO SAY LIKE, HEY, LET'S, LET'S DO THAT AND JUST SAY LIKE, NO, THIS RESOLUTION SAYS LIKE, THERE SHOULD BE NONE BECAUSE THEY'RE ULTIMATELY GONNA COMPROMISE ON IT ANYWAY AND DO OR SHOULD OR IF WE PUT OUR STAKE IN THE GROUND AT LIKE, YOU SHOULD LEASE NOT BUY, WELL, IS THAT CLOSER TO BUY, THEREFORE THEY'RE MORE LIKELY TO BUY? DOES THAT, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? I DON'T WANNA OVERTHINK THIS ON LIKE, THE VERY FIRST ITEM.
AND IF PEOPLE ARE NOT FEELING LIKE THIS IS A GOOD PLACE TO SPEND TIME, I WOULD ALSO RESPECT THAT.
AND, AND, AND I WOULD SAY YES AS IS IF I, BUT THAT'S THE ONLY THING I WANTED TO TAKE.
[00:20:01]
COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN, UH, THANK YOU.WE HAVE, WE HAVE SIX VOTES OF PEOPLE WHO ARE WILLING TO HOLD OUR NOSE AND GO WITH LEASE.
I, MY READ OF THE AUSTIN ENERGY SITUATION IS THEY'D LIKE A LOT MORE THAN THREE.
WHAT IS IT? 2 75 OR 300 MEGAWATTS OF TURBINES.
AND THAT THEY CAME DOWN A LOT TO GET TO HERE.
SO I THINK WE SHOULD TAKE A, A WIN ON LEASING RATHER THAN, THAN, I DON'T THINK IT'S FEASIBLE TO, TO GO WITH NONE.
AND I THINK THAT YOU OVERESTIMATE THIS, UM, COMMISSION'S POWERS,
THAT, THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I FIGURED.
AND, AND I'M ON BOARD TOO, SO, YEAH.
SO IT APPEARS THAT WE'VE HAD, WE HAVE A GENERAL CONSENSUS SYNONYMOUS.
WHAT WHAT ABOUT COMMISSIONER DAVIS? SHE PUT IT HEAD.
UH, ITEM TWO, REQUIRING HEAT PUMP WATER HEATERS IN THE BUILDING ENERGY CODE, THE COMMISSION, UH, THE COMMISSION IS ON RECORD RECOMMENDING COUNCIL REQUIRE HEAT PUMP WATER HEATERS FOR ALL ELECTRIC HOMES AS A PERFORMANCE OPTION IN THE ENERGY BUILDING CODE.
BECAUSE OF HUGE ENERGY SAVINGS, A BUILDING CODE AMENDMENT PROCESS SHOULD TAKE PLACE WITH IMPLEMENTATION, UH, NO LATER THAN OCTOBER 1ST, 2025.
YOU'LL NOTE THAT THAT DATE, UH, IS IN THE RESOLUTION SEVERAL TIMES.
AND ALTHOUGH I'M NOT GONNA BE HORRIBLY UPSET IF THINGS ARE NOT DONE ON THAT EXACT DATE, I, I PUT IT THERE BECAUSE I, I THINK WE NEED TO CONVEY THAT THIS CAN'T BE JUST A, WE'LL GET TO IT EVENTUALLY.
THAT THERE, THERE'S GOT TO BE SOME TIME CONSTRAINT ON IT.
WE'RE JUST, CAN I JUST GET A GENERAL MOOD OF THE ROOM
WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE, PASSIVE HOUSE PILOT.
UH, I, UM, CREDIT THIS TO, UH, COMMISSIONER FARMER.
THE COMMISSION IS ON RECORD RECOMMENDING COUNSEL CREATE A PILOT PROGRAM FOR PASSIVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
THIS SHOULD BEGIN NO LATER THAN OCTOBER 1ST, 2025.
COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN? NO, I'M RAISING MY HEAD.
I THOUGHT YOU HAD A COMMENT FIRST.
I'M SEEING GENERAL SUPPORT ACROSS THE BOARD.
HOW ABOUT THE FOLKS AT HOME? UH, I I DON'T LOVE THIS ONE.
I I THINK IT KIND OF MUDDIES THE MESSAGE A LITTLE BIT.
I THINK IT'S ONE OF THE LIKE PROBABLY THE LESS EFFECTIVE WAYS.
SO IF WE'RE GONNA LIKE, USE OUR VOICE, I THINK HAVING HIGH SIGNALS VERY IMPORTANT AND TO REALLY ONLY SPEAK ON THE THINGS THAT ARE VERY, VERY IMPORTANT HIGH.
I THINK THIS ONE DOESN'T, I'M PRO PASSIVE HOUSE TO BE CLEAR, BUT I'M NOT SURE IF THIS ONE REACHES THE BAR OF CLEARING THE SIGNAL TO NOISE THRESHOLD.
WOULD YOU LIKE OF THE KIND OF FLUID WOULD LIKE PUT THIS ONE TO THE SIDE? WE CAN DISCUSS IT AGAIN LATER.
COMMISSIONER DAVIS IS NODDING HER HEAD SEEMING TO AS SENT TO THAT TREATMENT AS WELL.
WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO NUMBER FOUR.
UH, BATTERY VIRTUAL POWER PLANT PROGRAM.
THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THAT COUNCIL IMPLEMENT A PILOT PROGRAM TO MAKE USE OF BATTERIES AND OTHER DEMAND RESPONSE TECHNOLOGIES.
UH, THIS SHOULD BEGIN OCTOBER 1ST, 2025.
UH, WHERE DOES THAT FALL ON THE CITY OF AUSTIN? FISCAL CALENDAR.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS ECONOMICALLY PLAUSIBLE.
I WAS WONDERING WHERE THAT DATE WAS COMING FROM IN ALL THESE THINGS.
UH, ANYONE HAVE ANY STRONG FEELINGS AGAINST OR FOR, OR RAISE A HAND IF YOU'RE GENERALLY SPEAKING.
OKAY, WITH THIS ONE? I, I'M GENERALLY OKAY WITH IT.
I JUST WANTED TO ASK, UM, JUST 'CAUSE THERE'S SO MUCH TEXT THAT HAS BEEN FLYING AROUND.
LIKE, THERE WERE SOME NUMBERS FOR BAT LIKE EXPECTED BATTERY DEPLOYMENT IN THE PLAN ALREADY, RIGHT? THIS IS JUST ABOUT DOING A VPP SPECIFICALLY.
DO I HAVE THAT RIGHT? NO, I DON'T THINK THERE ARE NUMBERS.
I DON'T THINK THERE ARE NUMBERS ON BATTERY DEPLOYMENT IN THE PLAN.
I SEE A LOT OF BATTERY, WELL MEGAWATT HOUR NUMBERS IN MY LIFE.
SO MAKE, THAT WOULD BE MY THING I WANNA ADD HERE IS LIKE A TARGET.
'CAUSE THE VPP CAN BE LIKE FOUR BATTERIES AND THAT WOULD NOT BE IMPRESSIVE.
UH, I BELIEVE THAT WE RECENTLY VICE CHAIR ROBBINS, WE'RE GONNA TRAIN YOU PEOPLE.
IT'S GONNA HAPPEN, I BELIEVE THAT WE RECENTLY APPROVED,
[00:25:01]
UH, IS THIS SHOT IN FRE? UH, I BELIEVE THAT WE RECENTLY, UH, APPROVED, UH, OR ASKED COUNSEL TO APPROVE A GRANT PROPOSAL, UH, IN WHICH SOLAR AND BATTERIES, UH, WOULD BE INSTALLED IN LOW INCOME HOUSES.AND I BELIEVE THAT, UH, TIM HARVEY, UH, GAVE US AN ESTIMATE OF HOW MUCH PEAK DEMAND THAT WOULD SAVE.
UM, OTHER THAN THAT I KNOW OF NO GOAL THAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED.
COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN, UM, THE CITY OF AUSTIN AND AUSTIN ENERGY HAVE RECEIVED A CHUNK OF THE SOLAR FOR ALL EPA GRANT MONEY, WHICH WILL BE SPENT IN, UM, ON SOLAR AND BATTERIES FOR SEVERAL LOW INCOME AND, AND HARD TO REACH COMMUNITY PROJECTS THAT COULD BE USED FOR BATTERY AND VPP.
AND, UM, I KNOW THAT, THAT HOLLY AND OTHERS ARE NOT HERE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES, BUT I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE AE COULD, COULD GET A, GET THIS THING MOVING QUICKLY BY, INSTEAD OF TRYING TO INVENT THEIR OWN PROGRAM, GO DO EXACTLY WHAT DAVID ENERGY OR OCTOPUS ENERGY ARE ALREADY DOING VERY SUCCESSFULLY.
AND WHICH MEANS PAYING FOR STUFF RATHER THAN JUST BEGGING OR USING OLD PROGRAMS THAT PEOPLE HAVE SHOWN BY NOT SHOWING UP THAT THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN.
SO I, I FULLY SUPPORT THIS AND WOULD NOT OPPOSE HAVING A, AN EXPLICIT GOAL ON THE PILOT PROGRAM.
THE ONLY REASON I'M NOT OFFERING A NUMBER IS BECAUSE MS. MARTIN AND HER STAFF WERE VERY EMPHATIC LAST NIGHT AND IN PREVIOUS CONVERSATIONS ABOUT HOW PUTTING, PUTTING IN SPECIFIC NUMBERS MEANS THAT, THAT IT IS SORT OF SETTING UP STAFF TO FAIL.
AND I DO NOT WISH TO DO THAT, BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, I DON'T WANNA GIVE THEM TOO MUCH ROOM TO NOT TRY.
CAN I INTERJECT FOR JUST A SEC? UM, WE DO HAVE STAFF AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS AS YOU, IF YOU WATCHED EUC LAST NIGHT, YOU KNOW THAT WHEN WE WENT THROUGH EVERY AMENDMENT WE GAVE FEEDBACK ON WHY IT WOULD OR WOULDN'T WORK.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANNA ALLOW THAT TONIGHT.
WE HAVE RICHARD, HOLLY AND SARAH ALL ONLINE AND AVAILABLE IF NEEDED.
AND OF COURSE, TIM AND LISA ARE HERE.
UM, LET'S KEEP GOING THROUGH THIS.
OKAY, SO ON NUMBER FOUR, DO WE HAVE CONSENSUS THAT WE'RE OKAY WITH THE LANGUAGE AS IT IS? COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ, ARE YOU RAISING YOUR HAND? THE ONLY OTHER THING I WAS GONNA POINT OUT WAS, UH, THE FIRST ITEM THAT I SENT WAS ALSO ON A VERY OVERLAPPING THING.
SO JUST THAT I'VE NO ISSUE WITH WHAT YOU WROTE.
JUST THAT WE SHOULD LOOK AT BOTH BEFORE WE MOVE ON THEM, BUT, SO HANDS ON FOUR.
SO IT LOOKED LIKE WE'RE OKAY ON NUMBER FOUR AS IS.
SO WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY HERE IS, IS THAT IF SOMEBODY HAS A STRONG OBJECTION OR AN OBJECTION WHERE THEY WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS THING MORE, SAY SO EARLY ON, AND THEN WE'LL PUT IT TO THE SIDE AND WE'LL KEEP CHUGGING ALONG AND THEN WE'LL START COMING BACK TO THINGS IN ORDER.
I THINK THAT WILL BE MORE PRODUCTIVE THAN BASICALLY KIND OF THE SEMI RELITIGATING THESE THINGS AS WE GO ALONG.
UH, IF I COULD JUST SEMI LITIGATE THIS TO SAVE TIME, UH, WOULD IT, UH, SUIT COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ IF WE ADDED, UH, A QUICK PHRASE ON NUMBER FOUR TO IMPLEMENT A PILOT PROGRAM, WHICH CAN INCLUDE INCENTIVES TO MAKE USE OF BATTERIES AND OTHER LET'S
YEAH, BECAUSE YOU'RE STARTING OFF WITH THIS.
SO ANYTHING YOU DO BEYOND THIS IS GONNA BE AN AMENDMENT, SO OH.
SO WE COULD ALWAYS TAKE A POTTY BREAK.
YOU GUYS COULD ALL GET TOGETHER AND COME UP WITH YOUR AMENDMENTS.
WE COULD DO THEM IN BULK AND DO IT THAT WAY.
BUT LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE.
'CAUSE I WAS GONNA BE HOME TODAY PLAYING WITH MY DUCK.
UH, ITEM NUMBER FIVE, GOALS FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY AND DEMAND SIDE PROGRAMS. THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS COUNCIL ADOPT THE FOLLOWING CLEAN ENERGY GOALS, 73% RENEWABLE ENERGY AS PERCENTAGE OF LOAD BY 2030, INCLUDING BOTH LOCAL AND NON-LOCAL RENEWABLE RESOURCES.
AT LEAST 205 MEGAWATTS OF LOCAL SOLAR BY 2027 AND AT LEAST 431 MEGAWATTS OF INSTALLED SOLAR CAPACITY BY 2035, INCLUDING 160 MEGAWATTS OF EXISTING CAPACITY.
AT LEAST 360 MEGAWATTS OF PEAK EFFICIENCY SAVINGS AND 269 MEGAWATTS OF DEMAND RESPONSE.
PEAK SAVINGS BY 2035, AT LEAST 40 MEGAWATTS OF LOCAL THERMAL STORAGE BY
[00:30:01]
2030 AND AT LEAST 50 MEGAWATTS OF LOCAL THERMAL STORAGE BY 2035 AT LEAST ONE THERMAL STORAGE INSTALLATION SHOULD BE TARGETED AT A GROCERY STORE OR FOOD PROCESSING PLANT.UH, I THINK THAT'S A MISSPELL.
UH, IT SHOULD BE SINGULAR PLANTS, PLANT NOT PLANTS.
AND, UH, IF I COULD, UH, INTERJECT, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER DAVIS HAD RAISED THE ISSUE OF WHAT'S THIS ABOUT GROCERY STORES.
UH, THE REASON I INSERTED THAT IS BECAUSE THEORETICALLY, UH, WITH SOLAR AND, UH, THE AIR CONDITIONING AND CHILLING COVERED BY THERMAL STORAGE, YOU COULD, WELL, AGAIN, THEORETICALLY ALMOST TAKE THE ENTIRE GROCERY STORE OFF THE GRID FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.
AND I DON'T KNOW THAT, UH, THAT THERE'S BEEN SUCH AN INSTALLATION IN, UH, THIS, UH, SERVICE TERRITORY TO DATE.
SO I THOUGHT TO MAKE THAT SUGGESTION.
OKAY, EVERYBODY HAVE A CHANCE TO DIGEST THAT? IF I GET A ROOM TONE, I'M GONNA WANNA TALK ABOUT THIS ONE FOR SURE.
OKAY, I'LL SAVE NOT LITIGATE, BUT WANT TO LITIGATE LATER.
ITEM NUMBER SIX, REMOVING NUCLEAR LANGUAGE IN THE GEN PLAN.
UM, SINCE NUCLEAR PLANTS IN THE UNITED STATES, INCLUDING THE SOUTH TEXAS NUCLEAR PROJECT HAVE BEEN PLAGUED WITH COST OVERRUNS, DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO DOMESTIC FUEL, HAVE AND HAVE UNSOLVED ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS, SUCH AS RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND POTENTIALLY DEVASTATING ACCIDENTS, THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS COUNCIL REMOVE LANGUAGE SUPPORTING NUCLEAR POWER AS A FUTURE ENERGY SOURCE.
UH, IF I COULD GET A FEEL FOR THE ROOM.
EVERYBODY RAISE THEIR HAND IF WE THINK WE'RE GOOD WITH SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
I HEARING NO OBJECTIONS FROM THE CHEAP SHEETS.
COMMISSIONER DAVIS IS TRYING TALK.
OH, I THOUGHT SHE RAISED HER HAND LIKE SHE WAS JUST HAPPY.
OH,
PAUL, YOU DIDN'T TO DO YOU, DO YOU WANT THIS ITEM PULLED FOR DISCUSSION? NOT NECESSARILY.
I JUST PROBABLY WON'T VOTE FOR IT, BUT WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT WHEN THE TIME COMES IF YOU LIKE.
ITEM SEVEN, REVISED GREEN CHOICE PROGRAM TO FUND DISPATCHABLE RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING ENERGY STORAGE.
THE COMMISSION IS ON RECORD RECOMMENDING COUNCIL TO DIVERT GREEN CHOICE FUNDING FORMERLY SPENT ON WIND POWER TO MORE RELEVANT, THE MORE RELEVANT CHALLENGE OF RENEWABLE ENERGY DISPATCHABILITY.
THIS WOULD INCLUDE GEOTHERMAL ENERGY AND STORAGE BATTERIES.
WE RECOMMEND COUNCIL PLACE THIS POLICY IN THE GENERATION PLAN.
I AM SEEING A COUPLE OF HANDS RAISED.
I'M ASSUMING THEY'RE NOT UPSET.
ANYBODY FROM OUTSIDE? THINK YOU GOT A WINNER.
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, CONSERVATION, CONSERVATION BASED ELECTRIC RATE PILOT PROGRAM.
UH, THIS IS SORT OF A, A COMMISSIONER FARMER ITEM, ALTERNATIVE RATE STRUCTURE AND NOT, I, I MEAN I SUPPORT IT TOO.
ALTERNATIVE RATE STRUCTURES SUCH AS TIME OF USE AND REAL TIME PRICING.
INCENTIVIZE INNOVATIVE EQUIPMENT SUCH AS BATTERIES OFF PEAK ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING, AND ELECTRIC VEHICLE CONNECTIONS TO BUILDINGS.
THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS COUNCIL CREATE OR EXPAND ALTERNATIVE RATE STRUCTURES TO BEGIN OCTOBER 1ST, 2025.
I'M SEEING, I WANNA DISCUSS THIS ONE.
OH, ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS BEING PULLED.
I THINK THE LANGUAGE IN ITEM NUMBER NINE IS THERE'S EITHER A WORD MISSING OR A WORD WRONG IN THE TITLE
I THINK, I THINK COST IS IS MISSING.
I WAS JUST SAYING, UH, I THINK ITEM NUMBER NINE, UH, THE TITLE NEEDS TO BE ADJUSTED OR
[00:35:01]
AMENDED.UH, STUDY OF WAYS TO REDUCE ROOFTOP SOLAR COST.
I WAS GONNA SAY COST OF ROOFTOP SOLAR.
WE'LL TACK THAT ON FOR FRIENDLY AMENDING.
DECOM, THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS COUNCIL ASK AUSTIN ENERGY TO INVESTIGATE POTENTIAL WAYS TO REDUCE THE COST OF CUSTOMER OWNED SOLAR, INCLUDING INSTALLATION PRACTICES IN OTHER COUNTRIES.
