Locavolts Unite! 2008 Bay Area Clean Energy Caucus Notes

Locavolts Unite!  2008 Bay Area Clean Energy Caucus
November 13th, 6-9p
Freedom Hall at Glide Memorial Church
330 Ellis Street (at Taylor), San Francisco

Opening Speakers Updates/Plenary

Ross Mirkarimi – SF Supervisor
Talked about election results, need for a political u turn in terms of renewable energy and the environment.
San Francisco: frustrated by lack of results, support from regional, state and national government.
Need for more local action to demand change in energy policy.
Prop H: we were outspent massively, yet 125,000 people still voted with us.  Prop H offered a timeline with mandates for renewable energy.
Local renewable energy programs offer a way to stabilize the workforce, if they can offer local jobs (Ross says they will).
Gave example of plastic bag legislation as a local action that started a national movement.
Others (politicians) that are adopting green ideas / mantra are not attaching real standards to their rhetoric.  Need to hold them accountable by “reminding them of the dissent” that would meet them if they don’t live up to their promises.
http://www.sfgov.org/mirkarimi

John Rizzo – Sierra Club
How did Prop. H come to be?  It was “born in Ross’s office.”  Idea was to meet a deadline that scientists (in Europe) are saying we need: 80% GHG reduction by 2020.  While it was being drafted, the Prop. started to get attacked.  PG&E: “push polls”, door hangers, lobbying in City Hall.  They spent $10,000,000 vs. our $50,000.  Why would they spend this much?  2 reasons: 1. They don’t want clean energy mandates (same as in Prop. 7).  2. They don’t want “in city decentralized generation.”  The model preferred by the utilities is large centralized desert infrastructure.  PG&E makes its money transmitting power.  They will fight any local measure.
http://sanfranciscobay.sierraclub.org

Ian Kim – Ella Baker Center
Facing Race Conference. Talked about parallel issues like green opportunity in our economy, solar power for local events.  Work force development: Oakland Green Jobs Corps.  The idea is to connect “green employers” who are doing construction, landscaping, installation, etc. with local youth.  Working on state wide legislation to provide career education / pathways for the Green Economy.
http://www.ellabakercenter.org

Dave Ralston – City of Oakland
Mentioned City of Oakland Green Jobs Corps, Reliant-Williams Energy settlement.  Talked about his work with the City of Oakland Redevelopment Agency.  Most difficult issue is how to make this a sustainable program – how to keep the Green Jobs Program going 3 and 5 years from now?  Redevelopment money could be a source.  Limitations on this funding are that the money has to help reduce blight and improve public spaces.  By helping people conserve and reduce their footprint on the local environment, they hope to be able to acquire funding.
http://www.business2oakland.com/main/redevelopment.htm

Redwood Rob Simpson - Hayward
Started with renewable energy in the 1980s (until tax credits ended).  Next tried to help sequester carbon by giving away trees.  Feels his efforts are dwarfed by the emissions from power plants like in Hayward. 14K MW have come online in the last 10 years.  Another 10K MW are already approved.  The only power plant that was stopped was the Eastshore Power plant (in Hayward).  The effort to stop these power plants are massive – need to form coalitions, mobilize thousands of people.  “Death by 1,000 cuts.”  Talked about plants proposed in Pittsburgh, San Francisco.  This undercuts renewable energy by bringing cheap energy online.

Ian Pocock – Rising Sun Energy (CYES)
Talked about California Youth Energy Services.  Opportunities for youth 15-24, provides free services to renters and seniors.  They try to help clients reduce energy use and educate them how they can conserve.  Provided for free.  This provides summer jobs for the young people.  They’re trying to first get the “low hanging fruit.”  Looking at the home as a complete system.  GETS – Green Energy Training Services.  Create a workforce development program for young people 18-35 modeled after CYES.  Expects that demand for efficiency services will increase as people stay in their homes longer.  “Pre apprenticeship” training with local employers who need youth / part time labor.  Final level of the training would be jobs placement.  Working with EBC and Solar Richmond.
http://www.risingsunenergy.org

Kirsten Schwind – Bay Localize
Community Choice Energy – brief explanation.  Explained the need for continuing to lobby cities of Oakland, Berkeley and Emeryville to look at Community Choice Energy and promote local clean energy.
http://www.baylocalize.org

