Energy Advisory Committee

MEAC minutes January 21, 2014 Attending: Dan Jones, Johanna Miller, Alison Hollingsworth, Andi Colnes, Anne Watson, Becky Wigg, Kiel Corey, Alex Prolman, Jessie Baker, Tim Shea, Jim Stiles, Hannah Reckhow, Ken Jones, Jeff Fitzgerald, Barbara Congrey, Bill Neuberger Meeting called to order at 7:04 Motion to approve minutes (Becky) Seconded (Johanna) Status of Solar RFP process Anne gave an update on the Solar RFP review process: there are three top contenders, would like to ask them more questions (difficult to compare them), will schedule interview next week or so Pilot Projects with GMP Andrea gave an update. Through GMP/EAN connections, there is interest in starting pilot projects. John Hollar is in support, recommends presentation to city council that presents vision of NZM, GMP/EAN/MEAC partnership, and next level vision planning piece Elements of pilot: heat pump pilot (no upfront costs), solar net metering project (ppa), small building top wind turbines, solar-powered streetlamps, monitoring power usage (dashboard), electric vehicle chargers (tech assistance from city, GMP would pay) Next steps: by end of January we’ll get a list from GMP clarifying costs/mechanisms designed into 1 year kickoff, outreach to mayor and city council at next meeting, develop plan for press conference to launch it The next level planning could be like EAN decade milestones. Could we set milestones for MZN? The committee then discussed how the NZM project fits into MEAC’s overall vision and the role of MEAC with regard to role of City Council with large projects. Johanna: NZM is overarching goal, not a contract. Can be pursued with potential projects. MEAC just helps decide which project to choose. Alison: questions of jurisdiction – would GMP have to ask city council to start projects? No, it’d be for support. Different levels that city would serve Incorporation of Montpelier Master Plan in NZM Comparison of Master Plan and EAN report on NZM by Dan Costin Dan: shows how Master Plan and EAN report don’t quite line up (lack of ‘pathways’ to Master Plan goals) Anne and Alison expressed that they didn’t see that division. Ken: would like to see MEAC decide its role in big projects. Despite our skills there are topics that we cannot always cover. For example, with the District Heat project a Local Development Corp could be useful. Should MEAC take these huge things on? There are topics that we should seek out a professionalized approach? Andrea: yes it’s really big and complex, but I don’t think it will happen with big plan mapped out. It will happen with excitement and momentum. Some projects will be of the scale that MEAC can do thinking and some will be way too big. MEAC’s role will be to say ‘here you need professional assistance’. MEAC will need to set vision, provide guidance in one way or another. EAN is a professional resource. Anne: likes idea of a local development corp taking this on, district heat was going to be handed off anyway. Leave MEAC to do projects it’s excited about. Becky: being realistic about what MEAC can do, can’t sustain energy fair level of activity year after year. Advisory role is appealing, hands on when appropriate. Kiel: agrees with Becky, getting idea out there soon is important and letting it take shape as we go. Tim: we have vision, no more time needed discussing that. Can start to get projects underway. Be advisory. Educators. Creating opportunities. Liaisons with entities in community. Bill: withhold comments, nothing new to add Alison: NZM is nice umbrella to work under for many years, so we don’t need to redefine what we’re doing every year for every project. Fussing over definitions not useful. Let’s do stuff this year. Johanna: in my experience, best thing energy committees can do is to provide voice and energy. Let’s not lose that aspect. Dan: MEAC is instigator of project towards goals, and I hear more comfort with smaller projects. Andrea: So, things on table moving forward: talking with city council, GMP pilot, solar RFP, Netzero transportation hub, MEAC subcommittees Alison: ACEEE City Ranking as tool to instigate projects Jim: professionalization is part of picture to build capacity Johanna: Govenor’s award for environmental excellence, we should nominate ourselves Feb 13th Washington county energy committee The committee broke up into groups to brainstorm project Anne: will plan to work with Ken and Dan and Jim and Alex on LDC idea. Presentation to council? Dan: subcommitte was working on it, will call meeting within two weeks… Jim: in light of open meeting law, email archive would be more transparent. Jessie: happy to set up, but remember that meetings over email enable people to participate. Dan: Sen. Sanders will be back mid March.This would be a good occasion to have a NZM proposal. Allison: Would this committee manage money from grant? Dan: for city, submitted by city, but we could write it Tim: already have RFP, why not turn it into a grant? (3 mill?) Dan: Local benefit corp, could use tax credits Meeting ended at 8:29