THIS STUDY SHOULD BE COMPLETED BY OCTOBER 1ST, 2025.
THIS IS PLENTY OF TIME TO SEND SOMEONE FROM AUSTIN ENERGY OVERSEAS TO DO ONSITE INVESTIGATION.
UM, OKAY, WELL, ASSUMING THAT IT'S ONLY THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, IS EVERYBODY ELSE GENERALLY SPEAKING OKAY, WITH THIS DOWN? NO, THAT WAS ACTUALLY, UH, AMY HIT THE THUMBS DOWN THING.
I DON'T KNOW WHY IT'S NOT SHOWING UP ON MY FACE, BUT YEAH, I'M, I LIKE THIS ONE.
AND BE SURE DAVIS ALSO IS SHAKING YOUR HEAD.
CREATE PILOT PROGRAM FOR TIERED INCENTIVE FOR TIERED IN INCENTIVES IN THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT FOR FOUR STRUCTURES.
UH, FRIENDLY AMENDMENT FOR BUILDING STRUCTURES THAT THAT EXCEED ENERGY BUILDING CODE.
BELIEVE IT OR NOT, I DID PROOFREAD THIS.
THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS COUNSEL IMPLEMENT AN INCENTIVE PROGRAM FOR BUILDINGS THAT EXCEED REQUIREMENTS IN THE ENERGY CODE.
THIS SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED NO LATER THAN OCTOBER 1ST, 2025.
LOOKING FOR A GENERAL TEMPERATURE CHECK IN THE ROOM.
IS THAT A SHAKE OF THE HEAD COMMISSIONER DAVIS, OR IS THAT A THUMBS UP? CAN'T TELL.
UH, I'M NOT CONVINCED ON THIS ONE.
ALL RIGHT, YOU CAN TAKE THAT ONE FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.
SO IN GENERAL, WE HAVE 1, 2, 3, 4 THAT SEEM TO BE UNANIMOUS AND THE OTHERS, UH, NEED DISCUSSION.
COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN, UM, I CAN OFFER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO ITEM EIGHT THAT MIGHT MOVE IT TO UNANIMOUS AND SAVE US SOME ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION TIME.
AND THAT'S ON THE CONSERVATION BASED ELECTRIC RATE PILOT PROGRAM.
I HAVE DONE SOME RATE DESIGN WORK AND IT'S A ROYAL PAIN IN THE BUTT AND THERE ARE A LOT OF EXISTING CITY AUSTIN ENERGY RATE STRUCTURES THAT WOULD NEED TO BE CONFORMED AND WRESTLED WITH, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
MY SUGGESTION IS THAT THIS, YOU CHANGE THE STARTING DATE TO IN 2026.
AND THAT'S MY ONLY FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
DOES THAT WORK FOR YOU, TREY? COOL.
ONE MORE INTO THE, I HOPE YOU UNANIM MR. REPORTS.
YEAH, I WAS JUST GONNA ASK WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH, DO WE WANT TO GO THROUGH AND DISCUSS ALL THESE THAT WE JUST READ, OR DO YOU WANT ME TO READ THESE AND MY ONES AND THEN WE CAN DO 'EM ALL AT ONCE? YEAH.
I MEAN, WE, WE START WITH THE BILL AND NOW YOU AMEND THE BILL, RIGHT? OR WHATEVER THE RESOLUTION.
SO AT THIS POINT, NOW WE'VE GOT LANGUAGE WE'VE AGREED TO, BUT NOW WE'VE GOT ITEM NUMBER THREE, FOR EXAMPLE.
SO THIS IS WHERE WE WOULD DISCUSS THIS, DECIDE IF IT'S TO BE AMENDED, DECIDE IF IT'S TO BE STRICKEN, AND THOSE ARE DONE AS AMENDMENTS.
SO, UM, FOR, THERE'S OVERLAP WITH COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ, BETWEEN COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ'S AND COMMISSIONER ROBERTS.
RIGHT? BUT I HAVE ONE RESOLUTION.
I THINK PART OF WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN IS WE'RE GONNA BE, IF WE DISCUSS THIS AND FOLD SOME OF THE IN, SO, SO EXAMPLE TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO ADD, SORRY, I KNOW I'M NOT USING THE MICROPHONE.
WELL, IF WE DECIDE WE'RE GOING TO ADD ITEM NUMBER NINE, WE WILL SAY, I WOULD LIKE TO USE THE LANGUAGE FROM COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ.
ITEM NUMBER TWO, WHATEVER ITEM NUMBER TWO IS, WE'RE GONNA TAKE THAT LANGUAGE AND PASTE IT INTO THIS, AND THAT WILL BE OUR NEW ITEM NUMBER NINE.
THAT IS WHAT THE PROCESS WILL BE ON HERE, BUT WE'RE GONNA START WITH, WITH THE VICE CHAIR'S RESOLUTION AND MAKE CHANGES TO THAT SO THAT THAT WAY WE DON'T HAVE TWO SEPARATE RESOLUTIONS THAT WE'RE WORKING FROM.
SO IT'S ON YOU TO KNOW WHERE THERE IS, WHERE IT FITS, WHAT OVERLAP, AND TO JUMP IN WITH YOUR ITEMS. THERE'S PROBABLY THREE AREAS OF OVERLAP AND THE ROSTER IS SEPARATE THERE.
[00:40:03]
OKAY.SO NOW, UH, LIKE I SAID, PART OF THIS IS, IS WE CAN HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF DISCUSSION.
AND THEN LIKE I SAID, WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS THEN WE HAVE SOMEBODY FORMALLY PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT.
I KNOW THIS ISN'T STRICTLY ROBERT'S RULES, BUT IT'S ABOUT AS CLOSE AS WE CAN GET FOR SOMETHING THAT'S KIND OF BEASTY LIKE THIS.
SO LET'S GO BACK TO NUMBER THREE, THE PASSIVE HOUSE, AND WE'LL DISCUSS AND THEN WE'LL DECIDE WHAT IT IS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO DO WITH THIS ONE.
LIKE I SAID, WHEN IT COMES TIME FOR FINAL LANGUAGE, THAT'S WHEN WE'LL HAVE A PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
OR IF WE DECIDE WE JUST CAN'T AGREE ON IT AT ALL, PROPOSAL TO STRIKE IT FROM THE LANGUAGE AND THAT'S HOW WE'LL PROCEED.
YOU COMMISSIONER FARMER, LEAD US OUT ON ITEM NUMBER THREE.
I THINK THAT, UM, THIS, I THINK WE CAN STRIKE THIS.
IT IS COVERED AND THEN MAYBE LIKE FOLD IN SOME MORE LANGUAGE TO NINE OR 10.
DO, DO YOU WANT TO PROPOSE TO, TO MAKE THIS SPECIFIC AMENDMENT TO NINE OR 10 NOW, JUST SO THIS DOESN'T GET LOST.
UM, I THINK WE CAN COVER THAT AS WE, WHEN WE GET DOWN THE LIST.
I MEAN, THIS ONE, LIKE, SO COUNCIL ALREADY PASSES RESOLUTION, SO WE'RE WAITING ON AUSTIN ENERGY TO COME BACK WITH THE PROGRAM.
UM, AND I THINK THAT THE INTENT OF THIS IS COVERED IN THE OTHER, THE ONE DOWN THE LIST.
SO YOU'RE RECOMMENDING TO STRIKE THIS ONE? MM-HMM.
OKAY, SO THEN YOU WOULD MAKE AN, YOU WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND, TO REMOVE ITEM THREE, AND THEN THERE'D BE A SECOND MOTION TO, UH, REMOVE ITEM THREE.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN.
ALL IN FAVOR, TURN ON YOUR CAMERAS.
FOR THOSE OF YOU AT HOME, WE GET TO DO THIS LIKE 400 TIMES.
I'M GENERALLY SEEING UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
WHAT DO I GOT HERE? UH, COMMISSIONER TI, COMMISSIONER TI IS OFF THE DA.
SO WE GOT 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 0, 1.
IS THAT HOW I RECORD THAT? OKAY.
I'M TRYING TO GET THUMBS THAT UP.
YEAH, I CAN SEE COMMISSIONER CITAS.
OH, WE CAN, YEAH, WE CAN'T SEE HIM ON CAMERA.
THAT'S BECAUSE YOU, YOU'RE PRESENTING.
YOU HAVE TO TURN, BUT I, I I AM REAL, UH, I AND HIS CAMERA ON.
IF WE GET TO THE POINT, WE'RE GONNA ACTUALLY BREAK QUO ON IT THEN.
WE'LL, I SUPPOSE WE'LL WORRY A LITTLE BIT MORE.
SO THIS HAS BEEN STRICKEN ON 8 0 0.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE WAS OUR NEXT ISSUE TO DISCUSS FURTHER THE GOALS FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY AND DEMAND SIDE PROGRAMS. UM, I DO, I DID NOT, UH, TAKE A NOTE TO SAY WHO IT WAS THAT WANTED TO DISCUSS THIS ONE FURTHER.
UH, I THINK IT WAS COMMISSIONER SA SARITA.
I I, I GUESS I'LL MAKE MY CASE SUCCINCTLY.
IF SOMETHING WAS TO CHANGE HERE, I THINK HAVING NO NUMBERS MAKES IT WORTHLESS.
SO THERE SHOULD BE SOME NUMBER, UM, TO, TO GIVE A TARGET.
AND I THINK EVEN PICKING LIKE A, A NUMBER THAT IS LIKE SMALL ENOUGH SUCH THAT IT DOES NOT SCARE ANYONE THAT NEEDS TO IMPLEMENT THE WORK BUT IS LARGE ENOUGH TO NOT BE JUST LIKE A TOKEN PROJECT, UM, IS LIKE THE RIGHT KIND OF SWEET SPOT THERE.
UM, SO I WOULD THROW OUT LIKE 50 MEGAWATTS AS LIKE AN ACHIEVABLE TARGET, MEGAWATT HOURS, HOWEVER YOU WANNA PHRASE IT.
UM, BY THE END OF THE YEAR OR MAYBE THE NEXT OCTOBER, ARE WE LOOKING AT FIVE OR NUMBER FIVE? NUMBER FOUR WE MOVED.
YEAH, WE SCROLLED DOWN ON, IT'S THE PREVIOUS ONE.
SO NUMBER FOUR, WE HAD CONSENSUS ON IT'S NUMBER FIVE.
I'M LOOKING AT FIVE I THE, THE GOALS, UH, FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY AND DEMAND SIDE PROGRAMS. I, I, IF I'M AN ERROR, I APOLOGIZE, BUT I THOUGHT YOU WERE THE PERSON THAT PULLED THIS, UH, COMMISSIONER SA SARITA.
YEAH, THIS ONE TOO, BUT I WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT NUMBER FOUR.
SO, UM, WE CAN I, YEAH, I DIDN'T MEAN TO SAY THAT I WAS GOOD WITH THIS ONE.
I THOUGHT I SAID THE OPPOSITE.
UM, I THINK NOT HAVING A NUMBER IS A YEAH.
I THINK IT'S WOULD BE BETTER TO NOT HAVE IT IT THAN TO HAVE IT WITH, UH, WITHOUT A NUMBER.
COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN? UM, I, I WOULD AGREE WITH PUTTING IN A NUMBER IF IT IS A SMALL NUMBER, 50 MEGAWATTS IS NOT ACHIEVABLE, NOR IS IT A PILOT PROGRAM.
THIS PROPOSES A PILOT PROGRAM.
I WOULD SAY THAT A PILOT IN THE CITY OF AUSTIN, WHICH HASN'T DONE A VPP BEFORE 10 MEGAWATTS IS A MUCH MORE APPROPRIATE NUMBER AND MORE ACHIEVABLE THAN ANYTHING HIGHER.
[00:45:02]
COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ? UH, SO I WAS JUST GONNA ASK IF, SO I HAVE, ONE OF MY ITEMS RELATES TO CUSTOMER CITED BATTERIES ALSO.SO ARE WE TRYING TO USE THIS OPPORTUNITY RIGHT NOW TO TRY TO INTEGRATE THEM OR DISCUSS INTEGRATING THEM? SO MAYBE I'M MISUNDERSTANDING HOW WE'RE I I RECOMMEND THAT WE TREAT THE BATTERY VIRTUAL POWER PLANT PROGRAM AS A WHOLLY SEPARATE ITEM THAN GET MORE CUSTOMER CITED BATTERIES AND THAT'S IT.
OR, AND, AND SO I THINK YOU SHOULD KEEP YOUR INCENTIVIZED CUSTOMER CITED BATTERIES.
YOU WANNA GET MORE BATTERIES ON THE GROUND VPPS AS A WAY TO DO THAT, BUT YOU CAN DO VPPS ON THEIR OWN.
I JUST DIDN'T KNOW 'CAUSE IT WAS LIKE SLASH SO I SUGGEST YOU KEEP YOURS SEPARATE AND WORDSMITH IT TO COMPLIMENT THIS.
SO, SO THAT'S MY, MY PROPOSAL IS IF, UM, COMMISSIONER SA IS WANTS A FIXED NUMBER, LET'S PUT, LET'S GIVE IT 10 MEGAWATTS AND NO MORE FOR THE PILOT.
DO WE KNOW? YEAH, I'M FINE WITH THAT.
I MEAN, SHOULD KEEP IN MIND THAT LIKE DVDS CAN USE BATTERIES THAT ARE ALREADY INSTALLED.
LIKE IT DOESN'T MEAN ALL THOSE BATTERIES WOULD NEED TO GET INSTALLED.
SO THE, THE PROBLEM ANYWAY, FINE.
THE PROBLEM IS IN FINDING THE BATTERIES, THE PROBLEM IS SETTING UP THE PROGRAM AND THEN RECRUITING ENOUGH PEOPLE WITH BATTERIES AND, AND WILLING TO RUN THEIR THERMOSTATS OR MODIFY THEIR OTHER BUILDING EQUIPMENT TO DO THAT.
SO HAVING BATTERIES ON THE GROUND IS THE LEAST OF THE PROBLEMS WITH SETTING UP A PROGRAM LIKE THIS.
SO, UH, WE VOTED ON THE RECEPTION OF THE GRANT FOR THE LOW INCOME HOUSING SOLAR PLUS BATTERIES WITH A VPP.
SO THIS WOULD BE, IT SEEMS LIKE REDUNDANT WITH THAT PROGRAM.
I MEAN, NOT LIKE WE DON'T NEED MORE BATTERIES, BUT I THINK IS THAT, ARE WE SITTING A SEPARATE PROGRAM? THE SOLAR FOR ALL INSTALLATIONS WILL NOT BE IN PLACE BY OCTOBER ONE.
AND THEY WERE NOT FUNDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF BEING IN A VPP, ALTHOUGH THEY COULD DEFINITELY PARTICIPATE AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE.
OKAY, SO WE SHOULDN'T TAKE LONG RUN.
THE SOLAR FOR ALL INSTALLATIONS COULD BE USED FOR THIS PURPOSE, BUT SHORT RUN, NOT FOR THE FIRST PILOT, NO.
I I I THINK MAYBE THEN, UH, TO COMMISSIONER ER'S POINT, LIKE ADDING LANGUAGE AROUND LIKE LEVERAGING EXISTING BATTERY CUSTOMERS.
LIKE, LIKE THERE ARE A SIGNIFICANT BATTERY.
IT JUST SAYS MAKE USE OF BATTERIES AND OTHER DEMAND RESPONSE TECHNOLOGIES.
VICE CHAIR ROBBINS, YOU HAD A HAND UP THERE.
I JUST LOOKING FOR LANGUAGE AS WHERE, WHERE TO INSERT THE 10 MEGAWATTS.
THIS SHOULD BEGIN IN OCTOBER 1ST, 2025.
AND TARGET SIZE OF A SIZE OF 10 MEGAWATT.
SAY AGAIN, PLEASE JUST ADD AND TARGET A SIZE OF 10 MEGAWATTS.
LIKE BY THIS FOLLOWING, BY THE SAME TIME, THE FOLLOWING BY LIKE OCTOBER, 2026.
IF I CAN GET EVERYBODY TO RAISE THEIR HANDS, I'LL DO IT.
WELL, I NEED A, I NEED A A MOTION AND A SECOND FIRST AND THEN WE CAN JUST DO THE HAND.
I MOVE TO APPROVE, UH, ITEM FOUR, BATTERY VIRTUAL POWER PLANT PROGRAM AS COMMISSIONER FARMER GOT THERE FIRST.
I'LL LET YOU HAVE THE SECOND THOUGH.
HOW'S THAT SECOND
IF EVERYBODY CAN RAISE THEIR HAND IF THEY'RE OKAY WITH THIS AMENDMENT.
ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS IN THE CAN ITEM NUMBER FIVE, GOALS FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY AND DEMAND SIDE PROGRAMS. OKAY.
AGAIN, COMMISSIONER TI I BELIEVE YOU PULLED THIS.
SO TELL US YEAH, THAT, THAT, THAT WAS MINE.
THE REASON WHY IS BECAUSE I THINK THAT THE NUMBERS VERSUS THE DATES HERE ARE, ARE TOTALLY WRONG.
LIKE ERCOT PROJECTS THAT BETWEEN 2020 AND 2030 DEMAND WILL DOUBLE IN ALL OF TEXAS.
I THINK WE WOULD EXPECT LIKE AUSTIN TO FOLLOW A SIMILAR TREND.
AND SO JUST GOING FROM 160 MEGAWATTS OF SOLAR TO 430 IN 10 YEARS IS JUST TOO SMALL OF A NUMBER.
I, I DON'T HAVE THE MATH PUT TOGETHER FOR LIKE, WHAT WOULD'VE REASONABLE NUMBER BE, BUT IT'S LIKE,
[00:50:01]
IT'S LIKE BARELY.AND THEN SOME COMM COMMISSIONER, UM, IF I MAY, UH, ALL OF THESE NUMBERS, UH, OR MOST OF THESE NUMBERS CAME FROM A STUDY THAT WAS COMMISSIONED BY AUSTIN ENERGY, UH, UH, A FIRM CALLED UH, DNV.
UM, IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT THE ACTUAL STUDY THAT WAS DONE HAS NOT BEEN RELEASED AND THAT WE ARE ONLY GETTING WHAT IS CONSIDERED, UH, UH, ECONOMICALLY VIABLE RESOURCES.
BUT I, I WOULD LOVE FOR YOU OR ANYBODY ELSE HERE TO MAKE A COMPELLING CASE AS TO HOW AND WHY WE CAN'T EXCEED THESE NUMBERS.
BUT I, GIVEN THAT AUSTIN ENERGY HAS SOME AMOUNT OF SATURATION FROM ITS, UH, 42, UH, TWO YEAR HISTORY IN CONSERVATION AND SOLAR AND GIVEN, UH, THAT I JUST DON'T LIKE TO THROW OUT, I FELT THESE WERE MORE JUSTIFIABLE.