Nils Moe - Berkeley
Berkeley’s 2050 goals.  How to increase decentralized renewable energy?  Right now only 400 out of 40,000 households in Berkeley have solar installed.  What are the options to help get more homeowners to invest in solar?  The City is helping property owners pay for efficiency improvements and solar installations through their Property Tax bill.  There is a legal background to let the City do it.  Prop. Owners pay off their solar install at a fixed rate over 20 years.  If they move/sell the house the payments are transferred to the new owners.  The application process just opened (Nov. 5th).  Response was overwhelming – the most frequent call to the mayor’s office.  They only have $1.5 million to use.  Thinks that this program can be used to also fund water retention systems and other complementary goals.
http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/ContentDisplay.aspx?id=26580

Peter Asmus
Talked about West Marin Cty.  New models for solar development.  Problem with the dependency of solar installations on the grid.  If the grid goes down, solar power disappears too.  He/they are trying to fix this.  “Solar Safety Net”.  Concept of “LocalVolt” is to turn around the model where power is brought in from outside, then local power is added.  In their model, (“Solar Safety Net”), electricity storage devices are installed on the property with a solar installation to allow the property to go “off grid.”  DC/AC hybrid systems.  Something to provide basic needs – refrigeration, lower power uses.   Point Reyes Station is experimenting with these systems.  Renewable Energy Communities (Ruscoes).  Says there is a CEC grant program for this. 
http://www.cleanpower.org - should be done early December

Michelle McGeoy – Solar Richmond
Talks about the social aspects of their program.  Keep local men and women employed and offer them “meaningful work.”  Local homeowners benefit also – a lot of the labor is offered for free.  Difficulty of the local workers competing with college graduates from other places (e.g. UC Davis).  So it’s important that jobs in the local community are given to local citizens who need them most.
http://www.solarrichmond.org/

Debra Berliner – Berkeley Ecology Center
Talked about Berkeley Climate Action Plan – Measure G.  A plan to live locally, and reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2050.  Their vision is outlined in the “Low Carbon Diet” document.  Organize people into local groups – could be coworkers, neighbors, family members, to 1) figure out what their carbon footprint is 2) come up with an action plan and 3) over the course of 1 month, perform the action plan.  Invited audience to participate in the plan by coming to a meeting at the Ecology Center, or can receive training from the Ecology Center.
http://www.ecologycenter.org/

Paul Fenn – Local Power
Mentioned problem with Dingell in the Federal Energy Commission.  Public Power / Community Choice Energy in San Francisco.  2001 the plan was adopted which set the standard 50% by 2017, of which 210 MW had to come from within the city.  Local Power was hired to roll out the plan.  They are planning to begin implementation in 2009.  SF is planning to issue $600 million in bonds. Sonoma also looking into Community Choice Energy.  Need to build a Bay Area wide constituency.  Need to cross over and support other Community Choice Energy efforts.   
http://www.localpower.com/

John Corcoran – Marin Clean Energy
Talked about MCE.  Started in 2002 after Community Choice Energy legislation was passed.  Spring 2008 they launched the “education” program.  Then the JPA was launched.  County is set to pass MCE on Tuesday (Board of Supervisors).  Next Tues. at 9:30 a.m..  Fairfax and Tiburon would be the second and third towns.  They need their biggest users to approve – San Rafael and Novato.  San Rafael will be considering Dec. 1st and 15th.  If San Rafael passes the plan, the JPA/other cities can start to meet in January.
http://www.marincleanenergy.info/

Update: The Marin Board of Supervisors unaminously voted on Tuesday to form a JPA for Community Choice.
http://www.localcleanenergy.org/news/marin/jpa http://cbs5.com/localwire/22.0.html?type=bcn&item=ENERGY-AUTHORITY-bagm-

Jim Lutz – Oil Independent Oakland Task Force
Works with the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Energy Analysis Dept. that does appliance efficiency.  OIO was a task force of citizens appointed by the mayor and council that started May 2007.  Oil is the backbone of our transportation system – can’t replace it as easily.  What can the city do?  The City has control over land use, can promote transit corridors and get transit systems to work better together.  The City also has little leverage over the Port Commission, can ask them require different/cleaner fuel sources for cargo ships and airplanes.
http://www.oaklandnet.com/Oil/