UH, I GUESS TELL, TELL ME WHY YOU'RE RIGHT IS LIKE, IS THE ANSWER YOUR QUESTION,
UM, I, YEAH, I JUST, I JUST GO BACK TO THE, LIKE THE 10 X, UH, SORRY, THE TWO X BETWEEN, UH, UH, IT'S 2020 TO 2030.
SOLAR IS A VERY LOW COST TYPE OF GENERATION.
I THINK WE JUST NEED TO LIKE, IF, I GUESS THE IDEA HERE IS LIKE WE, WE SHOULD BE SETTING BIG GOALS BECAUSE THIS IS A LONG TIME SCALE AND THEY, IT IS OKAY FOR THEM TO BE AGGRESSIVE AND, AND, AND LOFTY AND LIKE POINT US IN THE DIRECTION WE WANNA GO AS A CITY.
UM, AND I THINK JUST GETTING VERY COMFORTABLE WITH LOTS OF SOLAR AND COMMENSURATE BATTERIES IS JUST LIKE THE LIFE WE'RE GOING TO BE LIVING FROM AN, AN ENERGY PERSPECTIVE.
AND SO, UM, YEAH, I, IT FEELS NOT CRAZY TO BE LIKE DOUBLE BY 27 AND, AND AND LIKE FOUR X BY 35 AT, AND I HOPE THAT'S AN UNDERSHOOT BASICALLY.
COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN IN, IN MY HEART, I AM HIGHLY SYMPATHETIC WITH COMMISSIONER SERITA'S POSITION IN MY HEAD.
IT IS NOT FEASIBLE FOR US TO PLACE WILDLY AMBITIOUS AND WHOLLY UNTESTED GOALS THAT STAFF HAS SAID ON THE RECORD LAST NIGHT AND IN OTHER CONTEXTS THAT THEY DON'T KNOW IF THEY CAN ACHIEVE.
AND THAT, AND, AND IT TAKES MONEY TO SAVE MONEY.
IT TAKES MONEY TO, TO SAVE ENERGY.
AND WE DON'T YET HAVE A SOLID SYSTEM OR, OR A LOT OF MONEY TO, TO NOT TO ACHIEVE THE MAGNITUDE OF WAVING YOUR HANDS AND SAYING, LET'S DOUBLE THIS OR QUADRUPLE THIS.
JUST BECAUSE ERCOT, WHICH DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO FORECAST LOAD AND IS MAKING S**T UP EVERY DAY, IS SAYING WE COULD HAVE EVERY, EVERY CRYPTO MINER AND DATA CENTER IN THE COUNTRY SHOWING UP IN OUR SERVICE TERRITORY TOMORROW.
THERE ARE NO GROUNDS, NO CREDIBLE GROUNDS FOR ERCOT DEMAND FORECAST AND NO CREDIBLE GROUNDS FOR SUPPOSING THAT WE CAN JUST WILLY-NILLY DOUBLE OR QUADRUPLE THESE GOALS.
I DON'T THINK IT'S REASONABLE.
THE FARTHEST I CAN DO AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THIS PARTICULAR, AT LEAST ITEM BULLET NUMBER TWO HERE IS ROUND UP TO 400 MEGAWATTS OF PEAK EFFICIENCY SAVINGS AND 300 MEGAWATTS OF DEMAND RESPONSE PEAK SAVINGS BY 2035, COVERING BOTH SUMMER AND WINTER PEAKS.
COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ, YOU'VE BEEN PATIENT.
UH, I WAS JUST GONNA ADD ONE THING TO THE IDEA OF BEING MORE AMBITIOUS ON SOLAR.
THE DNV STUDY DID IDENTIFY A TECHNICALLY FEASIBLE, UH, LEVEL.
SO IT WOULD BE AN OPTION FOR US TO PUT THAT IN THERE AS NOT NECESSARILY A TARGET,
[00:55:01]
BUT A NUMBER THAT WE'RE PUTTING IN THE RESOLUTION.THE, THE LEVEL WAS FIVE 20, RIGHT? SO FOUR 30 TO FIVE 20.
THE FIRST LEVEL WAS THE ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE, MEANING THIS IS LITERALLY, THIS COSTS LESS FOR US TO DO FOUR 30 THEN WHATEVER WE HAVE TODAY.
AND THE FIVE 20 NUMBER WAS HOWEVER THEY CAME UP WITH IT, SOME HIGHER NUMBER THAT WOULD BE POSSIBLE, RIGHT? SO IF, IF YOU WANTED, IF WE WANTED TO PUT IN A HIGHER GOAL, YOU COULD PUT THAT IN THERE TO GIVE LIKE A RANGE BETWEEN THE TWO.
UH, VICE CHAIR ROBBINS, I, SIMILAR TO COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN, I DO IN, IN MY HEART, I WOULD LIKE TO FIND A WAY, BUT I JUST CANNOT SEE IT.
UH, IN CALIFORNIA, WHICH IS THE MOST ADVANCED STATE IN THE COUNTRY, THEY HAVE 7% SOLAR.
I THINK IN TEXAS IT'S ABOUT 2.5%, UH, ROOFTOP SOLAR IN CALIFORNIA, THEY REQUIRE SOLAR IN THE BUILDING CODE.
THEY'VE BEEN WELL AHEAD OF, UH, TEXAS FOR DECADES IN THIS, UH, IN CLEAN ENERGY AND, AND TO, TO THINK THAT WE CAN DO BETTER THAN THAN CALIFORNIA, WHICH IS WHAT ONE OF THE, NOT WHAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING COMMISSIONER SA, BUT WHAT SOME PEOPLE HAVE SUGGESTED, UH, IIII JUST CRINGE 'CAUSE I I I HAVE NO WAY TO JUSTIFY IT.
UM, UM, I, UM, I IN FACT RAN OFF, UH, THE DNV SPREADSHEET THAT, UH, SHOWS THE, UH, VARIOUS ECONOMIC VERSUS TECHNICAL, UH, I, I KNOW THAT YOU KNOW THIS BECAUSE OF THE WORK YOU'VE DONE AND THE WAY YOU'VE, UH, STRUCTURED YOUR OWN HOME.
BUT FOR EXAMPLE, I COULD PUT IN A GEOTHERMAL HEAT PUMP AND I WOULD SAY TWO, I'D SAY 80% OR MORE OF MY AIR CONDITIONING.
I DON'T THINK I'D GET A PAYBACK IN A HUNDRED YEARS BECAUSE I DON'T USE A WHOLE LOT OF AIR CONDITIONING.
AND THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ECONOMIC AND FEASIBLE.
UH, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THIS, I'M JUST STATING THE OBVIOUS AND I, I I, I DON'T THINK THAT WE CAN RELY ON WHAT'S TECHNICALLY THERE.
UM, I I THINK THAT IF WE BETTER UNDERSTOOD WHERE DMV WAS, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO PICK APART SOME OF THEIR ASSUMPTIONS AND MAYBE RAISE THE CURVE A LITTLE.
I JUST DON'T THINK WE CAN DOUBLE IT.
UH, I WAS GONNA RECOGNIZE COMMISSIONER TI AND YOU SEE WHERE THE HAND IS IN THE UPPER LEFT.
THAT'S WHY I THOUGHT THE THUMBS DOWN WAS COMING FROM YOU.
'CAUSE I WAS LOOKING UP THERE FOR THE SIGNALS FROM HIM.
SO COMMISSIONER TI SOMETIMES IT GOES TO THE BOTTOM.
I I MEAN, I THINK WE DON'T HAVE ANY BASIS UPON WHICH TO SAY THAT LIKE, OH, THIS FOUR 30 NUMBER IS REASONABLE AND QUADRUPLING THE NUMBER OF TODAY'S IS, IS NOT LIKE I, IT IS BASED ON THE STUDY UPON WHICH WE HAVE NO TRANSPARENCY WHATSOEVER.
AUSTRALIA HAS LIKE 35% ROOFTOP PENETRATION LIKE THIS, THESE NUMBER WE'RE WAY BEHIND THAT.
UM, AND I JUST THINK THIS IS, THIS IS EXACTLY THE RIGHT PLACE TO LIKE MAKE A, A LOFTY GOAL BECAUSE IT LIKE POINTS, POINTS THE SYSTEM IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
UM, I, I THINK THERE'S VERY LITTLE BENEFIT TO SAYING LIKE, LET'S SET A MEAGER GOAL.
UM, AND, AND, AND CERTAINLY NOT ONE BASED ON LIKE A COMPLETELY OPAQUE FROM THE SOUNDS OF IT.
SORRY, I'M NOT MORE WELL READ ON IT.
UH, YEAH, I DON'T KNOW IF I WANNA CHANGE THE TOPIC, BUT I
'CAUSE WE'RE ALL JUST WORKING WITH NUMBERS THAT COME OUTTA SOMETHING THAT, RIGHT.
WE WERE NEVER SHOWN WHAT THE INPUTS OR PARAMETERS WERE GIVEN
[01:00:01]
ANY DETAILS ABOUT VICE CHAIR ROBBINS.YOU WOULDN'T BE THE ONLY PERSON TO ASK THAT.
UM, I BELIEVE, UH, TO COMMISSIONER CASITA'S POINT ABOUT AUSTRALIA, THAT'S, UH, WHY WE HAVE PUT IN NUMBER NINE STUDY OF WAYS TO REDUCE COST OF ROOFTOP SOLAR IN BUILDINGS.
UH, AND UH, I WOULD VERY MUCH LIKE, UH, TO FIND OUT WHAT WE CAN TRANSFER FROM AUSTRALIA TO, UH, TEXAS.
BUT, UM, WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT STUDY YET.
WELL, THEY GAVE US FOSTERS BEER AND WE'RE STILL DEALING WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF THAT COMMISSIONER CNI
AND MAY HAVE AN ACTUAL SUGGESTION HERE.
SO DID I HEAR THAT AUSTIN HAS LIKE, WHAT WAS IT, TWO AND A HALF PERCENT ROOFTOP PENETRATION? THAT WOULD BE A BALLPARK FOR TAXES? I THINK THAT'S RIGHT.
BALLPARK? NO, I THINK THAT'S, AS FAR AS I KNOW, TWO AND A HALF PERCENT IS AUSTIN, BUT THE NUMBER MIGHT BE LOWER.
LIKE TWO PER TEXAS IS PROBABLY LESS THAN 1% SOLAR TOTAL ROOFTOP SOLAR.
SO AUSTIN IS A NUMBER THAT IS LIKE ROUGHLY SOUNDS LIKE TWO OR TWO OR 3%.
SO I DON'T FI I DON'T SEE WHY IT WOULDN'T BE REASONABLE TO SAY LIKE, OKAY, WE'RE NOT GONNA GET ALL THE WAY TO AUSTRALIA IN AUSTIN, BUT THERE IS EXISTENCE PROOF OF 30, 35% PENETRATION.
SO WHY DON'T WE GET TO 10% BY 2035, WHICH IS MORE THAN 10 YEARS FROM NOW.
THAT DOES NOT FEEL LOFTY TO ME AT ALL.
IT FEELS LIKE UNDERSHOOTING IF, IF ANYTHING, AND THAT WOULD BE A FIVE X FOUR OR FIVE X VICE CHAIR.
ROBBINS, CALIFORNIA ISN'T EVEN AT SEVEN.
COMMISSIONER ERUS CA CALIFORNIA IS, IS NOT THE RIGHT, IS NOT THE RIGHT BENCHMARK.
THEY, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT DOING IT RIGHT.
LIKE THEY, THEY UNDERBUILDING THAT IN THE BUILDING CODE COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN, UM, I I THINK WE HAVE PASSED THE POINT OF PRODUCTIVE PRODUCTIVITY IN THIS CONVERSATION.
AND, AND I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT WE PICK SOME DAMN NUMBERS AND, AND VOTE THESE SUCKERS OUT ONE AT A TIME, PLEASE.
I'M SORRY, TREY, WHAT DID YOU I I GUESS I WOULD JUST LIKE COMMISSIONER FARMER, UH, ONE KIND OF LEVEL SETTING WHAT THIS DISCUSSION IS ULTIMATELY GONNA LEAD TO IN TERMS OF LIKE, WE'RE GONNA SEND A RESOLUTION TO COUNCIL AND THEN AUSTIN ENERGY'S GONNA BE INVOLVED DIRECTLY WITH COUNCIL IN OVERRIDING ANYTHING THAT WE PUT IN THERE.
AND AT THE SAME TIME, IF THIS IS AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT, THEN I THINK WE NEED TO BE TREATING IT AS SUCH AND SO LOFTY GOALS FEEL APPROPRIATE.
I JUST LIKE TO NOTE THAT IT'S REFRESHING TO HAVE SOMEBODY ELSE AS JADED AS I AM IN THIS GROUP BECAUSE YES, I ALSO LOOK AT IT AND SAY IT'S LOVELY.
WE'RE GONNA PASS THIS BEAUTIFUL RESOLUTION.
IT'S GOING TO GET READ BY A COUPLE OF PEOPLE AND THEN THEY'RE GONNA DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO ANYWAY.
SO THAT HAVING BEEN SAID, I DO GENERALLY AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN THAT WE PICK SOME NUMBERS THAT WE BELIEVE WE CAN STAND BEHIND, THAT WE CAN JUSTIFY THAT WE'LL FEEL GOOD ABOUT.
AND LET'S PUT SOME NUMBERS INTO THIS THING IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION WE CHOOSE AND WE GO MOVE ON.
UH, COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN, GIVEN YOUR VAST EXPERIENCE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO, UH, ARE YOU GAME FOR, UH, MAKING NUMBER KICKING? UH, YEAH.
TAKE A DEEP BREATH, THROW THE DART.
UM, IS THERE, IS THERE SUPPORT FOR THE, LOOKING AT, AT BULLET ONE, IS THERE ALREADY SOME CREDIBLE SOURCE FOR THE 73% RENEWABLE ENERGY? IS THAT FROM AUSTIN ENERGY'S PLAN? UH, IT'S, I I PICKED THIS FROM, UH, CYRUS REED'S, UH, UP, UH, PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
UH, I BELIEVE IT'S PRETTY CLOSE.
PERHAPS, UH, MS. MARTIN COULD, UH, BE SPECIFIC.
THE NUMBER IN THE DRAFT PLAN IS 70% RENEWABLE ENERGY AS A PERCENTAGE OF LOAD BY 2030.
AND, UH, THE COMMISSION VOTED ON THIS ITEM LAST NIGHT, THE ELECTRIC UTILITY COMMISSION, AND IT FAILED.
UM, REAL QUICK, COMMISSIONER DAVIS RAISED HER HAND AND SHE'S BEEN PRETTY PATIENT OVER THERE.
OR WAS IT AN ACCIDENTAL CLICK? NO, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY 70%.
I SUPPORT THE 70% IF ANYONE WANTS MY NUMBER.
SO WE'LL, WE'LL PENCIL THAT AND LET'S KEEP GOING WITH THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
WE'RE GONNA GO UP WITH ONE AMENDMENT FOR ALL THESE NUMBERS ALL AT ONCE, RIGHT? THE,
[01:05:01]
FOR THE WHOLE BULLET.KEEP THE, IN THE SECOND BULLET, KEEP 2 0 5 MEGAWATTS OF LOCAL SOLAR.
KEEP THE AMY, WHAT HAPPENED TO THE 4 31 MEGAWATTS LAST NIGHT WITH THE EEC? I'M SORRY, MS. MARTIN.
THE NUMBER IN THE PLAN IN THE DRAFT PLAN IS 405 MEGAWATTS OF INSTALLED LOCAL CAPACITY BY 2035, INCLUDING 160 MEGAWATTS OF EXISTING CAPACITY.
I PROPOSE THAT WE KEEP THE NUMBERS AS WRITTEN IN THE, ON THE PIECE OF PAPER FOR THE THIRD BULLET ON EFFICIENCY.
I PROPOSE THAT WE RAISE THIS TO 400 MEGAWATTS OF PEAK EFFICIENCY SAVINGS AND 300 MEGAWATTS OF DEMAND RESPONSE PEAK SAVINGS BOTH SUMMER AND WINTER BY 2035.
WHAT WAS THAT SECOND NUMBER PLEASE? TH 400 AND 300 INSTEAD OF 360 AND 2 69.
AND IN, IN CASE, UM, HOLLY IS ON THE PHONE AND RICHARD RIPPING THEIR HAIR OUT, I WANNA REMIND YOU THAT YOU COULD PROBABLY PICK UP THE PHONE AND GET THE, THE TEXAS CAPITAL, WHATEVER IT IS.
WHO, WHO, WHO MANAGES ALL THE TEXAS STATE BUILDINGS THAT COMPLEX.
IF YOU COULD GET THOSE SUCKERS SIGNED UP TO DO DEMAND RESPONSE AND BETTER ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND ALL THOSE BUILDINGS, YOU COULD PROBABLY NAIL THOSE NUMBERS TOMORROW.
COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ LOOKS LIKE HE WANTS TO TRY TO OFFER A LITTLE FEEDBACK THERE.
SO I HAD A COUPLE THINGS ON THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND DEMAND RESPONSE.
SO THE FIRST THING, THE NUMBERS DISCUSSED YESTERDAY AND IN THE PLAN, OR DIFFERENT NUMBERS, I GUESS THEY'RE FROM A EARLIER GOAL, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE FROM 2024 OR EARLIER.
SO THE GOAL THAT THEY HAD FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY WAS 9 75.
SO I GUESS IT'S WORKING FROM AN EARLIER DATE.
SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IF WE'RE ABLE TO, UH, CREATE LESS CONFUSION ABOUT THAT.
I GUESS THE 360 IS FROM THE DNV STUDY, BUT THE, THE GOALS THAT THEY HAVE IN THE PLAN ARE, ARE FROM AN EARLIER DATE AND TIME, OR THEY'RE NOT STARTING FROM ZERO TODAY.
I, I BELIEVE, MAY I SPEAK, SORRY, VICE CHAIR ROBBINS
I BELIEVE THAT THE, UM, THAT WAS FROM ONE OF THE SCENARIOS.
REMEMBER THEY RAN LIKE 17 OR 18.
AND, UM, I THINK IF MY MEMORY IS CORRECT THAT THEY QUALIFIED THAT THEY DON'T THINK THEY CAN MEET THAT, BUT THEY'RE RUNNING IT ANYWAY.
UM, AND BY THE WAY, THE 430 MEGAWATTS WAS THE ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY THAT CAME FROM THE DNV STUDY, SO YEAH, YEAH, NO, I'M, I WAS ASKING ABOUT, YEAH, I WAS ASKING ABOUT THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY NUMBER.
I KNOW THE NUMBER LAST NIGHT THAT THE NUMBER ON THE PLAN IS 9 75 AND IT'S STARTING FROM AN EARLIER DATE AND TIME.
SO I'M TALKING ABOUT THE 360 ON, I THINK THE 360.
I GUESS I'M, I'M, THERE WERE SO MANY NUMBERS.
I DO NOT REMEMBER WHAT YOU WERE REFERENCED.
I REMEMBER A NUMBER SIMILAR TO THAT FOR SOLAR.
WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ON SOLAR IS RIGHT.
I WAS JUST, UH, POINTING OUT THAT THE NUMBER HERE ON PEAK EFFICIENCY IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE TYPE OF NUMBER THAT THEY'RE USING IN THE RESOURCE PLAN.
UH, MS. MARTIN, IF IT'S EASIER, YOU COULD JUST TAKE ONE OF THOSE CHAIRS RIGHT THERE.
I'M SORRY, COULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? SO THIS AMENDMENT OR, UH, BULLET POINT HAS 360 MEGAWATT PEAK EFFICIENCY SAVINGS.
UH, THAT'S FROM THE DNV STUDY, I THINK.
HOW DOES THAT RELATE TO THE, RIGHT NOW THE PLAN HAD 9 75.
THERE WAS AN AMENDMENT YESTERDAY FOR A THOUSAND MEGAWATT PEAK SAVINGS THAT WAS VOTED DOWN, I THINK.
SO 9 75 AND 360, THEY'RE NOT THE SAME NUMBER.
SO THE DRAFT PLAN, UM, REFERENCES A GOAL THAT IS IN THE EXISTING 2030 PLAN.
UM, THAT IS, IT SAYS 9 75 MEGAWATTS OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY BY 2030.
AND IN ENERGY EFFICIENCY, SINCE WE ARE LOOKING TO PIVOT TO GREENHOUSE GAS AVOIDANCE GOALS, UM, IN 2027, WE, UH, LOOKED TO ACTUALLY JUST BRING THE 9 75 MEGAWATT GOAL FROM FORWARD THREE YEARS.
SO INSTEAD OF ACHIEVING THAT BY 2030, UH, WE'LL LOOK
[01:10:01]
TO STRETCH OURSELVES AND ACHIEVE IT BY 2027.SO I GUESS WHAT I WAS SUGGESTING WAS IF WE HAVE AN ENERGY EFFICIENCY GOAL, IT PROBABLY OUGHT TO EITHER BE, YOU KNOW, REDEFINED TO WHAT THEY HAVE OR EXPLAINED ABOUT WHERE IT'S WORKING FROM BECAUSE THE NUMBER THAT THEY HAVE IN THE PLAN IS IT'S A PEAK ENERGY EFFICIENCY GOAL.
IT'S LIKE A WILDLY DIFFERENT NUMBER.
COMMISSIONER DAVIS, YOU HAD RAISED A HAND.
AGAIN, I WAS JUST GOING TO AGREE AND REINFORCE WHAT COMMISSIONER FARMER IS SAYING IN THE PLAN.
THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY GOAL IS 975 MEGAWATTS OF SAVINGS BY 2027.
UM, SO I THINK THERE'S NOT A, UM, AND THE TWO 70 BY 2035 FOR DEMAND RESPONSE.
SO THAT'S WHAT I PUT IN MY NOTE.
UM, BACK ON THESE IS THAT THAT GOAL SEEMED LESS AMBITIOUS THAN THE ONE THAT'S ALREADY IN THE DRAFT PLAN, AND THAT WE SHOULD BE SUGGESTING THINGS THAT ARE AT LEAST AS AMBITIOUS AS IS ALREADY IN THE PLAN.
COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ, THIS IS ALL A LITTLE CONFUSING TO DEAL WITH NOW, BUT PAUL, I THINK THE 360 MIGHT HAVE BEEN BASED ON THIS YEAR GOING FORWARD.
AND THE, AND THE LAST ONE WAS FROM A NUMBER OF YEARS BEFORE.
IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE, IT'S JUST, UH, TRYING TO PREVENT IT'S WHERE YOU START THE BENCHMARK.
SO, UH, PER MR. SILVERSTEIN, PERHAPS WE COULD ASK, UM, MR. GENESEE AND HIS TEAM TO DO SOME QUICK MATH FOR US, RATHER THAN US HAVING TO FIGURE THIS OUT ON THE FLY IN TERMS OF WHERE THE STARTING POINT IS FOR THIS AND TELL US HOW TO TRANSLATE BETWEEN THE 9 75 AND ITS STARTING POINT AND THE NUMBERS THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
BUT, AND, AND THEN, UM, EMAIL MAY BE MS. EVERHART TO TELL US WHAT THAT NUMBER WOULD BE WHEN THEY FINISH THE MATH RATHER THAN US GOING IN CIRCLES ON THIS POINT.
I, I WILL POINT OUT HOWEVER, THAT, UM, I REMAIN FIRM IN MY DESIRE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE EFFICIENCY AND DEMAND RESPONSE THAT AFFECT BOTH SUMMER AND WINTER DEMAND, RATHER THAN JUST SUMMER, WHICH IS HOW THE CURRENT TEXT OF THE, THE RESOURCE PLAN READS, OR AT LEAST THE LAST TIME I LOOK AT THE TEXT OF THE RESOURCE PLAN.
UM, WILL THAT WORK, MS. EVERHART? SO, WE'LL, WE'LL HEAR BACK FROM YOU IN 10, 15 MINUTES, I HOPE.
SO DO WE WANNA GO ON TO THEN ITEM SIX OR ITEM EIGHT AND COME BACK TO, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY WE DO, IS MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER SIX, WHICH IS, UH, DISCUSSION ON REMOVAL OF NUCLEAR LANGUAGE IN THE GENERATION PLAN.
COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ, HATE TO DO THIS, BUT I DID HAVE SOMETHING ELSE THAT I WANTED TO BRING UP IN DEMAND RESPONSE.
UH, IF WE CAN CIRCLE BACK TO IT AFTER, I DON'T KNOW, BUT WELL, I MEAN IF IT'S, IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE NUMBER CRUS ARE GONNA GET INVOLVED IN, THIS IS THE CHANCE.
SO WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT WAS THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY NUMBER THAT THEY BROKE OUT SEPARATELY FROM DEMAND RESPONSE.
SO WHAT I WANTED TO BRING UP WAS THE TWO 70 GOAL IS 2035, AND THEN WE SAID THE TWO, NO, I'M SORRY.
NO ONE'S ALLOWED TO SAY A NUMBER IN THIS WITHOUT SAYING WHAT THE HELL UNITS ARE.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT
SO THE TWO 70, OR I GUESS IT'S, IT MIGHT BE 2 69 MEGAWATT DEMAND RESPONSE BY 2035.
SO ONE OF MY BULLET NUMBER FIVE WAS GONNA SUGGEST ADDING THE 2027 GOAL, WHICH IS FROM THE SAME DNV STUDY, 2027, UH, HAD 78 MEGAWATTS ADDED, UH, OF A DEMAND RESPONSE, ADDITIONAL DEMAND BETWEEN 78 AND 102 MEGAWATTS.
78 WAS THE ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE NUMBER, THE ONE THAT WOULD PAY FOR ITSELF.
AND 1 0 2 WAS THE TECHNICALLY FEASIBLE NUMBER.
AND I KNOW THIS WAS, I BELIEVE, PASSED AT EUC YESTERDAY.
SO THE IDEA BEHIND THIS WAS TO ADD, UH, A MEANINGFUL TIMEFRAME, 2035 IS, UH, MIGHT AS WELL BE AN ATTORNEY IF YOU'RE DOING, YOU KNOW, CORPORATE PLANNING.
SO TO ADD, TO ADD SOMETHING FROM THE SAME STUDY THAT MENTIONS A YEAR THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THREE YEARS FROM NOW.
[01:15:01]
I, UM, CAN YOU PLEASE READ THE NUMBERS OUT LOUD SO THAT MR. GENESEE AND MS. PROSSER CAN DO THE MATH, THE MATH CONVERSION FOR 2027 AS WELL AS 2035, PLEASE.WOULD IT MAKE SENSE TO SCREEN SHARE WHAT I HAVE THE DOCUMENT THAT I HAVE? NO, IT'LL TAKE TOO LONG.
SO I GUESS THE AMENDMENT WOULD BE TELL 'EM, TELL 'EM WHAT NUMBERS YOU WANT SO THAT FOR 2027, SO THAT THEY CAN DO THE MATH AND CONVERT IT RELATIVE TO WHAT THE BASELINE IS FOR THE RESOURCE PLAN 9 75 STARTING DATE.
SO THIS IS ALL A LITTLE CONFUSING, BUT THE RESOURCE PLAN BROKE OUT ENERGY EFFICIENCY SEPARATELY FROM DEMAND RESPONSE.
THEY'RE NOT, THEY'RE NOT THE SAME.
SO THE DEMAND SIDE NUMBERS THAT USED TO BE LIKE AGGREGATED ARE NO LONGER AGGREGATED.
SO THEY'RE SO, SO I, I AM READING YOUR LANGUAGE AND YOU SAY AT LEAST 78 MEGAWATTS AND UP TO 102 MEGAWATTS OF DEMAND RESPONSE BY 2027.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO JAM IN HERE? IS THE, YEAH.
YEAH, SO IT'S, IT'S UNRELATED TO THAT.
SO HOLLY AND RICHARD, CAN YOU PLEASE DO THE MATH TO CONVERT THEM INTO THE SAME BASELINE? SO THERE'S NO, THAT'S WHAT I WAS SORT OF SAYING.
SO FOR SOME REASON, OH, UM, LET ME THINK IF I'M REALLY, WELL, IT'S NOT RELATED TO THE NINE 70.
THEY'LL TELL, TELL, THEY'LL TELL US IF IT NEEDS TO BE DIFFERENT.
SO IT'S, IT'S UNRELATED TO THE 9 75 ISSUE BECAUSE THEY SEPARATED THAT.
BUT I THINK YOU'RE GOING TOO FAR IN THE WEEDS.
YEAH, WE NEED TO GET THEM TO GIVE US, TO GET US ALL ON THE SAME PAGE.
MY POINT WAS JUST THAT THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO NUMBER ISSUE WITH THIS ONE.
LIKE THERE IS WITH PAUSE 360, THAT COMES FROM A DIFFERENT THING.
SO THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO MATH.
DO WE'LL LET THEM CONFIRM THAT.
IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION, CAN YOU PLEASE RESTATE IT? COMMISSIONER SA HAS A PROPOSAL TO ADD, UM, AT LEAST AN 78 MEGAWATTS AND UP TO 102 MEGAWATTS OF NEW DEMAND RESPONSE BY 2027.
AND COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ, BUT, YOU KNOW, I'M SORRY,
I'M ALREADY ON OVERLOAD AND IT'S ONLY SEVEN 30.
SO, SO, UM, THE QUESTION IS, DOES THAT IN THE SAME WAY THAT WE ARE CON TRYING TO DO A CONVERSION OF THE NUMBERS FOR PEAK EFFICIENCY AND DEMAND RESPONSE SAVINGS BY 2035 FROM COMMISSIONER ROBIN'S LIST? YEAH, THAT RIGHT THERE.
BUT THE ASK IS FOR THE 2027 GOALS THAT COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ IS TALKING ABOUT, DO THOSE NEED ANY BASELINE REVAMPING AND THEREFORE NUMBER RECALCULATION IN ORDER TO COMPORT WITH WHATEVER THE BASELINE IN THE PLAN IS? AND, AND I CAN MAKE A QUICK POINT TO THIS, UM, FOR, FOR AND TO THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY QUESTION.
UM, THIS IS SARAH HARRIS, DIRECTOR OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY SERVICES.
UM, SO ON THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY FRONT, UM, THE DELTA BETWEEN NOW AND WHAT WE HAVE TODAY AT THE END OF FY 24, UM, AND THE PROPOSED 975 MEGAWATTS IS 132 MEGAWATTS OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY OR REFERENCE, UM, WHICH IS A LITTLE MORE AGGRESSIVE AS NOTED THAN WHAT WOULD BE IN THE CURRENT PLAN.
UM, REGARDING THE DEFINITIONS OF DEMAND RESPONSE, UH, COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN AND COMMISSIONER ROBIN, YOU'LL RECALL THAT IN OUR FIRST ROUND OF WALKING THROUGH THE PLAN, ONE OF THE KEY ELEMENTS THAT WE IDENTIFIED IS THAT THE WAY THAT WE WERE DEFINING DEMAND RESPONSE OR THE WAY THAT WE WERE MEASURING DEMAND RESPONSE, UM, TO MEET OUR GOAL AT PRESENT, UH, WAS BASED ON CAPACITY OF INSTALLED DEMAND RESPONSE CAPABLE DEVICES OVER THE LIFETIME OF THE PROGRAM.
AND WE ARE TRANSITIONING OUR DEFINITION AND REPORTING ON DEMAND RESPONSE TO THE ACTUAL PERFORMANCE OF THE PORTFOLIO, UM, DURING A SUMMER EVENT.
SO AT PRESENT, OUR PORTFOLIO REPRESENTS ABOUT 50 MEGAWATTS, 40 TO 50 MEGAWATTS OF SUMMER PERFORMING CAPACITY.
AND THEN THE QUESTION IS, IN ORDER TO, THE PROPOSAL THAT WE HAVE ON THE TABLE IS ASKING FOR, YOU SAID THERE'S 132 MEGAWATTS ADDITIONALLY PROPOSED TO REACH THE 9 75,
[01:20:03]
AND I DUNNO HOW TO, WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT GETTING AT LEAST 360 MEGAWATTS OF PEAK EFFICIENCY SAVINGS AND 2 69 MEGAWATTS OF DEMAND RESPONSE PEAK SAVINGS BY 2035.AND I'M TRYING TO, WE'RE ALL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER THAT IS BASED ON A DIFFERENT BASELINE THAN YOUR 1 32 MEGAWATTS PROPOSED OR WHETHER WE'RE DOUBLING OR TRIPLING THAT NUMBER.
AND, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SOURCE OF THESE NUMBERS WAS.
I THINK PAUL, YOU GOT 'EM FROM DDNV? UM, MOST OF THEM, YES.
I BELIEVE THOSE NUMBERS ARE BASED ON THE VALUES WE USED FROM DNV FOR THE PURPOSES OF MODELING OUR PORTFOLIOS.
UM, BUT FOR REFERENCE THAT WE ARE USING THE SAME LANGUAGE FROM THE 2030 PLAN FOR THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY GOAL, JUST TO PROVIDE CONTINUITY BETWEEN THE TWO.
BUT THE, THE SORT OF SCALE OF THE GOAL IS FAIRLY AGGRESSIVE OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS.
AND, UM, I WOULD JUST NOTE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE WILLING TO PUT THAT FOOT FORWARD IN ORDER TO DEMONSTRATE OUR COMMITMENT TO ENERGY EFFICIENCY WHILE ALSO EXAMINING WHAT A MORE HOLISTIC PORTFOLIO MEASURE LIKE GREENHOUSE GAS AVOIDANCE WOULD LOOK LIKE, AND THEN SETTING GOALS ACCORDING TO THAT.
I, DID YOU SAY THAT THE 132 MEGAWATTS IS THE, WHEN ARE YOU TRYING TO REACH THAT 132 MEGAWATTS BY OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY? THAT WOULD BE BY 2027.
SO IF YOU'RE, IF TODAY, LET'S SAY THE BEGINNING OF FY 25 OCTOBER, WE'RE, WE'RE CLEANING THE SLATE AND CALLING IT ZERO, THEN IT WOULD BE 132 BY 2027.
THE CUMULATIVE PORTFOLIO SIZE WOULD BE 975 SINCE THE INCEPTION OF THE PROGRAM.
MY, MY ADVICE FOR YOU GUYS IN DRAFTING THIS IS STOP COUNTING OLD MEGAWATTS.
I MEAN, SET TODAY IS ZERO AND, AND 'CAUSE ALL OF THESE 9 75 FROM THE INCEPTION OF GOD KNOWS WHEN IS JUST TOTALLY CONFUSING.
EVEN MORE CONFUSING AND UNHELPFUL.
SO IF YOU WANT SOME UNSOLICITED ADVICE, GO BACK AND TAKE ALL THIS STUFF WITH LIKE TRAILING CREDITS OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND OTHER RESOURCES AND START FROM TODAY OR THE, THE, THE START OF THE 2024 FISCAL YEAR OR SOMETHING.
BUT NONE OF THIS, THE FACT THAT WE HAVE WASTED THIS MUCH TIME TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE HELL THE NUMBERS ARE IS, IS JUST LUDICROUS AND UN INAPPROPRIATE.
AND I WOULD CALL IT EXASPERATING, BUT THAT TOO, THAT'S JUST ME.
SO, OKAY, SO VICE CHAIR ROBBINS ASKED ME TO PICK NUMBERS.
I'M GOOD WITH 132 MEGAWATTS BY 2027.
THE ALL OF THIS 9 75 IS A BASELINE FROM, GOD KNOWS WHEN I SAY WE GO WITH 400 MEGAWATTS OF PEAK SAVINGS BY 2035 FROM EFFICIENCY AND 300 MEGAWATT GOAL FROM DEMAND RESPONSE AND 4 20 35.
AND WE ASK FOR BOTH OF THOSE TO BE SUMMER AND WINTER PROGRAMS SO THAT YOU, SOME, SOME PROGRAMS WILL COUNT FOR SUMMER, SOME PROGRAMS WILL COUNT FOR WINTER, SOME PROGRAMS WILL REDUCE BOTH LIKE IF, LIKE, UM, INSULATION MOST VALUABLY AND, AND THAT KIND OF THING.
SO THAT'S MY PROPOSAL SINCE YOU ASKED ME FOR NUMBERS.
SO IT WOULD READ IF I, IF I GOT YOU AT LEAST 400 MEGAWATTS OF PEAK EFFICIENCY SAVINGS AND 300 MEGAWATTS OF DEMAND RESPONSE, PEAK SAVINGS BOTH SUMMER AND WINTER BY 2035.
RIGHT, BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'VE ALREADY GOT LANGUAGE IN THERE FOR 2027.
IS THE 2027 LANGUAGE OF 132 MEGAWATTS ACTUALLY IN THE PLAN AT PRESENT? NO.
COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ, YOU'VE BEEN, YEAH, UM, I THINK YOU'RE TOTALLY RIGHT THAT IT'S EXTREMELY CONFUSING TO LOOK AT ALL ACCUMULATED NUMBERS, BUT I THINK IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT DIFFERENT NUMBERS HERE, WHEN THE PLAN IS USING ONE STANDARD, IT RISKS BEING EVEN LESS LIKELY FOR ANYONE TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT OR THEY COULD FIX THE PLAN TO MAKE IT LESS CONFUSING.