Timothy Burroughs – City of Berkeley
Talked about the climate action plan.  Still in draft status.  Can be reviewed and commented on.  It was set in motion by a local ballot measure, Measure G, which asked if the City should set a target for carbon emissions reduction and implement a program to reach it.  Was approved by 80% - a “local mandate.”  Talked about the need for local solutions to global problems like climate change.  What happens in local communities can spread elsewhere.  The CAP is only a work plan.  It will take “residents changing their behavior” for things to change.  In order to achieve our goals we need stronger coalitions.  We need to be working with advocates for social justice and public health.  Public Health benefits like healthier living (more walking) and cleaner air (less pollution) should be mentioned more.
http://www.berkeleyclimateaction.org/

Breakout Sessions

PG&Es history in fossil fuels and energy efficiency, misinformation and the media
Speakers: Barbara George, Aliza Wasserman, Amanda Witherall
Barbara:
Spoke about the status of the power mix (and energy efficiency) that PG&E is currently buying and delivering to customers.  It isn’t adding up to the state mandated level of required renewable energy mix. PG&E’s power mix uses 47% from natural gas, 22% nuke, 13% large dams, 5% coal, 4% waste energy and only a mere 8% from renewable.  They are going backwards.  They count nuclear and hydro as renewable, even though this isn’t recognized as renewable energy.  PG&E plans to invest further in nuclear and natural gas in the future.
Their green advertising tells a very different story from their sworn testimony in the procurement proceeding at the CPUC.

When their hit team tried to peddle PG&E's green fairy story to Marin cities to undercut Community Choice, clean energy advocates ousted them with this info and they finally pulled out of the presentations last month. The cities are now voting on Community Choice Energy. So far we have three town councils plus the County each voting unanimously to leave PG&E on their first of two rounds of voting. (Two of them voted Monday.)

Aliza: 
Introduced GGAG - Green Guerrillas Against Greenwash (GGAG, http://www.letsgreenwashthiscity.org ) 
a citizen group formed out of disgust for PG&E’s ‘Lets Green This City’ greenwashing campaign that attempts to associate the gas and nuclear energy company as environmentally-friendly.  The group is comprised of grassroots based activists who are outraged at PG&E’s attempt to prevent cities from implementing policies - such as Community Choice Aggregation - that provide hopeful alternatives to PG&E's dirty energy. In the past several years, we focused on producing high-profile actions and guerrilla ad-busting to embarrass PG&E and expose their plans to undermine truly green legislation.
We raised awareness in SF about what's really green
We did postering runs, hit crowds & public events.
Worked mainstream media to generate stories – look on our website for links to press coverage.
While PG$E ran strong in their deceptive ad campaign, and we countered it just as hard -  SF's Board of Supervisors PASSED the Community Choice Energy implementation plan in June of 2007
Prop H went down with 41% of the vote in favor, and 59% against.
We were outspent on PR by 16,100%.
PG&E is very savvy in their green washing strategies – they project themselves as a green company with press coverage, massive campaigning and winning awards for being a green company.

Their method also is to put the responsibility of greening the city on individual action, so that diverts the public eye from their actions and accontability.

Also – they have a carbon offset Climate Smart program – though offsets don’t work.

Amanda Witherall, Journalist, SFBG
In the wake of the devastating 1906 earthquake and fire, the city of San Francisco desperately needed reliable supplies of water and electricity. Its mayor, James Phelan, pressed for the damming of the Tuolumne River in the newly created Yosemite National Park. Ultimately, passage of the passage of the Raker Act in 1913 by Congress granted San Francisco the right to flood the Hetch Hetchy Valley.