[01:25:01]
I THINK ONE, YEAH, BUT WHAT I'M SORT OF SUGGESTING IS JUST I DO KNOW WE DO HAVE THE INFORMATION TO CONVERT IT TO WHAT THEY DID.WE CAN, WE'D PROBABLY BE MORE LIKE LIKELY TO BE SUCCESSFUL IF WE DO THAT THAN TRY TO, UH, CORRECT THEIR MATH TOO.
SO THIS, WELL, ARE THERE ANY OTHER CHANGES, ADAPTATIONS TO ALL THIS OTHER STUFF IN THIS
MY RATIONALE FOR THAT IS THAT 2 0 2 0 5 TO TWO, UM, TWO 50 WOULD REPRESENT A 50% IMPROVEMENT OVER TODAY, AND FOUR 80 WOULD REPRESENT A THREE X IMPROVEMENT.
AND LIKE ALL OF THAT GETS US BASICALLY TO CALIFORNIA PARODY, WHICH IS LIKE EVEN IN THE SAME COUNTRY AS, AS TEXAS KIND OF QUIET IN HERE, COMMISSIONER SILVER STATE, I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF CONFIDENCE THAT THE CURRENT LEVEL OF FEDERAL SUBSIDIES IS GOING TO CONTINUE FOR SOLAR INSTALLATION.
AND REMEMBER THAT CALIFORNIA IS GIVING OUT A HELL OF A LOT MORE SUBSIDIES AT THE STATE LEVEL.
SO WHILE I WOULD LOVE TO SUPPORT YOUR NUMBERS, I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO, UM, SET AUSTIN ENERGY GOALS AT RISK TO TWO SIGNIFICANT THREATS.
WELL, I MEAN, WOULD IT BE SO BAD IF THEY WENT, YOU KNOW, AND ENDED UP GETTING TWO 20 INSTEAD OF TWO 50? WOULDN'T WE STILL CELEBRATE THAT? IT SAYS AT LEAST, I MEAN THE WHOLE, ALL OF THESE GOALS ARE WRITTEN AS AT LEAST YEAH.
BUT SO I GUESS I LOOK AT IT AND SAY, YOU KNOW, PART OF IT IS IS, YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD BE A LITTLE ASPIRATIONAL HERE, YOU KNOW, SO I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH OF AN EXTRA LIFT, HONESTLY.
I MEAN, I'M AN ACCOUNTANT, YOU KNOW, I CAN DO A MATHEMATICAL CALCULATION, SAY IT'S THIS MUCH MORE OF A LIFT.
BUT, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW PHYSICALLY HOW MUCH MORE OF A LIFT IT IS FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO DO IT.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I JUST LOOK AND SAY, YOU KNOW, WE COULD SAY WE'RE GONNA SHOOT FOR TWO 20 IF WE GET 2 0 5 AWESOME SAUCE.
I MEAN, WE COULD DO THAT FOR ANYTHING REALLY.
WE COULD LITERALLY SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, 9 75 IN ENERGY SAVINGS, THAT'S NOT ENOUGH.
WE WANT YOU GUYS TO COME BACK WITH 1200.
I MEAN, I THINK SETTING GOALS IN GENERAL IS LIKE A LITTLE BIT OF AN ART AND A SCIENCE, AND IT ALWAYS INVOLVES SOME, SOME GUESSWORK.
AND THE SWEET SPOT IS ALWAYS LIKE, WHAT IS GONNA KEEP US REACHING WITHOUT A NUMBER, BEING LIKE SO BIG OR DATE SO SOON THAT IT IS LIKE, WELL THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE.
UM, AND YEAH, I TOOK YOUR FEEDBACK.
UM, COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN AND I FIND IT REASONABLE.
I JUST THINK WE'RE NOT BEING, WE'RE NOT QUITE REACHING AT LEAST MY PERSONAL THRESHOLD OF LIKE WHAT IS REASONABLY AGGRESSIVE FOR LIKE, SUCH LONG TIME SCALE GOALS ON A MATTER THAT IS LIKE SO IMPORTANT.
SO THE NUMBERS, AGAIN, WERE TWO 40 AND, AND, AND, UM, FOUR 80, AND I HOPE WE, WE BLOW PAST THEM.
I THINK WE WILL BLOW RIGHT PAST THEM GOING ON RECORD RIGHT NOW.
MR. SPORTS WAS FIRST, AND THEN, THEN THE VICE CHAIR WILL FOLLOW.
YOU CAN, UH, SKIP ME, SKIP YOU.
SO I, I, UH, I GUESS I, I HAVE NO RIGHT TO BE ANGRY, BUT I KIND OF AM, I'M KIND OF EXASPERATED.
I THINK WE SPENT WAY TOO LONG ON THIS.
I I I DO NOT BELIEVE WE CAN BE QUOTE ASPIRATIONAL JUST FOR THE SAKE OF BEING ASPIRATIONAL.
IF WE COULD TELL THEM, YOU KNOW, HOW TO GET THERE.
IF WE HAD SOME STRATEGY THAT, THAT REALLY HADN'T BEEN CONSIDERED, OR STRATEGIES THAT HADN'T BEEN CONSIDERED, THEN OKAY, I FEEL BETTER ABOUT IT.
I, I I DON'T NOW, UM, AND YOU KNOW WHAT, UH, I DON'T WANT TO BE HERE FOR FIVE AND A HALF HOURS, LIKE THE EUCI WAS HOPING THIS WOULD BE EASY.
UH, AND I'LL CALL THE QUESTION AND IF I LOSE, FINE, BUT I THINK THAT WE NEED TO, I I I WOULD RATHER LEAD, LEAD WITH 205 AND 4 31.
[01:30:01]
BUT IF I LOSE, OKAY, I CALL THE QUESTION.SO I HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT ITEM FIVE.
WITH THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE HAD BEFORE, DIDN'T WE CHANGE THE 73 TO 70 OR DID I IMAGINE THAT 70 73 WHAT? THE 73% RENEWABLE.
I THOUGHT WE CHANGED THAT TO 70.
UH, AND THEN WE ALSO HAD CHANGED THE, AT LEAST 400 MEGAWATTS OF PEAK EFFICIENCY AND 300 MEGAWATTS OF DEMAND RESPONSE, WHATEVER THE LANGUAGE WAS, BOTH SUMMER AND WINTER.
AND THOSE ARE THE CHANGES WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US.
LOOKING FOR A SECOND, I WAS JUST WONDERING, WE TALKED ABOUT MOVING THE 2027 LANGUAGE, BUT THEN GOT AT THE, AT THE 2027 GOALS, SORRY, AT THE 2027 GOALS FOR DEMAND RESPONSE, WHICH ARE 132 MEGAWATTS OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY.
WELL, RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE.
SO I NEED PAUL TO CHEERFULLY WITHDRAW.
NOW YOU GUYS COLLABORATE AGAIN.
AND WHILE THEY'RE DOING THAT, COMMISSIONER DAVIS, YOU HAVE A HAND UP.
I WAS GONNA ASK IF THIS WE'RE ABOUT TO VOTE ON THIS ENTIRE NO, JUST ITEM NUMBER FIVE.
WE'RE WE'RE TAKING THE CONTENTIOUS PIECES ONE BY ONE.
SO, BUT ARE WE VOTING ON THE THERMAL STORAGE INSULATION AT THE GROCERY STORE WITH THIS? YES.
YES, THAT WOULD BE PART OF IT.
BUT AGAIN, WE'RE BACK TO GENERAL DISCUSSION NOW THAT THE MOTION TO APPROVE HAS BEEN CHEERFULLY WITHDRAWN.
UM, TRY TO, UH, OH, THE, THE, THE, THE 127, THE, THE SECOND BULLET.
THE THIRD BULLET OF, OF PART FIVE OF THIS FESTIVITY READS AT LEAST 400 MEGAWATTS OF PEAK EFFICIENCY SAVINGS AND 300 MEGAWATTS OF DEMAND RESPONSE PEAK SAVINGS IN BOTH SUMMER AND WINTER BY 2035 WITH 2027 GOALS OF 132 MEGAWATTS OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND 72 MEGAWATTS OF DEMAND RESPONSE.
THOSE ARE AT LEAST, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT LAST PORTION? UM, 2027 GOALS.
THE 2027 INTERIM GOALS ARE AT LEAST 132 MEGAWATTS OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND 72 MEGAWATTS OF SUMMER AND WINTER DEMAND RESPONSE.
WHILE SHE IS SHORTHANDING THAT AND THAT SHE'LL PUT IT INTO THE WORD DOCUMENT SO THAT WE CAN ALL SEE IT.
COMMISSIONER CITA, YOU HAVE A HAND UP? YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO RESPOND TO, UM, TO PA PAUL'S POINT THERE ABOUT LIKE, WE CAN'T GO UP FROM 2 0 5 TO TWO 40 WITHOUT SOME PLAUSIBLE PLAN TO GET THERE.
OUR ROLE IS NOT TO TELL THEM HOW TO GET THERE.
IT'S JUST TO SAY WHAT I THINK THIS IS LIKE EXACTLY OUR PURVIEW.
AND I THINK WE'RE STEPPING BACK FROM, I DON'T KNOW, THIS IS LIKE ALREADY VERY SCALED BACK, NOT VERY AMBITIOUS.
UM, I JUST THINK WE'RE, WE'RE MISSING WE'RE, WE'RE MISSING OUR, OUR TASK HERE, UM, ON THE FIRST BULLET.
SO I DO NOT WANNA VOTE FOR THIS AS, AS STANDS AND I'M WONDERING IF PEOPLE WOULD BE WILLING TO LIKE VOTE FOR THE CHANGE NUMBERS, WHICH ARE NOT THAT DIFFERENT FROM WHAT IS STATED.
SORRY, I'M WAITING TO, TO SEE HOW THIS AMENDMENT IS SHAPING UP HERE.
UM, ANYBODY HAVE ANY FEEDBACK THEY'D LIKE TO OFFER? COMMISSIONER TI I'LL JUMP IN.
UM, I WOULD SUPPORT THE MORE INCREASED NUMBERS.
I GUESS MY QUESTION TO Y'ALL IS LIKE, WHY NOT BE MORE AMBITIOUS IF THEY DON'T HIT THE NUMBERS? IS THERE A PENALTY? I THINK LIKE WHEN DINO BROUGHT UP, THERE'S LIKE, WE WANT TO FIND SOMETHING THAT'S GONNA MAKE THEM REACH BUT NOT BE SO FAR OFF THAT THEY JUST THROW THEIR HANDS UP AND NOT EVEN TRY.
THAT SEEMS TO BE THE SWEET SPOT.
SO I MEAN, I I JUST GENERALLY LIKE, IS THERE AN ISSUE WITH HAVING GOALS THAT ARE A LITTLE BIT FURTHER THAN LIKE, LIKE IF THEY CAN'T MEET THE GOAL, IS THERE SOME PENALTY OR IS THERE SOME REASON THAT WE WOULD NOT WANT TO BE MORE AMBITIOUS? YES.
AS CHAIR CREDIBILITY? I, I, I HATE TO BE THAT BLUNT, BUT, UM, I, I, AGAIN, I GO BACK TO WHAT COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN SAID IN MY HEART, I AGREE WITH YOU.
I THINK IT IS OUR TASK IF WE'RE
[01:35:01]
GOING TO BE ON THE CUTTING EDGE, IT IS OUR PURVIEW TO AT LEAST IN A GENERAL WAY SAY HOW THIS CAN BE EXCEEDED.I'M NOT AS PESSIMISTIC AS COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN AND, AND I DO NOT BELIEVE, UH, SOLAR TAX CREDITS ARE GONNA GO AWAY.
BUT STILL, I, UH, I I JUST DON'T, I I CAN'T GET THERE.
COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN, THE, THE OTHER THING IS I'M LOOKING ACROSS THE ROOM AT THE FOLKS WHO ARE GONNA HAVE TO IMPLEMENT THIS AND DURING LAST NIGHT'S, UM, MARATHON, I HEARD MS. MARTIN STAND UP SEVERAL TIMES AND SAY, LOOK, THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS A LONG TIME TRYING TO DELIVER THESE PROGRAMS AND THEY'RE DOING THE BEST THEY CAN WITH THE TOOLS THEY'VE GOT.
AND IF THEY SAY THEY DON'T THINK THEY CAN GET MUCH HIGHER, THERE'S PROBABLY A PRETTY GOOD REASON.
AND I DON'T WANT TO MAKE THEIR LIVES EVEN HARDER AND MORE DISCOURAGING THAN THEY ALREADY ARE.
'CAUSE THEY'RE DOING IMPORTANT AND VALUABLE WORK AND I'D LIKE TO SEE THEM FEEL LIKE THEY'RE SUCCEEDING RATHER THAN HAVING THEM SAY THAT THEIR WORK IS NOT HITTING THE MARK, UH, SPEAKING.
'CAUSE AUSTIN'S IN BETTER SHAPE THAN MOST PLACES ARE.
ONE THING, SPEAKING OF MS. MARTIN, SHE'S GOING TO BE DITCHING US IN ABOUT 10 MINUTES.
SO IF YOU HAVE ANY REALLY NERDY, LIKE QUESTIONS THAT WE NEED HER TO COVER, IT MIGHT BE WORTH SWITCHING GEARS.
BUT ANYWAY, THAT HAVING BEEN SAID, COMMISSIONER FARMER.
YEAH, I I, I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.
AND I JUST THINK, UM, THAT CONTEXT IS REALLY HELPFUL.
LIKE FOR THOSE OF US WHO WEREN'T THERE LAST NIGHT, SO LIKE, UM, COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN AND COMMISSIONER ROBBINS, LIKE IF THAT Y Y'ALL WERE THERE AND, AND WERE A PART OF THAT LAST NIGHT.
NO, I, I KNOW, BUT I MEAN LIKE, WITNESS TO, OR, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, SO I THINK THAT LIKE, THAT, THAT CONTEXT IS REALLY HELPFUL.
VICE CHAIR ROBBINS, IF, IF WE WANNA REVISIT THE IDEA AND COMMISSIONER SERITA UH, WANTS TO CO-SPONSOR AN AGENDA ITEM WITH ME TO FIND OUT NEW STRATEGIES TO GET US TO, TO GET US FARTHER, THEN I'LL HAPPILY DO SO.
UH, I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE QUESTION IF IT, IF COMMISSIONER DAVIS'S, UH, ONLY RESERVATION IS GROCERY STORES, I WILL ACE TO REMOVING THAT LAST SENTENCE.
I DON'T KNOW WHY IT WOULD BOTHER HER, BUT IF IT DOES, I'LL DO IT.
UH, VICE CHAIR ROBBINS? UH, MY, MY ONLY CONCERN I THINK IS JUST WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONER CITAS TERMED, I THINK WAS LIKE SIGNAL STRENGTH IS, IS LET'S FOCUS ON THE THINGS THAT ARE, ARE VERY IMPORTANT AND THAT WE FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT THIS.
THE GROCERY THING CAME KIND OF OUT OF THE BLUE AND I DON'T, I I I THINK MAYBE IT'S WORTH A RESOLUTION DOWN THE LINE TO SAY, LET'S, LET'S DO THIS, BUT I'M NOT SURE IT BELONGS IN THIS RECOMMENDATION.
UH, CAN WE, UH, COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ, YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YEAH.
I JUST NOTICED THAT THE, BEFORE WE VOTED THAT THE DEMAND RESPONSE NUMBER IS, SHOULD BE 78.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I WAS ABOUT TO ASK YOU 'CAUSE I DIDN'T RECOGNIZE YEAH.
I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD YOUR NUMBER FLYING AROUND.
SEE, I DO ACTUALLY READ THIS STUFF.
I MIGHT NOT UNDERSTAND MOST OF IT, BUT I READ IT.
IT APPEARS I CALL THE QUESTION, IS THERE A SECOND?
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN, IF I CAN GET A SHOW OF HANDS.
UH, COMMISSIONER ESUS THIS A NO.
MOVING ALONG ITEM NUMBER SIX, BUT I'M GONNA STOP REAL QUICK AGAIN.
I'M GONNA POINT OUT SHE'S GOING TO BE LEAVING IN 10 MINUTES.
IS THERE ANYTHING REALLY NERDY YOU NEED, YOU GUYS NEED TO ASK HER BEFORE SHE LEAVES US? OKAY.
SHE'S FREE TO GO WHENEVER SHE WANTS TO GO.
ARE YOU LEAVING HIM AS HOSTAGE
WE APPRECIATE YOUR HELP THIS EVENING.
[01:40:01]
THERE IS, UH, A TECHNOLOGY THAT SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE HEARD OF CALLED MODULAR NUCLEAR REACTORS.AND WHEN MOST PEOPLE THINK ABOUT NUCLEAR POWER AS A NEW CLEAN ENERGY SOURCE, THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE THINKING ABOUT TODAY.
THEORETICALLY, THESE ARE SMALL, LIKE 100 MEGAWATT OR SO, UH, MACHINES THAT CAN BE STAMPED OUT IN A MANUFACTURING FACILITY.
THEORETICALLY THEY WOULD BE CHEAP, UH, MASS PRODUCED AND THERE AIN'T ONE OF 'EM IN EXISTENCE.
UH, AND IT, IT'S KIND OF, UH, LIKE THE, THE MIRAGE, IT'S, IT'S LIKE A MIRAGE.
IT'S LIKE A, A FICTIONAL CHARACTER THAT YOU, YOU NEVER QUITE FIND.
I BELIEVE THAT IT IS GIVING US FALSE HOPE TO BANK ON SOMETHING THAT HAS NEVER BEEN BUILT AND THAT ITS PREDECESSOR, UH, HAS GIVEN THE WORLD SO MUCH GRIEF.
UH, AND SO THE, THESE ARE MY, I I MEAN SIM THIS IS SYMBOLIC.
I DO REALIZE THAT, UM, SINCE THIS IS A MYTHICAL CHARACTER, UH, IT'S, IT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN ANYTIME IN THE NEXT DECADE.
I JUST THINK ON PRINCIPLE WE SHOULD ASK THAT IT BE REMOVED BECAUSE IT'S A DANGER.
CURRENTLY A DANGEROUS, EXPENSIVE TECHNOLOGY AND THE, UM, SUCCESSOR TO IT HAS NEVER BEEN MANUFACTURED.
UM, I, I, I SEE OVER THERE WHO RAISED THEIR HAND ON THIS ONE TO BEGIN WITH? COMMISSIONER DAVIS.
SO LET'S FIND OUT WHAT HER ISSUE IS.
AND I WANNA REMIND COMMISSION VICE CHAIR ROBBINS, THAT YOU GOT A WHOLE, MOST OF US AGREEING WITH YOU THAT THIS SHOULD BE DROPPED SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO KEEP SELLING.
SO LET'S FIND OUT WHAT COMMISSIONER DAVIS'S ISSUE IS.