The RA called for the dam to be used not only to store water but also to generate electric power. This power was to be sold directly to the citizens of San Francisco through a municipal power agency at the cheapest possible rates. The objective was for publicly-owned water and electrical energy to free the city from private monopoly. If San Francisco didn’t honor the terms of the Raker Act, it would lose the federal waiver.
By the early-twenties San Francisco had built a powerhouse in Tuolumne County to use the energy of the dam. SF bought hundreds of miles of copper wire to run that power into the city. After the powerlines were to be installed, SF agreed to sell the hydro-power to the utility company Pacific Gas & Electric, which would use its grid to carry the power to San Francisco, for which PG&E would sell the power back to the citizenry at an incredibly high mark-up. With this agreement, the city continued to construct its own grid, but by this time PG&E had already organized city government in its pocket. The city managed to get its grid as near to San Francisco as a PG&E switching station but then the money for the project ran out. The public's copper wire was then shelved.
In the Roosevelt era, Interior Secretary Harold Ickes fought a tenacious struggle, which was then capped by a favorable US Supreme Court decision in the early 1940s, to force San Francisco to abide by the terms of the Raker Act. PG&E's mayors, newspapers, public utility commissioners, city supervisors and legislators through all the following years successfully thwarted the bonds required to finance a municipally owned utility.
In all the years past this point, the Raker Act became forgotten and PG&E has ruled supreme ever since.
Public power has been taken off the agenda in the state of California for decades. Labor took it off because it was co-opted. The newspapers took it off - they get a lot of advertising from PG&E. If you're a politician and you go up against PG&E, they make sure that you're not a politician for very long. San Francisco has seen this pattern for decades. They get elected, get to City Hall, and then PG&E rolls them over and the scandal continues. The Guardian has been working with various groups for years on this issue of the Raker Act scandal and PG&E.
(Group discussion only had 5 minutes)
Goals for the future –
Take back our rights as shareholders
Pass Community Choice Energy in SF and Marin

Improving Energy Efficiency and Home Performance
Ian Pocock – Rising Sun Energy CYES (California Youth Energy Services) spoke about new GETS (Green Energy Training Program) focused on whole home performance based on infrared imaging, duct blasters and blower doors.  This identifies specific energy loss and trains program participants to both assess and fix these problems.  This goes beyond the low hanging fruit of the CYES program, which switches out lightbulbs and water fixtures, as well as is systematic.   
Challenges exist when the specialized contractors recommend home improvements based on what specific service they provide(eg HVAC contractor suggesting bigger HVAC system, water heater contractor suggesting new water heater), where whole home performance audits give tailored results of specific building.
GETS is looking at both residential and commercial opportunities for energy auditing and then get trainees jobs in the community – one business they are talking to about employment opportunities is Sustainable Spaces.
Major difficulty is that the market needs to be grown
Major opportunity is energy savings and green job creation
George Kopf of Rising Sun added that in the process of developing curriculum they are having conversations with potential employers to make sure that participants have the skills that employers are looking for.  A big part of this is that these companies are doing good work but don’t have high demand. How to raise awareness in residents about the $/energy savings in whole home performance audits?
They are building relationships while developing the training curriculum for this new program, the goal is to get the first cohort launched in the next 3 months (may be ambitious)  They are getting great feedback from contractors, but the issue is that they are not able to commit to hiring folks from this program.
They are also involved in a collaboration called Green Leap – which includes Rising Sun, Spanish Speaking Citizens foundation, Richmond Build, and others which gives hands on training.
There is a Contractors Council Meeting on December 9th – they are still actively looking for contractors to join.

Scott Wentworth, City of Oakland, spoke about Energy and Climate Action Process.  City of Oakland is trying to get the word out; to get participation from the community at large in order to get folks interested in the process. He also wants people to be able to tap into existing resources.  There is often money left in the “trough” and we need to use this money to show that it is important to continue to provide funding.
He is also working on policy support: working with PG&E to help them see the benefit/importance of these “feel good” programs like GETS as it relates to their portfolio and image.
Energy Climate and Action Plan – Dec 11
Business focus 4-6pm
Residential focus 7-9pm
Open Discussion/Q&A:
Affordable Comfort is another workshop that is focused on energy efficiency.
What are some metrics on energy savings?
-The issue is that there really aren’t universal metrics that you can use across the board, it is dependent on each building.
-Life cycle costs are a good measure, what is the best value depends on each building, the idea is to bundle the services in order to find synergies.
What do we do to explain to short-term thinking politicians the importance of long-term planning?
-Green For All- is developing energy efficiency programs, which can become models/experiments for others to see how prioritizing energy efficiency could work with different national models.
-Saving the most carbon requires building analysis.  Each building and neighborhood is different.  Building analysis allows for a master plan – it looks for key opportunities.
-Efficiency may NOT be the cheapest, but there is a lot of work required to bring buildings up to a proper standard – lot of work=lot of jobs=politicians happy.  The cost of this work is coming from any number of different agencies and businesses, which shares the burden of additional cost to hire.
Buildingsolutions.com – check out this site
How do we target renters?
-There is a challenge but it may bring us closer to the solution. Landlords may be reluctant initially to make investment in efficiency, BUT we can work together with them, help to point them in the direction of money that exists to get the work done.