SO IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION THEN, THEN IT'S OKAY, LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE.
'CAUSE WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY OTHER AMENDMENTS, SO WE DON'T NEED TO DO A VOTE ON THIS ONE.
IF, IF THERE'S NOTHING TO CHEERFULLY AGREE ON, WELL, I THINK SHE'S GONNA VOTE AGAINST IT.
I WOULD, I WAS GOING TO ABSTAIN OR VOTE AGAINST THE, YEAH, IF THERE'S BEEN NO CHANGE, I DON'T ONLY WANT, DO WE NEED TO DISCUSS? OKAY.
SO, SO DID THIS PASS IT, IT WAS NEVER CHANGED.
SO THIS WAS FURTHER DISCUSSION.
SO IF, IF OBJECTION IS REMOVED, NO AMENDMENTS WERE MADE, THEN IT'S JUST PART OF THE REGULAR BILL ALREADY IT WAS ALREADY, THE TEXT WAS ALREADY THERE.
THE QUESTION IS, WERE WE GONNA BE MAKING ANY CHANGES, AMENDMENTS OR DELETIONS? OKAY.
SO IF THERE ARE NONE, THEN YOU CONTINUE ON ITEM EIGHT, CONSERVATION BASED ELECTRIC RIGHT.
SO OH SEVEN WAS APPROVED, NEVERMIND.
EIGHT WAS ME, ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, CONSERVATION BASIS.
AND YOU, YOU WERE ALREADY, UH, MAJOR AMENDMENT.
I MADE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE, THE, THE DATE, EFFECTIVE DATE TO IN 2026 RATHER THAN BEGIN OCTOBER 1ST, 2025.
AND THAT IS THE ONLY CHANGE YOU HAVE IS OCTOBER 26, CORRECT? CORRECT.
UH, IS THAT A MATERIAL? NO, THAT'S NOT A, IT'S A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
YOU CONSIDER IT FRIENDLY, RIGHT, PAUL? CORRECT.
NINE, NINE STUDY WAYS, STUDY OF WAYS TO REDUCE COST.
SOMEBODY HAD SOMETHING TO TALK ABOUT THAT I BELIEVE THAT COMMISSIONER SAIS REACTED ADVERSELY TO THIS.
AM I MISTAKEN? UH, YOU'RE NOT, I CHANGED MY MIND THOUGH.
UH, DO WE THINK THAT OCTOBER 1ST OF 25 IS A REASONABLE TIMEFRAME FOR AUSTIN ENERGY BE ABLE TO GET THIS DONE? I COULD GET THEIR TICKETS.
YEAH, BUT IF THEIR BUDGET'S ALREADY STARTED AND I CAN, I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK OF IF I WERE RUNNING AN ORGANIZATION LIKE THAT WHERE I HAVE TO NOW SET ASIDE RESOURCES FOR A STUDY.
[01:45:01]
I, I'M WONDERING IF WE SHOULD ALSO HAVE THAT ONE BE A 2026 THING SO THAT THAT WAY IF THEY DO NEED THE ADDITIONAL DOLLARS, THEY CAN REQUEST THEM IN A CYCLE.SOUNDS LIKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO ME.
I WOULD HATE FOR THIS TILL LANGUISH FOREVER.
HOW ABOUT SPRING 2026? ONE SECOND
THE STUDY DUE DATE WOULD BE MARCH 1ST, 2026.
I, I WAS GOING TO FLOAT THE IDEA OF ADDING, UH, RESIDENTIAL BATTERIES TO THIS WHO, SO LIKE NOW LIKE 50% OF RESIDENTIAL, UH, ROOFTOP SOLAR INSTALLATIONS NOW INCLUDE BATTERIES AS WELL, UM, IN AUSTIN.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF THE HOLDUP OR COST ADD, YOU KNOW, FROM LIKE A PERMANENT, LIKE STUFF THAT AUSTIN ENERGY WOULD HAVE POTENTIALLY ABILITY TO REDUCE THAT COST WOULD CARRY OVER TO THE BATTERY INSTALLATION OR IF THAT'S PURELY LIKE A SOLAR ISSUE IN TERMS OF PER, YOU KNOW, PERMITTING, UH, CERTIFICATIONS, THAT KIND OF THING.
THERE, THERE ARE A LOT OF EXTRA COSTS THERE THAT
SO YEAH, I THINK IT'S SMART TAD JUST LIKE SOLAR PLUS BATTERIES WOULD, WOULD YOU LIKE TO, UH, GIVE AMENDED WORDING, UH, STUDY OF THE WAY IS TO REDUCE COST OF ROOFTOP SOLAR AND THAT ON ONSITE BATTERY BACKUP AND BACKUP BATTERY BACKUP BATTERIES.
I DON'T KNOW WHY OTHERS YOU HAVE MORE BETTER HANDLE ON THE LANGUAGE THAN I DO.
DO YOU WANT ME TO REWORD THIS OR DO YOU WANT TO REWORD IT? I THINK THE ADJUSTMENT THAT'S ON SCREEN NOW WORKS.
UH, AND THEN WE SHOULD ALSO CHANGE THE, THE, THE BYLINE ON NINE TOO.
THE, THE, THE BOLD PRINT PRODUCE COST OF ROOFTOP SOLAR AND BACK UP BATTERY SYSTEMS, RIGHT? MM-HMM.
THAT WOULD ALSO INCLUDE A CHANGE OF THE HEADER, THE, THE BOLD PRINT THING TOO.
OH, HOW'S THAT ONE LOOK TO YOU? UM, AS FAR AS I CAN TELL, IT'S FINE TO ME.
'CAUSE IF WE'RE USING 'EM AS P THAT, THAT'S USING ENOUGH POWER BENEFIT.
STRIKE THE WORDS BACKUP PLEASE.
THIS I DO CONSIDER A SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE.
SO WE'LL CONSIDER THIS TO BE AN AMENDMENT FINE WITH ME
UH, SO I'LL NEED A, A MOTION SECOND AND ALL THAT OTHER FUN STUFF IF IT'S A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT BECAUSE WE ARE CHANGING, WE'RE CHANGING MORE SUBSTANTIVE THING HERE.
WE'RE CHANGING THE BATTERY SYSTEMS. WE'RE ALSO CHANGING.
I MOVED TO ACCEPT THE AMENDMENT.
IS THERE A SECOND? THERE YOU GO.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN.
ALL IN FAVOR? PLEASE RAISE YOUR HANDS.
ITEM NUMBER 10, CREATE PILOT PROGRAM FOR TIERED INCENTIVES FOR BUILDING STRUCTURES THAT EXCEED THE ENERGY BUILDING CODE.
UM, I, I, THIS THIS WAS MY BABY AND I THINK IT REQUIRES A LITTLE BIT OF THREE WORDING OR WORDSMITHING.
THAT MAYBE, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S APPROPRIATE TO DEAL WITH.
NOW THE, THE INTENT WITH THIS WAS, UM, A NUMBER OF OTHER JURISDICTIONS HAVE CREATED ROADMAPS TO INCREASING ENERGY, EFFICIENCY OF CODE THAT'S LIKE 10 YEARS OUT.
SO LIKE MEETING THAT 10 YEAR OUT ENERGY EFFICIENCY, YOU'LL GET SOME INCENTIVES EARLY ON, BUT ALSO, YOU KNOW, WHERE THINGS ARE GONNA BE HEADED
[01:50:01]
IN 10 YEARS.SO I THINK IT'S REALLY COMMENDABLE.
AUSTIN'S UH, ADOPTING IAC 2024 SO QUICKLY AND WITH ALL OF THE, UH, ELECTRIC READY REQUIREMENTS, AND THIS IS JUST SORT OF SETTING US UP FOR LIKE FUTURE GOALS AND MORE, UH, THAT'S KIND OF LIKE ARISING TIDE FLOATS ALL BOATS.
AND THIS HELPS US SET GOALS FOR FUTURE ENERGY EFFICIENCY TARGETS.
UH, AND A ROAD LIKE A ROADMAP AS WELL AS INCENTIVES FOR REACHING THOSE, HITTING THOSE REACH GOALS EARLY.
SO LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, USING THE, THE AUSTIN GREEN BUILDING CODE IS, IS I GUESS MY MY REFERENCE POINT HERE.
IF YOU HAVE A, A COMPANY THAT, OR YOU HAVE A, A BUILDING THAT YOU KNOW IS GOING TO BE FIVE STAR CERTIFIED AND ONLY THREE STARS REQUIRED FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO MEET WHATEVER THEIR REQUIREMENTS ARE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE BASICALLY TRYING TO IN SET MORE PEOPLE TO MAKE IT TOWARDS FIVE STAR IN A SHORTER TIME WINDOW.
AND YOU WANT TO HAVE WHATEVER THAT INCENTIVE STRUCTURE WOULD LOOK LIKE TO BE ABLE TO GET PEOPLE TO WANT TO TAKE THOSE MORE ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY STEPS.
WELL, AT THE SAME TIME FLAGGING THAT LIKE IN FIVE YEARS, THE FIVE STAR REQUIREMENT WILL BE THE THREE STAR REQUIREMENTS.
SO DOES AUSTIN ENERGY CURRENTLY HAVE ANYTHING, ANY KIND OF STUDIES ON THIS THAT THEY HAVE ALREADY DONE TO BE ABLE TO KIND OF SHOW WHAT A ROADMAP MIGHT LOOK LIKE? BECAUSE OTHERWISE, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I LOOK AT IT AND SAY YOU'RE CREATING SOMETHING WHERE YOU'RE ASKING FOLKS TO HAVE SOMETHING DONE WITH COMPLEXITY.
THERE, THERE WAS A LOT OF TALK LAST NIGHT ABOUT GIVE THEM THE GOALS AND DON'T GIVE 'EM THE HOW.
AND I THINK THAT IT'S THEIR JOB TO DO THE, THE, TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT ROADMAP IS.
AND THEY HAVE NOT BEEN SHY TO DO THAT.
I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO TELL 'EM.
I GUESS I, SO I, I SUPPORT THE CONCEPT, BUT I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO DO IT HERE.
'CAUSE YEAH, I MEAN, I HAVEN'T SEEN LIKE THE, LIKE NO, THERE'S NO PUBLICLY AVAILABLE ROADMAP THAT'S EXPLICIT THAT OTHER MARKETS HAVE SEEN, HAS BEEN LIKE VERY USEFUL TOWARDS GETTING REALLY AGGRESSIVE, LIKE MUCH MORE AGGRESSIVE THAN I THINK AUSTIN IS COMMENDABLE WITHIN OUR MARKET AND WAY BEHIND THE REST OF THE, YOU KNOW, LIKE NEW YORK AND MASSACHUSETTS AND CALIFORNIA AND SEATTLE AND ALL THESE OTHER MARKETS.
UH, AND SO I THINK THAT LIKE, THAT'S ALL I WANNA FLAG.
LIKE WE CAN BE A LOT BETTER ON ENERGY EFFICIENCY THAN WE ARE.
UM, BUT YEAH, IF THAT'S ALREADY IN THERE, I KNOW THAT'S LIKE A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPLICATED THAN MAYBE WHAT WE GONNA TALK ON RIGHT NOW.
UM, I MEAN, SO I MEAN, GIVE ME AN IDEA OF WHAT YOU WOULD DO TO WORDSMITH THIS.
I GUESS WHAT I HAD WAS CREATE A TIERED INCENTIVE STRUCTURE AND ROADMAP FOR EVENTUAL MANDATE FOR ABOVE CODE ENERGY EFFICIENCY CERTIFICATIONS FOR NEW AND EXISTING STRUCTURES.
UH, VICE CHAIR ROBBINS, I SIMPLIFIED THIS FROM YOUR WORDING AND TOOK THAT OUT SIMPLY BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS ANYWAY.
THE BUILDING CODE IS CONSTANTLY, UH, MOVING WITH CHANGE.
BUT MY POINT IS THAT THERE'S NO ROADMAP.
LIKE NOBODY KNOW, LIKE CONTRACTORS, ARCHITECTS, DEVELOPERS DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY GUIDELINES IN 10 YEARS ARE GONNA BE AS THEY DO IN OTHER, IN OTHER MARKETS.
THAT HAS BEEN, THERE'S LIKE A 10 AND 20 YEAR ROADMAP TOWARDS ZERO NEED READY OR PASSIVE HOUSE.
AND WE KNOW WHAT THE GUIDELINES ARE AND GUIDEPOSTS ARE THAT ARE MOVING TOWARDS THAT.
AND WE DON'T HAVE, SO THEY DO IT IN TERMS OF, UH, ENERGY USE PER SQUARE FOOT.
THE, IT DEPENDS ON THE MARKET, BUT THERE'S SOME, IN SOME PLACES IT'S LIKE, WE'RE GONNA, YOU HAVE TO BE NET ZERO ON ALL BUILDINGS BY 2030 OR 2035, AND HERE'S THE ROADMAP TO HOW WE'RE GETTING THERE.
ANYWAY, I, I THINK THAT'S JUST A, WE CAN STRIKE THIS IF IT'S TOO COMPLICATED.
IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S ALREADY BEING FLAGGED AT, OR IT WAS DISCUSSED LAST NIGHT, BUT IT'S SOMETHING MAYBE I'LL BRING UP AT FUTURE MEETINGS.
DOESN'T NO, I I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE IT IN HERE, BUT TELL US HOW.
I THINK, SO I GUESS LIKE THE, THE, THE ROADMAP IS THE MORE, I THINK THE MORE IMPORTANT THING TO ME, BUT IT IS PAIRED WITH THIS, WITH SOME SORT OF INCENTIVE PROGRAM WHERE IT'S LIKE, OKAY, IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE HITTING THE STUFF THAT'S GONNA BE MANDATED IN 10 YEARS, 10 YEARS AHEAD OF TIME, THEN WE'RE GIVING YOU SOME CARROTS TO DO THAT.
BUT ALSO WE'RE FLAGGING THAT THIS IS WHAT'S GONNA BE MANDATED IN 10 YEARS.
SO IT'S HELPING CREATE MARKET SHIFTS WHILE ALSO FLAGGING TO THE INDUSTRY, LIKE, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO THIS IN 10 YEARS.
SO WE'RE SETTING, IT'S KINDA LIKE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH SOME OF THESE OTHER THINGS WHERE THIS, THE CITY OR AUSTIN ENERGY, THE A THE JURISDICTION IS SAYING
[01:55:01]
WE'RE SETTING REALLY TOUGH TARGETS IN 10 YEARS, BUT YOU HAVE 10 YEARS TO GET THERE, AND WE'RE TELLING YOU RIGHT NOW THAT YOU HAVE TO GET THERE IN 10 YEARS SO YOU CAN, YOU KNOW, IF IF WE SET THIS NEXT YEAR, EVERYBODY WHINGE ABOUT IT AND PUSH BACK, IF WE SET IT IN 10 YEARS, IN EIGHT YEARS, THEY'RE GONNA WHINGE ABOUT IT.BUT WE'LL SAY YOU'VE HAD EIGHT YEARS TO FIGURE IT OUT AND HERE'S ALL THESE OTHER EXAMPLES THAT WE'VE HAD INCENTIVIZED TO CREATE ON THE GROUND EXAMPLES OF THOSE THINGS.
COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ, THAT WAS JUST, SO YOU'RE NOT PROPOSING A ROADMAP, YOU'RE JUST PROPOSING 10, BUT YOU'RE EXPLAINING TO PAUL WHAT, WHAT 10 WOULD BE? YEAH, I I I'M JUST, I GUESS I'M ASKING FOR A ROADMAP.
SO I'M NOT, I'M NOT PROPOSING LIKE IN 10 YEARS IT NEEDS TO BE THIS, AND I'M NOT EVEN SAYING LIKE WE NECESSARILY NEED TO DEFINE THOSE THINGS.
IT'S MORE JUST LIKE, I WANNA SEE AGGRESSIVE GOALS FAR ENOUGH OUT THAT THEY'RE REACHABLE, BUT THAT THEY'RE SET IN STONE SO THAT WE KNOW THAT WE ARE GONNA HAVE TO REACH THEM AT SOME POINT RATHER THAN LIKE, OKAY, WE'RE GONNA ADOPT 2024 IACZ NEXT YEAR.
AND THEN YOU MAKE THAT SHIFT AT THAT POINT AND THEN WE'RE GONNA HIT, YOU KNOW, THE NEXT CODE CYCLE THE NEXT TIME.
HOW WERE YOU REWARDED? I DON'T, I MEAN, I, I GUESS CREATE A TIERED INCENTIVE STRUCTURE.
I, I MEAN THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE I HAVE, WHICH I DO NOT HAVE, OR I, SO YEAH, I DON'T EITHER.
SO SAY, I KNOW THAT CREATE A TIERED INCENTIVE STRUCTURE AND ROADMAP FOR EVENTUAL MANDATE OF ABOVE CODE ENERGY EFFICIENCY CERTIFICATIONS.
EVENTUAL MANDATE THEN WHAT, UH, OF, UH, FOR ABOVE CODE ENERGY EFFICIENCY CERTIFICATIONS FOR NEW AND EXISTING STRUCTURES.
AND THEN I GUESS BY OCTOBER 1ST, 2026 SEEMS TO BE WHERE WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING.
SO WHERE DOES THIS ACTUALLY GO? OKAY, SO IT GOES RIGHT THERE.
UH, WHAT ANSWER WE HAVE? SO THIS WAY, THIS IS BASICALLY A ITCH I TOLD YOU.
SO RESOLUTION IS WHAT THISS, SO AM I STRIKING THE REST OF THIS ALL? SURE.
I GUESS EXCEPT FOR THE LAST SENTENCE, THIS PART.
WHEREAS WE PASSED THIS DAMN THING TWICE, THEREFORE AMEND THE ONE THAT WE DID THE SECOND TIME.
SHE STILL HUNDRED PERCENT IS THAT WHICH, SO YEAH, YOU CAN TELL ME HOW YOU GOT HOW YOU WANT IT.
IT SAYS, WHERE IS THIS? WE SAID THIS IN MAY.
WE SAID IT AGAIN IN JUNE, THEREFORE, OKAY.
SO THAT'S WHAT I GAVE HER TO LOOK AT AND SEE IF IT MAKES ANY SENSE.
I THINK THAT'S, I MEAN, I'M, I'M OKAY.
SO WHAT, IT'S A LITTLE LIKE IN MY HEAD, SO IT'S HARD TO, IF THIS DOESN'T ACTUALLY MAKE SENSE TO ANYONE ELSE.
SHOULD PILOT PROGRAM COME OUT OF THE TITLE OR NO? UM, OR IS THAT THE WHOLE THING? I THINK, YEAH, I THINK CREATE AN INCENTIVE STRUCTURE AND ROADMAP.
YEAH, THAT PART TIER CENTER STRUCTURE AND ROADMAP.
I MEAN, IT'S BASICALLY JUST, UM, I DON'T KNOW.
I MEAN, I I WITHOUT JUST COPYING AND PASTING, LIKE, AND A ROADMAP FOR ABOVE CODE ENERGY EFFICIENCY CERTIFICATIONS.
CREATE A TIERED INCENTIVE STRUCTURE AND ROADMAP FOR STRUCTURES THAT EXCEED ENERGY BUILDING CODE.
THIS WILL JUST BE THE TITLE, I THINK JUST, YEAH, MAYBE LIKE THE, THE WHOLE RED, THE WHOLE ADDITION BE TYPED OUT.
WHAT IS THE TITLE? HOW ABOUT THE EXCEED ENERGY? I WOULD JUST SAY REQUIREMENTS.
EXCEED THE BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS RIGHT HERE? YES.
I THINK THAT'S WHERE YOUR MOUSE IS.
[02:00:05]
STRUCTURE AFTER IS AN EVENTUAL MANDATE OF INSTEAD OF FOUR ABOVE, CODE ENERGY IS ABOVE CODE HYPHENATEDHOW ARE WE FEELING ABOUT THAT LANGUAGE, FOLKS? YES, PLEASE.
THIS IS STRUCTURALLY DIFFERENT, SO WE'RE GONNA TREAT THIS AS AN AMENDMENT.
I, WE'RE GONNA LET YOU HAVE THE FIRST, NO, SORRY.
COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ GETS THE FIRST IN.
IF I COULD GET A SHOW OF HANDS ON THIS ONE, PLEASE.
SO WE NOW HAVE THE DOCUMENT SITTING IN FRONT OF YOU THERE.
AND FOR, FOR FUTURE REFERENCE, WE HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL STUFF FROM COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ.
AND I'VE GOT ONE ITEM THAT IS NOT ON A PIECE OF PAPER YET, BUT I'VE WRITTEN IT DOWN TO HAND IT TO MS. GOODWIN.
SO, UH, COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ HAS, HE GAVE US A LISTING.
UM, I WAS PREPARED TO, YOU KNOW, LET HIM PROPOSE A AMEND, LET HIM HAVE THE FIRST, UH, SHOT AT AMENDMENT.
THE IDEA IS THAT IT'S AMENDMENTS INTO THIS CHRISTMAS TREE DOCUMENT, RIGHT? YES.
THERE, THERE ARE AMENDMENTS INTO PAUL'S DOCUMENT.
SO YOU WOULD BE PUTTING IN ITEM NUMBER 1111, UNLESS YOU HAD SOMETHING THAT MADE A HECK OF A LOT MORE SENSE AS ITEM NUMBER THREE, THEN WE WOULD RENUMBER ALL THE OTHER ONES AND INSERT YOURS AS NUMBER THREE.
IS IT POSSIBLE TO PULL UP, I DON'T KNOW WHO'S SCREEN SHARING.
IS IT POSSIBLE TO PULL UP THE YEAH.
EMAIL OR DOCUMENT? SO SOME OF 'EM ARE MOOT NOW AT LEAST THREE OR FOUR OF 'EM ARE MOOT BECAUSE WE ALREADY DID DID THEM.
BUT I CAN START TOO IF WE'RE WAITING.
UH, OH, HERE IT'S, UH, SO YEAH, SO NO, THE, SO THERE THERE'S ONE THAT I EMAILED THIS AFTERNOON.
I, THAT OTHER ONE FROM LAST WEEK.
I THINK WE'RE JUST IGNORING YEAH.
IS IT RELATED TO THIS, SIR? NO, NO, THANK YOU.
SHOULD I, SHOULD I JUST GO THROUGH THEM AND READ THEM? UH, YOU'RE GONNA STRIKE SOME OF THEM, RIGHT? YEAH, YEAH.
SO OFFER UP YOUR FIRST AMENDMENT.
BATTERY COMMISSION RECOMMENDS COUNCIL TO ASK AUSTIN ENERGY TO DEVELOP AN INCENTIVE INCENTIVES, PROVIDE INCENTIVES FOR CUSTOMER CITED BATTERY STORAGE TO MAXIMIZE BENEFITS TO CUSTOMERS IN THE ELECTRIC GRID.
AND I THINK ACTUALLY, AND THEN IT SAYS, INCLUDING ADOPTION OF A PROGRAM THAT ALLOWS ALL CUSTOMER CLASSES TO RECEIVE AN INCENTIVE FOR PROVIDING THE UTILITY ACCESS TO CUSTOMER SIGHTED BATTERIES.
UM, WITH PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULED FOR NO LATER THAN OCTOBER, 2025, ALLISON HAS SUGGESTED TO TAKE AWAY, TAKE AWAY THE, THE SECOND HALF, BUT I THINK THAT THE FIRST HALF IS ALREADY IN THE GENERATION PLAN.
SO THE IDEA WAS THAT TO ASK THAT ALL CUSTOMER SITE, CUSTOMER CLASSES AND, UM, I THINK WE JUST ADOPT IN, IN ITEM FOUR OF WHAT WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED.
THE BATTERY VIRTUAL POWER PLANT PROGRAM,
[02:05:01]
I THINK COVERS THE, INCLUDING LANGUAGE, BUT AT LEAST THE UTILITY ACCESS TO CUSTOMER BATTERIES.SO WE COULD SCRAP THE WHOLE IF IT COVERS, DO, DO YOU THINK WE SHOULD SCRAP THE WHOLE NUMBER ONE? SO THE IDEA WITH THE, THE, THE INCLUDING LANGUAGE IS THAT IT'S ALL CUSTOMER CLASSES, SO IT ISN'T, IT WOULD INCLUDE RESIDENTIAL OR, I, I RECOMMEND THAT YOU STOP THIS AFTER ELECTRIC GRID.
IN THAT CASE, I THINK THAT THE BASIC IDEA OF EVERYTHING BEFORE THE WORD GRID IS ALREADY IN THE PLAN, THE RESEARCH PLAN.
IN THAT CASE, WE DON'T NEED THIS AT ALL.
SO THEN IF IT'S NOT, UNLESS I'M WRONG.
SO LET'S JUST MOVE ON AFTER THAT ONE THEN.
I HOPE NUMBER TWO,
BUT, BUT IN TERMS OF MR. ROBBINS MOTION STILL 11, IF YOU ADD AN AMENDMENT, IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE NUMBER 11.
SO YEAH, THE IDEA WITH TWO IS IN THE 2030, WELL I CAN JUST READ IT.
THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS COUNSEL TO ASK AUSTIN ENERGY TO KEEP REQUIREMENTS OF THE 2030 PLAN FOR CUSTOMER ENERGY SERVICES TO TARGET 25% OF ITS CUSTOMER ENGAGEMENT TO BE WITH INCOME LIMITED HOUSEHOLDS.
SO THIS WAS, UH, THIS EXISTED IN THE ONE PAST FOUR YEARS AGO.
IT'S GONE FROM THE NEW ONE FROM, SO THAT'S WHAT THIS IS ABOUT.
IS THIS CUSTOMER ENERGY SOLUTIONS OR CUSTOMER ENERGY SERVICES, ARE THEY DIFFERENT? NO,
SO YOU MEAN SOLUTIONS INSTEAD OF SERVICES? SOUNDS.
OKAY, SO THEN WE'RE SKIPPING THREE AND FOUR.
HANG ON, BECAUSE WE'RE DOING AMENDMENTS ONE BY ONE.
SO SEEMS LIKE THE VIBE IS PRETTY GOOD FOR THIS ONE.
SO WE HAVE A, DO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO ADD THIS AMENDMENT ON? SO MOVED SECOND.
ALL RIGHT, EVERYBODY
AND, AND THIS IS WITH THE MODIFICATION THAT SERVICES WAS CORRECTED TO SOLUTIONS? YES.
OKAY, THEN SKIPPING THREE, UH, 'CAUSE WE BASICALLY KIND OF COVERED IT AND FOUR WE'RE SKIPPING AND THEN SKIPPING FIVE TWO, AND THEN WE'LL BE SKIPPING SIX THEN IF YEAH, BECAUSE WE, WE ALREADY DECIDED NOT TO DO IT.
IS THAT RIGHT? NO, IT'S INCLUDED.
SIX IS IN, IS IN ITEM PART FIVE OF PAUL'S.
THAT WASN'T STRUCK BECAUSE OF THE GROCERY STORE CONVERSATION.
NO, WE TOOK THE GROCERY STORE OUT.
OKAY, SO SEVEN IS GRID SCALE BATTERY STORAGE.
THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS COUNCIL ASK AUSTIN ENERGY TO COMMIT INSTALLATION OF AT LEAST 1 25 MEGAWATT OF BATTERY STORAGE BY 2027.
RECOGNIZING THAT THIS IS IN LINE WITH THE MODELING THAT LEADERSHIP OF THE UTILITY, UH, INSTALLING, UH, LEADERSHIP PRESENTED THAT SHOULD BE REWRITTEN, MAYBE
AUSTIN ENERGY SHOULD FURTHER COMMIT TO STUDYING INSTALLATION OF UP TO 300 MEGAWATT OF GRID SCALE BATTERY BY 2030.
UH, SO IF FOLKS WANT CONTEXT, THE NOTHING FOR YOU, YOU HAD MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT A GRAMMATICAL, SOMETHING OR OTHER THAT NEEDED TWEAKING.
YEAH, I THINK, UH, THE, YEAH, THE WORD PRESENTED NEEDS TO BE MOVED FORWARD.
TAKE OUT THAT LEADERSHIP
IF YOU, UM, RECOGNIZING THAT THIS IS IN LINE WITH MODELING OF INSTALLING, WE CAN CUT THE WHOLE THING YES.
SO WITH MODELING, CUT THE NEXT FIVE WORDS, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 OF INSTALLING AND THEN DELETE JOINTLY AND DELETE THE WORD UTILITY, RIGHT? DELETE, YES.
AND THEN AFTER PEAKERS, DELETE PEAKERS TWO, DELETE JOINTLY.
[02:10:02]
OKAY.UM, THE 300 MEGAWATTS I THINK, IS THAT, MAYBE JUST CLARIFY IF THAT'S TOTAL OR ADDITIONAL TO THE 1 25 TOTAL.
YOU GUYS LIKE THE WORDING YOU SEE, I, IF YOU'LL PAUL, UH, VICE CHAIR ROBBINS, HOW MUCH WILL THIS COST? SO WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THIS CAME FROM THE 14 MODEL 14, UH, PORTFOLIO 14 THEY PRESENTED, WHICH WAS THE, THE MODEL.
SO THE, THE MODELS THAT EUC CAME UP WITH THAT WERE LIKE HIGH AMOUNTS OF BATTERIES.
THOSE ARE LIKE 3, 4, 500 MEGAWATT BATTERY.
SO THOSE WERE THE EXPENSIVE ONES.
1 25 WAS THE NUMBER WHERE THEY WOULD STILL NEED AT LEAST A FEW PEAKERS TOO.
SO THIS WAS MY ATTEMPT TO, UH, DILUTE AND SORT OF GO AGAINST MY, MY, WHAT MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE, WHICH IS TO NOT USE PEAKERS, BUT THE 1 25 MEGAWATT NUMBER WAS USING BOTH IN THE MODELING.
SO THAT'S WHAT IT WAS BEFORE THE, UH, BEFORE THE MEETING TONIGHT, I, UH, ASKED ONE OF THE AUSTIN ENERGY STAFF, UH, WHAT THE SPECS WERE ON BATTERIES AND THE COSTS WERE, AND THE, UH, COSTS FOR COMBUSTION TURBINES FOR THAT MATTER.
AND I'VE NEVER BEEN, I'VE NOT BEEN GIVEN AN ANSWER TO THAT.
UH, UH, THEY SAID THAT I, I ASKED, WELL, HOW MUCH, HOW MANY MEGAWATTS OF BATTERIES AND COMBUSTION TURBINES ARE EVEN IN THE GENERATION PLAN? AND THEY SAID, WE DON'T KNOW YET.
UM, AND IT, IT'S DISCONCERTING THAT THIS MIGHT, THIS, THE BATTERIES AND THE COMBUSTION TURBINES MIGHT BE THE MOST EXPENSIVE PART OF ALL OF THIS, AND WE DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THEY WANT.
UM, LET ME CUT TO THE CHASE 'CAUSE WE WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE HERE BEFORE MIDNIGHT.
WELL, ALL OF THIS IS VERY EXPENSIVE AND I JUST WORRY ABOUT THE FISCAL IMPACTS BEFORE WE KNOW FULLY WHAT THEY ARE.
UM, IT'S HELPFUL IF, JUST LOOKING AT LIKE NRE ESTIMATES FOR HOW MUCH GRIDSCALE BATTERIES COST.
THIS IS LIKE 30 OR $40 MILLION CAPITAL EXPENDITURE.
SO I'M TRYING TO BRAINSTORM THE BEST WAY TO SAY THIS, BUT THE, THE LOW NUMBER THAT I PUT HERE, AT LEAST THE 1 25 IS IN LINE OR LOWER THAN WHAT AUSTIN ENERGY IS BASICALLY PRESENTING.
BUT THERE'S NO NUMBER IN THE PLAN, WHICH IS THE PROBLEM THAT I HAD THE PLAN CALLS FOR A SPLITTING PEAKERS AND BA AND GRID SCALE BATTERIES.
THERE'S NO BATTERY NUMBER, WHICH IS PROBLEMATIC.
IF IT'S A PLAN, THERE SHOULD AT LEAST BE SOME SORT OF PLAN, RIGHT? IT'S NOT REALLY LIKE IF YOU'RE GONNA USE, YOU COULD, THERE'S A, THERE'S ALREADY A ONE MEGAWATT PLAN LIKE BATTERY, RIGHT? WITH, UH, DOWNTOWN.
SO I'M TRYING TO TURN THE PLAN INTO A PLAN.
I'M NOT REALLY TRYING TO CHANGE ANYTHING.
THEY, YOU KNOW, THE MODELING THAT THEY HAD USES 1 55 OR 1 25 MEGAWATT FOR, THAT'S FOR THE SCENARIOS THAT ALSO NEEDED A WHOLE BUNCH OF PEAKERS.
SO I'M NOT REALLY, EVEN THOUGH I WANTED, I, I WOULD LOVE TO PROPOSE SOMETHING AMBITIOUS.
I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE THIS SOMETHING AND NOT NOTHING.
THAT'S KIND OF MY EXPLANATION.
AND I WOULD ALSO ADD, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, IF YOU IMAGINE YOU HAVE SOMEBODY FROM AUSTIN ENERGY SITTING IN A ROOM WITH, UH, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL AND THEY'RE GOING THROUGH THIS, UH, RESOLUTION THAT WE'RE GOING TO SEND ALONG, THEY'RE GONNA SAY, SO CAN YOU DO THIS? AND THE PERSON FROM AUSTIN ENERGY IS GONNA SAY, NOPE, WE ABSOLUTELY CAN'T.
SO, YOU KNOW, GIVEN THAT AS LONG AS THE NUMBER IS PLAUSIBLE, THEN,
[02:15:01]
YOU KNOW, I I I SEE NO REAL REASON TO, TO LET THIS GET US IN, IN A TWIST.WE WANT THEM TO BE ASPIRATIONAL.
AND, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T KNOW.
I MEAN, IF YOU TELL ME THE NUMBER IS REALLY ONLY 12.5 WILL EVER BE ATTAINABLE.
NOW WE GET TO THE WHOLE QUESTION OF CREDIBILITY.
AGAIN, THAT WAS BROUGHT UP EARLIER.
BUT IF 1 25 IS PLAUSIBLE BASED ON WHAT THEY'VE ALREADY PRESENTED, MAYBE WOULD IT BE I HAVE THE FLOOR, OH, SORRY.
VICE CHAIR S UH, COULD WE TIE ONE TO THE OTHER? COULD WE SAY THAT FOR SO MANY MEGAWATTS OF COMBUSTION TURBINES, YOU GET SO MANY MEGAWATT HOURS OF BATTERY? I MEAN, IT SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD IDEA TO ME.
MORE WORK OR MORE COMPLICATED.
'CAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHO THE READER IS.
I MEAN, I, LIKE, I, I THINK THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT'S GOING ON HERE IS THEY'RE TRYING TO TIE TWO TO ONE OR WHATEVER.
BUT THAT MIGHT BE BEYOND, IT'S EASIER FOR ME TO ADD THE NUMBER THAT I READ IN THE MODEL, YOU KNOW, THAN TO SAY IT NEEDS TO BE, UH, A CERTAIN RATIO OR SOMETHING.
WELL, CAN WE TIE IT, THE MODEL TOGETHER? FOR EVERY 300 MEGAWATTS OF COMBUSTION TURBINES, YOU MUST HAVE AT LEAST COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN.
I WOULD ADVISE DOING THE WRONG THINGS WITH MY MIC.
I WOULD ADVISE AGAINST THAT CHAIR ROBBINS.
I, WE, TECHNOLOGY WILL BE CHANGING.
AUSTIN ENERGY'S NEEDS WILL BE CHANGING.
UM, AND I THINK THAT THE, WE DO NOT WANT TO BE OVERLY PRESCRIPTIVE HERE.
I THINK IT'S BETTER, SAFER TO SAY, UM, AT LEAST 125 MEGAWATTS OF BATTERY STORAGE BECAUSE IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY IN THEIR PLAN.
PARAMETERS TO MAKE THIS MORE COMPLEX IS, IS INVITING TROUBLE AND INVITING COMPLEXITY FOR DIFFICULTY FOR THEM IN IMPLEMENTATION AND MORE, MORE WEASELING ON EVERY SIDE.
AND, AND I JUST THINK THAT THAT ABSOLUTE ROUND NUMBERS ARE A SAFER BET, ESPECIALLY IF WE KNOW THAT THEY'RE ROUND NUMBERS THAT, THAT THEY'VE ALREADY KIND OF WANNA TRY TO DO.
WELL, THEY DIDN'T ACTUALLY COMMIT TO THEM, BUT, WELL, THIS SAYS COMMIT.
SO THIS TAKES US A LITTLE BIT FARTHER DOWN THE PATH THAT WE WANT IN THE INTEREST OF MOVING ALONG.
I WILL AE TO YOUR WISDOM, WHEW.
IF WE WERE REALLY IN TELL INTEREST OF MOVING ALONG, WE WOULDN'T HAVE CALLED THIS MEETING AND LUCA HAVE STAYED AT HOME TONIGHT, BUT HERE WE ARE.
NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT ITEM NUMBER SEVEN THAT YOU SEE ON YOUR SCREEN, WHICH WOULD BE PROPOSED AMENDMENT NUMBER 12.
IF I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
UH, JUST, JUST TO CLARIFY, IF WE, UH, SINCE WE CANCELED ITEM THREE, PASSIVE HOUSE, DON'T ALL THE NUMBERS SORT OF MOVE DOWN SO THAT FOUR BECOMES THREE, FIVE BECOMES FOUR, ET CETERA? YES.