Community Choice Energy Implementation Steps and Strategies Notes
Experts/ Authorities- Eric Brooks and Barbara George
·    Community Choice- empowers community and locals to become buyers of energy/ decide where energy comes from
·    CC- If a community doesn't opt out then PG&E will try and lock customers in
·    Example of CC- In central valley a huge amount of solar is in their CC proposal, the next step is trying to figure out what developers will give us for our money.
·    How to successful progress CC?
·    Going door to door, outreach on the street
·    It will take years to get the word out, the media has a blackout on the issue
·    Local groups are bought off by PG&E and other large utilities, why aren't local non-profits getting behind the cause? Given money to quiet dissent
·    Public power initiatives more difficult than community choice, community choice is difficult as it is?
·    "get ready to meet your neighbors to make this happen"
·    Make a community out of the left the same way that the republicans had community during the 2000/2004 election years. Get out and meet people, make a network.
·    In CA the only cities the survived the blackout made money.
·    The community says- this is what we want and then an ESP is hired and packages it up
·    PG&E drums up the fear that citizens will be in the dark when and if community choice is implemented. tremendously successful marketing campaign
·    The city will not run the energy plan, it will be contracted out to the private sector
·    Community Choice Energy- the community needs to have meetings and needs to push
·    Must be a citizen driven initiative
·    Get in contact with Baylocalize to get on city governments and pressure them
·    PG&E all over climate change issue in marketing
·    If you do have community meetings with energy companies such as PG&E you should bring a video-grapher, amateur or professional, this changes PG&E, scares them and they will act differently because they know that what they are saying could end up on the internet and make them look bad
·    Why are SF citizens disconnected? PG&E effective in marketing? Public Power replaces PG&E, turns people off.
·    Voter fraud issues in SF?
Break out discussion inside the breakout discussion-
·    Community Choice Energy totally revisions energy, can be creative, share energy, a power CO-OP
·    More interaction with how you get energy
·    Be in control of your own destiny
·    Takes profits from your CC energy systems and can be reinvested in ways that suit the community, PG&E when it invests energy expects a turn around in 5 years whereas a community can spread out that investment over a longer period of time
·    Finance your own CC renewables with the money saved
·    "we are doing this for our benefit"
·    Unfair advantages for PG&E- hugely successful propaganda machine can be hired/ Marketing approach
·    for Community Choice Energy to work we need to think about what will motivate Joe the plumber to buy in?
·    How is Community Choice Energy presented? how can we make it more understandable?
·    People that cant be bothered will already be in, they will default and be part of the Community Choice Energy movement in their community. CO-OP means opt in. You must contact PG&E to opt out of the Community Choice Energy
·    How to get regular people excited?
·    Change the verbage- from Community Choice Energy to CLEAN ENERGY FOR YOUR CITY, more approachable for normal people
·    Community Choice Energy will meet or beat PG&E prices.