I HAVE ONE MORE AND THEN ONE FROM AYE.
RIGHT NOW FOR THIS NEW ITEM NUMBER 12 TO BE RENUMBERED.
ITEM NUMBER 11, WHEN THE DOCUMENT IS CLEANED UP, UH, I GET A SHOW OF HANDS ON THIS ONE.
ANYONE? BUELLER BUELLER, FOLKS AT HOME? WONDERFUL.
AND THEN THE LAST ITEM ON, UH, WISHLIST FROM COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ.
I THINK IT'S JUST TO, OR I CAN READ IT.
YOU KNOW, LONG DURATION BATTERY COMMISSION RECOMMENDS COUNSEL ASK AE TO STUDY USAGE OF LONGER DURATION BATTERIES.
AND ONCE UTILITIES DETERMINED THAT THEY'RE ECONOMICALLY VIABLE, BEGAN A PROCESS TO PROCURE THESE TECHNOLOGIES AS THEY ARE NECESSARY FOR THE UTILITY TO MEET ITS FUTURE CARBON FREE GOALS.
ANYBODY HAVE ANY ISSUES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? NO.
ANYTIME SOMEBODY WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION, I SO MOVE.
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN.
[02:20:02]
WAITING PATIENTLY FOR COMMISSIONERITEM NUMBER 13 HAS NOW BEEN ADDED TO THE, WELL, RIGHT NOW 13 UNTIL EVERYTHING GETS RENUMBERED AGAIN AND TEXT.
I'M TRYING TO STICK WITH WHAT SHE'S GOT THERE SO WE DON'T RUN INTO PROBLEM.
YOU ARE NOW BACK TO YOUR MAIN DRAFT BILL.
FEEL FREE TO MAKE FURTHER AMENDMENTS.
THANK YOU, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER AN ADDITIONAL AMENDMENT, AND I HAVE GIVEN THE TEXT OF THIS TO, TO OUR FRIEND MS. GOODWIN, WHO WILL BE TYPING IT IN THE, THE LANGUAGE IS WORK.
AUSTIN ENERGY SHOULD WORK WITH ERCOT TRANSMISSION OWNERS TO MAXIMIZE DEPLOYMENT OF GRID ENHANCING TRANSMISSION TECHNOLOGIES, INCLUDING RECONDUCTORING ON ALL TRANSMISSION AFFECTING THE AUSTIN ENERGY LOAD ZONE.
I, SO I JUST WANNA BE ABLE TO READ IT
OR IF YOU WANNA READ IT AGAIN, CERTAINLY POSSIBLY.
AUSTIN ENERGY SHOULD WORK WITH ERCOT TRANSMISSION OWNERS TO MAXIMIZE DEPLOYMENT OF GRID ENHANCING TRANSMISSION TECHNOLOGIES, INCLUDING RECONDUCTORING ON ALL TRANSMISSION AFFECTING THE AUSTIN ENERGY LOAD ZONE.
THE RATIONALE IS THAT THEY CAN DO THIS MUCH FASTER AND AT MUCH LOWER COST THAN, THAN BUILDING NEW TRANSMISSION.
AND THAT AUSTIN ENERGY CAN'T DO IT ALONE.
THEY NEED TO DO IT WITH PARTNERS BECAUSE OF, THERE'S OTHER PEOPLE'S CONTROLLED TRANSMISSION THAT AFFECTS THE, THE FIX THAT WE ARE IN, IN TERMS OF LOAD ZONE CONGESTION COSTS.
AND WHAT IS YOUR, WHAT I'LL CALL THE, YOUR, YOUR SUMMARY LINE, YOUR BULLET LINE.
AH, WHAT'S YOUR BULLET PIECE? UM, GRID ENHANCING TECHNOLOGIES.
HE, HE ACTUALLY DID MAKE SUCH A RECOMMENDATION.
AND MAY I HAVE A FLOOR? OH, SORRY.
IF VICE CHAIR ROBBINS, UH, I ACTUALLY, HE ACTUALLY DID MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION AND I ASKED HIM, WELL, I THOUGHT AUSTIN INTER, I TOLD HIM, ASKED HIM.
I, I THOUGHT AUSTIN ENERGY WAS ALREADY DOING IT.
UH, I THOUGHT THAT THEY HAD, UH, ALREADY IMPLEMENTED, UH, THE NEW TRANSMISSION, UH, UH, PROTOCOLS.
UM, I RECALL READING THIS IN, UH, A MEMO.
THEY'RE NOT DOING ENOUGH OF IT, AND PROTOCOLS ARE DIFFERENT THAN ACTUAL TECHNOLOGY INSTALLATION.
SO I THINK I MEANT INSTALLATION.
I NONETHELESS, UH, WOULD, WOULD ANY OF THE AUSTIN ENERGY STAFF KNOW IF I'M CORRECT IN MY ASSUMPTION OR NOT? DON'T ALL SPEAK AT ONCE.
I WAS GONNA SAY, IT SEEMS LIKE THE FOLKS ALL LODGE SHOULD HAVE SOMETHING
THEY MAY NEED SOME RECONDUCTORING THEMSELVES.
OH, MR. GENESEE, PLEASE FEEL FREE.
I'M, I AM, WHAT WAS THE QUESTION AGAIN? THE, THE, THE QUESTION IS, ARE YOU AWARE OF WHETHER AUSTIN ENERGY IS ALREADY DEPLOYING ANY GRID ENHANCING TRANSMISSION TECHNOLOGIES SUCH AS RECONDUCTORING? YEAH.
I BELIEVE THE ANSWER IS YES, BUT WE WOULD NEED TO CHECK WITH LISA AND HER TEAM ON THAT.
THERE ARE MANY, MANY GRID ENHANCING TECHNOLOGIES THAT CAN HAVE SIGNIFICANT IMPROVING, UM, EFFICIENCY BENEFITS FOR THE GRID AND FOR CONGESTION COSTS.
SO I DON'T THINK THERE IS ANY HARM IN LEAVING THIS IN BECAUSE THERE IS, THERE'S HONOR NOW I'LL MAKE THE MOTION, BUT I'M GONNA JUST SAY FOR THE RECORD THAT, UM, THE TRANSMISSION GRID ENHANCING TECHNOLOGIES ARE PROBABLY THE BATTLESHIP, THE FLAGSHIP ON THIS.
UH, AND, UM, IT, I THINK IT WOULD, I THINK IF WE HAD MORE SPECIFICITY, UH, IT, UH, THE RESOLUTION WOULD CARRY MORE WEIGHT.
[02:25:01]
SUPPORT IT.ANY OTHER THOUGHTS OR COMMENTS? OTHERWISE, I'M HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
SECOND MOVE BY VICE CHAIR ROBINS SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN.
COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ IS VERY EAGER ALREADY WITH THE HAND UP
WE'RE BACK ON OUR MAIN RESOLUTION.
YOU MEAN WE CAN VOTE ON THIS? YES, PLEASE.
I CALL THE QUESTION OF THE, UM, OMNIBUS.
SECOND, THERE HAS BEEN A MOTION BY VICE CHAIR ROBBINS TO, UH, ACCEPT THE, UH, RESOLUTION OF THE AUSTIN ENERGY GENERATION PLAN.
OMNIBUS BILL, AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN.
UH, THIS IS A FORMAL VOTE, SO WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO DO ROLL CALL ON THIS ONE.
COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN? YES, PLEASE.
AND THE CHAIR VOTES SNOW 7 1 0.
YOU KNOW MY RULE
WE ALL HAVE OUR HILLS TO DIE OUT.
SO DID WE GET A FORMAL ANSWER ON WHETHER OR NOT WE NEED TO DO
[2. Discussion and recommend the Resource Management Commission bylaw change asking the Austin City Council to expand its purview to advise on issues related to natural gas utilities.]
ANYTHING ON THE TEXAS GAS THING? BECAUSE I HAVE WHIPPED UP A RESOLUTION, WHICH IS BASICALLY, LOOK, THIS IS WHAT WE TOLD YOU.NOW DO IT, BILL IF WE NEED IT.
SO THE, THE ANSWER TO THAT WAS IT'S NOW, IT NOW HAS TO BE APPROVED BY COUNCIL.
SO YOU SENT IT TO AUDIT FINANCE.
AUDIT FINANCE HAS BEEN WORKING WITH STAFF TO MAKE THE CHANGES, AND NOW IT THEN GOES TO CITY COUNCIL AND DO, SO YOU CAN PASS THE NEW LANGUAGE AGAIN IF YOU WANT.
COMMISSIONER SILVER STATE, DO WE HAVE CONFIRMATION THAT THE LANGUAGE THAT COMMISSIONER ROBBINS WORKED OUT WITH DIANA THOMAS OF AUDIT AND FINANCE WILL BE SENT UP AS, UH, AS, AS THE VERSION THAT THAT WAS NEGOTIATED AS OPPOSED TO DO WE KNOW THAT THEY'RE GONNA SEND UP A NEW LANGUAGE THAT WE'VE ASKED FOR THAT WE'VE AGREED TO THERE? THANK YOU.
UM, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE AGREED TO BECAUSE I HAVE THEN OKAY, THEN YES.
NATASHA, DO YOU HAVE THIS WRITTEN DOWN? NOPE, I HAVEN'T GIVEN IT TO HER YET.
HERE'S THE, HERE'S THE BACKSTORY.
MONTHS AGO, MANY MONTHS AGO, WE THIS COM THIS COMMISSION ADOPTED LANGUAGE EXPANDING THE LANGUAGE OF OUR BYLAWS WITH RESPECT TO TEXAS GAS SERVICE, TO SAY THAT WE WANTED TO HAVE REVIEW PURVIEW OVER A WHOLE BUNCH OF STUFF, INCLUDING OPERATIONS AND CONSERVATION PROGRAMS AND A LOT OF OTHER THINGS ASSOCIATED WITH THEIR FRANCHISE AGREEMENT AND THEIR RATES AND AUDIT AND FINANCE GOT ALL HALF, IT WAS ADOPTED, I THINK UNANIMOUSLY BY THIS COMMISSION.
THERE WAS ONE VOTE AGAINST ONE VOTE AGAINST AUDIT AND FINANCE SAID AFTER MANY MONTHS OF DELAY, WE THINK THIS IS TOO BROAD AND YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE ALL THIS POWER AND WE'RE GONNA OPPOSE IT.
AND, BUT, BUT THEY TOOK MONTHS AND MONTHS AND MONTHS.
IT'S BEING VOTED ON NEXT WEEK.
PAUL DID SOME, UM, EXTENSIVE AMOUNTS OF COMMUNICATION WITH THOMAS OF CITY STAFF ASKING FOR NEW LANGUAGE THAT MET OUR MORE LIMITED GOALS BECAUSE WE INSISTED THAT WE DID IN FACT HAVE THE AUTHORITY WITHIN OUR, THE BYLAWS.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO CEMENT AND ARTICULATE THE AUTHORITY WE DO HAVE.
AND WE FINALLY GOT NEW LANGUAGE FROM THOMAS THAT IS SIGNIFICANTLY STREAMLINED.
[02:30:01]
AND WHY DON'T YOU READ THAT NOW? UH, THIS WOULD BE DI DI DIANA THOMAS, RIGHT? WHO I BELIEVE IS THE HEAD OF FINANCIAL SERVICES.I'LL READ INTO THE RECORD THAT THEY'VE CHANGED OUR RECOMMENDATION TO, UH, UH, 0.5 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NATURAL GAS UTILITY RATE MAKING, FRANCHISE AGREEMENT PRIORITIES, AND OPERATIONAL POLICIES FOR WHICH THE CITY HAS REGULATORY AUTHORITY AND POINT, UH, AND, AND THAT WOULD BE, UH, POINT D FIVE AND THEN POINT E SIX REGARDING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NATURAL GAS UTILITY RATE MAKING, FRANCHISE AGREEMENT PRIORITIES, AND OPERATIONAL POLICIES FOR WHICH THE CITY HAS REGULATORY AUTHORITY.
SO IF, IF I MAY RESUME MR. CHAIR.
SO OUR GOAL HERE, AND IN EXCESS OF CAUTION, IS FOR THIS COMMISSION TO ADOPT THE MODIFIED LANGUAGE THAT MR. ROBBINS JUST READ OUT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE LANGUAGE THAT WE HAVE AGREED TO, THAT WE NOW AGREE WITH THAT LANGUAGE.
AND WE WILL, IT WILL BE SENT UP CONSISTENT WITH THE NEW LANGUAGE TO CITY COUNCIL NEXT WEEK.
AND SO I HAVE PROVIDED AMY THE, THE LANGUAGE, I'LL, I'LL JUST KIND OF READ IT AND THIS, SHE'LL HAVE IT ON SCREEN IN A MINUTE OR TWO WHEN SHE CAN GET IT TYPED UP.
IF SHE CAN INTERPRET MY CHICKEN SCRATCH, GOD BLESS HER FOR TRYING.
UM, BUT ESSENTIALLY IT SAYS, WHEREAS THE AUSTIN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT COMMISSION PASSED RECOMMENDATION 2 0 2 4 0 5 2 1 0 0 5, AND 2 0 2 4 0 6 1 8 0 0 3, REGARDING AMENDMENTS TO THE BYLAWS OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT COMMISSION.
AND WHEREAS CHANGES TO THE AMENDMENTS HAVE BEEN RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY OF AUSTIN ATTORNEY, AND WHEREAS THE AUSTIN RMC AGREES TO THESE CHANGES, EXCUSE ME.
THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT THE, GOD, I CAN'T READ MY OWN HANDWRITING.
THE AUSTIN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT COMMISSION RECOMMENDS RECOMMENDATION 2 0 2 4 0 6 1 8 0 0 3 AS FOLLOWS, D FIVE REVIEW AND ANALYZE, AND THEN THE SECTION THAT HE HAD READ TO YOU EARLIER, AND THEN E UH, SIX E OR SORRY, E SIX.
I KNEW I'D GET IT EVENTUALLY ADVISE THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE SECTION THAT HE HAD PUT IN THERE AS WELL.
AND SO SHE'S TRYING TO WHIP SOMETHING UP AS QUICK AS SHE POSSIBLY CAN.
BUT BASICALLY IT'S REMOVING THOSE SECTIONS,
SO THIS, HOW IS THIS PAGE DIFFERENT? WHAT WE'RE ESSENTIALLY DOING? YOU SEE THAT FIVE, THIS PAGE, THEY, THEY SAY THE SAME PAGE.
WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS, IS ON THE ORIGINAL BILL, WHICH I THINK IS WHAT YOU'VE GOT HERE, RIGHT? YOU'VE GOT D AND THEN FIVE BELOW IT ISSUES, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, ALL THAT STUFF THERE.
SO ALL YOU'RE DOING IS YOU'RE REPLACING IT WITH C YOU GOT THE SMALL THING DOWN THERE.
THAT FIVE, THAT ONE IS GONNA BE REPLACING THERE.
AND THEN E SIX IS REPLACE WITH THE SHORTER LANGUAGE.
SO'S THIS WITH THE, WITH YOUR, WHEREAS IS AT THE TOP.
WITH WHATEVER THE RELEVANT WHEREAS IS AND THEREFORE IS AND WHO'S IS WHAT THE TOP.
IF, AND, AND, AND SINCE I WROTE THIS ONE, I'M BASICALLY, LIKE I SAID, THE IDEA BEHIND THIS IS ESSENTIALLY TO LET THEM KNOW, YOU KNOW, THIS IS, WE'VE AGREED TO THIS, WE'RE SENDING THIS FORWARD.
WE ARE HOPING THAT THIS IS THE LAST TIME THAT WE HAVE TO PASS ONE OF THESE, BECAUSE THIS WILL BE NUMBER THREE.
I IMAGINE IN FEBRUARY IT'LL PROBABLY BE NUMBER FOUR, BUT WE'LL, WE'LL GET THERE WHEN WE GET THERE.
SO I, UH, I, ARE YOU MOVING THE RESOLUTION? YES, PLEASE.
I SECOND AND I WILL, I THANK MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS FOR THEIR HELP, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE COMMISSIONERS, SILVERSTEIN, DAVIS, UH, AND SCHWARTZ.
AND, UH, THE CHAIR HELPED A LITTLE BIT TOO.
YOU GUYS DON'T WANNA READ WHAT YOU'RE VOTING ON FIRST.
THIS IS HOW CONGRESSIONAL BUDGETS GET PASSED AND WE END UP HAVING THESE MASSIVE LIABILITIES FOR THE REST OF OUR LIVES.
[02:35:01]
GIVE HER A MINUTE.A STALL, HUH? YOU CAN READ IT AFTER IT'S PASSED.
THAT WORKED OUT GREAT FOR US, DIDN'T IT?
I THINK THAT'S HOW WE GOT THE PATRIOT DONE.
UH, YOU WANT TO CAPITALIZE AUSTIN? SHE WAS ALREADY.
THAT IT, WE FEEL GOOD ABOUT THIS.
AND WHO MADE THE MOTION? DID YOU GET THOSE? UH, I DIDN'T TAKE THAT YET BECAUSE I WANTED TO.
I IGNORED IT SO THEY COULD ACTUALLY LOOK AT WHAT THEY WERE MAKING A MOTION ON.
SO WE'LL HAVE TO DO THAT AGAIN.
MOVED BY COMM, VICE CHAIR ROBINS.
AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN.
VOTE IF EVERYBODY COULD TURN ON YOUR CAMERAS AND WAVE HELLO TO THE CAMERA AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
WE'RE MISSING ONE COMMISSIONER.
COMMISSIONER SCHWARTZ OFF THE DAY.
COMMISSIONER SILVERSTEIN? YES.
SO THAT IS SEVEN ZERO IS A ONE COUNT AS AN ABSTENTION WHEN HE IS OFF A DAYS.
DO YOU WANNA SUPPORT THIS? ALL RIGHT.
[FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
ITEMS THERE.ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU GUYS WANNA TALK ABOUT WHEN WE RECONVENE IN JANUARY? DIDN'T YOU WANT TO, TO PUT SOMETHING ON YOU? NOT RIGHT NOW.
WE HAVE WHO'S UP IN JANUARY FOR REGULAR PRESENTATIONS? I'M NOT SURE.
IT'LL BE A SURPRISE TO US ALL.
UH, SEEING THAT EVERYBODY SEEMS TO BE ITCHING TO GET OUT OF HERE, I'M HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
HELLO? THERE HAS BEEN A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
THEREFORE, WE'LL CONSIDER OURSELVES ADJOURNED AT, I CAN'T READ MY WATCH FROM THAT DISTANCE.
I WISH I WERE A PRINCESS AND YOU WERE MY OH, HAPPILY EVER AFTER I, I WISH BESIDE ME SO.