Fighting Gas Power Plants
·    Rory Cox– fight against natural gas power plants
·    Rob Simpson- Hayward clean and green,
·    Rory – community groups fight the import terminals for foreign fossil fuels. Terminals are extremely dangerous. Making it a bigger issue in the community, by helping people understand this is anti clean energy and localization. Creating a unified net work of communities
·    Rob-how did you achieve success? Organized thousands of people, FAA supported it, because plumes from the plants would tip the airplanes when they were trying to land. CEC overrides any legislation to get dirty power plants developed. Mary Hayashi wrote bill to not let a second plant into a community that does not want it. One plant was approved the 1st one Russell city(?), second one was not. Rob went through plans for 2nd plant, which stated they would be 90% percent more energy efficiency. But he found out that they would be 5% less efficient. Regional or federal authority is the only level of law that the CEC will listen to.  So city must go to the state level.
·    Rory- ab13 state law creates punishments if utility companies do not meet standards by 2013.
·    PG&E still makes money from rate payers just for building plants event if they never power them. 39 plants came on line since the late 90’s and 15 or 20 have been approved just in California.
·    Leah- PG&E plans to create a pipeline from Canada to provide power to Washington, Oregon, and cal.
·    Q. What strategies do the companies do to stop you?
·    Buying out community centers and donating major bucks, telling folks they’ll lose power if no new plants are built.
·    It's the energy commission s choice where we put our plants, and we'll put them anywhere we can.
·    There are ways of sequestering emissions in natural ways.
·    To fight power plants do homework to find out how the federal, state and private sectors are negatively affected and involve them in the fight.

AB32 Compliance for Cities
 John Corcoran, Garrett Fitzgerald and Timothy Burroughs   
Ted Bissell, former Marin City. Builder
AB32 – Global Warming Solutions Act – signed by the governor in 2006.  Goal of the law is to reduce GHG statewide to 1990 levels by 2020.  The state is supposed to be starting to implement / decrease GHGs by 2012.  Puts the CARB in charge of implementing it.
John: There are 2 elements: 1. Impact on cities / municipal operations and 2. Impact on citizens / business.  We’ve been looking more at #1 – municipal operations.  Not as much commercial industry in Marin.  Need to obtain votes in the cities first.  Talked about Marin Clean Energy and its contribution to attaining the AB32 goals.  62% of Marin’s GHG emissions are related to transportation.  MCE can’t do much about this unless people all buy plug in hybrids.  MCE can do other more creative things to help people: solar panels, weatherization, conservation / efficiency. 
Garrett: “The reality is that there is nothing in AB32 now that requires local municipalities to do anything differently.” 
John: Yes, the Attorney General has filed lawsuits against cities that don’t analyze climate emissions as part of specific development projects.
Rory: there was an action in Oxnard when a power plant (LNG terminal?) was first approved, but then the State Lands Commission said that this didn’t comply with AB32.
Garrett: the State (CARB) drafted the scooping plan that emphasized state level control and ignored local measures.  Only more efficient vehicles can be sold in the state.  We’ve got to increase renewable electricity % in the state.  The state wants to set a target for VMT throughout the state.  But will the state actually create incentives for the next 1,000,000 people who move to California to move to localities that have public transportation infrastructure and not in the central valley?  Will local transit infrastructure projects get more funding from the state? 
John: mentioned SB 375 – the law that attaches transportation dollars to infill development and TOD. 
Timothy:  SB375 also establishes regional emissions targets.  This will mandate that the ABAG get more involved in regional transportation planning and development.
Rory: the latest draft of the scoping plan is available on the CARB website.  Anyone can login and submit comment.  Steinberg (the author) said the reason 375 passed was 1. coalitions that were supporting the bill (health, social justice, builders) and 2. …?
Community Choice Energy and AB32: Garrett: thinks the reason the East Bay Cities are recommending against the plan is they don’t feel it’s possible to implement it right now.  Too complicated, too high a hurdle to get credit, etc. etc.  John suggested to help Marin Cty by lobbying them now.

Collaborating with unions and Redevelopment on workforce development

Chevron won the job to solarize City Hall because it was a “union job”, rather than using a local business such as Solar Richmond

There is a lot of competition between job training programs in different cities, such as who would have better incentive for employers that hire from the different programs.  This creates an atmosphere of rivalry rather than cooperation.

Oakland’s Redevelopment department has money to spend: 
·    This is a potential funding stream because it can be used to increase energy efficiency in affordable housing. 
·    There could be grants also to support small-scale solar installation programs, which could then expand out to larger programs.
·    Idea: Put solar panels on low-electricity-consumption buildings such as warehouses, and then transfer the solar energy to low income housing
·    Maybe develop a “local green WPA program” with Parks.  This would be a public infrastructure program.  But how would we get contractors to do the green work, since it won’t be very profitable?

There is no prevailing wage for solar installation!

Unions Point-of-View
·    Solar installation isn’t financially feasible for any contractor if they use electrical workers’ prevailing wage.  There has to be an incentive.  Idea: Good for training, so also pay employers to train workers while installing; this makes 2 sources of revenue.
·    Unions don’t want to lose the market share.  Unions believe they have the skills already, so they won’t want to subdivide into those who will and won’t do the work.  However, if unions give up the solar market, they will lose that market forever.
·    Idea: Make a program where the unions get a share of financial incentives or make an incentive to them to install solar panels.

Others Point-of-View
·    There’s no accountability for contractors to use local workers
·    On jobs, the contractor will send out 1 electrician and 9 technicians.  This makes more work for the contractor, but the job is done less efficiently.
·    Apprenticeships in unions are very hard to get- need a certain number of mentors per apprentice, and they need to pass tests before acceptance into the program (but a lot of them can’t pass these tests due to illiteracy)

How do illegal immigrants fit into the picture?
·    Illegal immigrants aren’t in unions.
·    They will be hired by non-union contractors that don’t pay prevailing wages.  This happens more often in small, private, residential programs

Next Steps
·    Good to have a constant dialogue to see different pathways, points of view
·    There is still a lot of money in lighting retrofits, which are not always union jobs and may not pay prevailing wage
·    No program for training technicians to assess for the electrical needs for each property so that energy efficiency is a part of any electrical job
·    Maybe start a “green union”

Building Power and Raising Money for Clean Energy

Tools to get power
1.    Lots and lots of organizing
·    table at events
·    create petitions and use multiple medias to reach people
·    create a very good, comprehensive database and list of man power
2.    Find out who the decision makers are
·    What influences these decision makers
·    Who influences these decision makers
3.    Find the process; then influence it!
·    Rules and procedures
·    Talk to councilmen
·    Who is the chair for different groups?  When do they meet?

Unions and large companies are a challenge to work with
·    Set up meetings to find out WHY
·    Start a dialogue to try to build an alliance rather than fighting
·    Find out what influences them, i.e. PG&E has a big contract with the unions

Local companies are good at running a business, but bad at managing community engagement.  Those that manage community engagement help bring business to local companies, but running a business doesn’t help community engagementà try to have a partnership to help each other out can build power and raise money for everyone!

Not a lot of policies require the use of local companies or local workers
·    When jobs are put out to bid (government jobs, school jobs, etc) the lowest bidder gets the job, but may me from out of state.  Local companies can’t compete!  But those companies also don’t always consider efficiency and don’t consider what you need (you only need 3 lights but get 10 instead)
·    Makes it harder for local companies to get work, and thus more difficult for these local companies to be involved in local training programs.  “I need the job in order to train the workers”.

Training program/ apprenticeship
·    Retention is hard to track- how successful are these programs
·    Learn the most from hands-on, on-the-job training (workforce development)
·    Need companies to be involved and hire them

Lessons from trying to push Prop H, and what if you had to do it again with no money?
·    Putting it on the ballot was worth it, even if we lost!  We got awareness.
·    Run in synergy with other clean energy campaigns
·    Didn’t realize how much PG&E would spend!  This information should be made public
·    Next time, we need REAL power, hopefully more money, and need more time
·    We didn’t have the full community and grassroots organizations engaged
·    Didn’t fully use and activate endorsements.  It was very hard to keep track of all the groups that endorsed
·    Engage the public more to make a personal connection

Race, Ethnicity Obstacle
·    Very big race-gap.  This movement isn’t reaching everyone.  Not reaching colored communities in full force.
·    Sometimes there is a disconnect between groups and this can create misinformation
·    Go into these communities and start a dialogue with them too: churches, community groups
·    Understand where these people are coming from too and their priorities (i.e. food and shelter before energy efficiency)

Community organization
·    Communities can organize and use their collective power to make things happen.
·    This can bypass the bureaucracy and red tape associated with the government
Example: One Block off the Grid (www.1bog.com) where a block will go to a solar company and make a deal with them to install solar panels on all their homes at a discounted rate.