HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-06-13 Climate Action and Sustainability Committee Summary MinutesCLIMATE ACTION &
SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 1 of 9
Regular Meeting
June 13, 2025
The Climate Action & Sustainability Committee of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the
Community Meeting Room and by virtual teleconference at 1:30 P.M.
Present In-Person: Veenker (Chair), Lu
Present Remotely: Burt
Absent: None
Call to Order
Vice Mayor Veenker called the meeting to order. The clerk called the roll and declared all were
present.
Public Comment
David C. thanked the Committee for the resolution upholding Palo Alto values and protection
against the current Administration. The Committee was reminded of involvement in No Kings
Day and stressed the importance of democracy.
Standing Verbal Reports
A. Staff Comments
Brad Eggleston, Director of Public Works, reported that the Youth Climate Advisory Board
(YCAB) celebrated the first school year of climate action and sustainability work.
Subcommittees will continue projects over the summer, and a progress report will be made to
the City Council in August. A new group of YCAB members will be selected by the end of this
month for the upcoming school year.
Director Eggleston mentioned the Full-Service Heat Pump Water Heater Program had installed
5 to 10 of the 120V plug-in water heaters. This represented approximately 2 percent of total
installations. The Emergency Water Heater Replacement Program had installed 6 of the 120V
heat pump water heaters, which equated to about 30 percent of those installations to date.
The team had been monitoring field studies of the 120V plug-ins throughout the U.S. The
program guidelines were tailored to incorporate best practices so customers with plug-in pump
water heaters had sufficient water to meet their needs. Standards incorporated in the Palo Alto
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 2 of 9
Climate Action & Sustainability Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 6/13/2025
program included the size of the water heaters, which was upsized by 2 relative to gas water
heaters to meet minimum plumbing code specifications recommended for moderate-size
homes and small families. The placement should be in conditioned spaces avoiding outdoor
placement, and the tank temperature should be set to 140°F. At the request of the Committee,
Director Eggleston will provide data on what household sizes have used the 120V heat pump
water heaters in Palo Alto and any feedback on negative experience with inadequacy.
Director Eggleston stated the Low Carbon Concrete Reach Code requirements were available in
Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 16.14.240. This set the standards for concrete to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions. This applied to all Tier 1 and Tier 2 residential and non-residential
projects. Most remodels and new constructions were included. The cement limit pathway
limited the cement content of concrete. The embodied carbon limits pathway required use of
certified lower emission materials. The Building Department had used the cement limit
pathway since January of 2023. The Committee will be supplied with estimates of carbon
reduction as a result of the program, including Scope 3 reductions. Improvements for next year
include identifying head of staff who will mentor and provide project ideas. There were
currently 11 members, with a maximum of 15.
B. Committee Member Comments and Announcements
Vice Mayor Veenker reported the Silicon Valley Youth Climate Action Group Youth Climate
Summit was taking place in August. This was co-sponsored by the League of California Cities
Peninsula Division. It will be in Campbell from 9:30 to 3:00. Panel discussions will take place,
and council members were encouraged to participate. The next meeting of the Recycling and
Waste Reduction Commission of the County will take place on June 26, 2025. The last meeting
extended product responsibility rulemaking for manufacturers in the County’s food waste
program. Regarding the Northern California Power Agency, there was an understanding that
the California ISO approved a second transmission line coming into Palo Alto. The Commission
for the Air District passed budget and new fee schedules. The Policy Grants and Technology
Committee Meeting is next week. The Board Meeting will take place on July 2, 2025. The
Stationary Source Committee had potential amendments to appliance rules, including
mandates regarding no-NOx appliances being discussed.
Councilmember Lu stated that 2 members of the Palo Alto Student Climate Coalition presented
the argument and current situation of SB 684, which was referred to as “make polluters pay.”
This measured monetary damages from effects of climate change and applied fines to fossil fuel
companies. The status of the bill was uncertain. Councilmember Lu will monitor the bill through
Student Climate Coalition members and provide updates at future meetings.
Councilmember Burt shared that the MTC Planning Committee recommended approval of Plan
Bay Area 2050+ to the Board. There will be a complete redo in the next couple years. This
covered GHG reductions that would result from the strategies of the plan that were
attributable to MTC's actions. There would be an impact on the whole region in GHG
reductions, which was relevant when calculating projected reductions. This would make staff
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 3 of 9
Climate Action & Sustainability Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 6/13/2025
aware what regional reductions from transportation would reduce the GHG inbound and
outbound commute trips. This was being adopted now and will be presented to the Board
promptly.
Agenda Items
1. Approval of Schedule for 2025 Climate Action and Sustainability Committee Meetings
Director Eggleston stated that the Committee meetings being held on Fridays, tried to find
dates that worked for both Committee members and staff. These were regular monthly
meetings for the remainder of the calendar year. Due to agenda and flow, two meetings were
proposed for September.
Councilmember Lu mentioned conflicts to his attendance where he would most likely be able to
attend remotely on August 22, September 19, and October 3.
Vice Mayor Veenker proposed that because the September 19 and October 3 meetings would
be back-to-back, and that she would not want Councilmember Lu to miss both of those, that
perhaps one of those dates could be adjusted. October 3 would conflict with the wedding of
Councilmember Lu. It was suggested that the Schedule be approved and look at the October 3
date.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Veenker moved, seconded by Councilmember Lu, to approve the
following schedule for its regular meetings through calendar year 2025:
• August 22, 2025, 1:30 P.M.
• September 5, 2025, 1:30 P.M.
• September 19, 1:30 P.M.
• October 3, 2025, 1:30 P.M.
• November 14, 2025, 1:30 P.M.
• December 12, 2025, 1:30 P.M.
MOTION PASSED: 3-0
1. Discussion of Gas Utility Transition Study Scoping; CEQA Status - Not a Project
Jonathan Abendschein, Assistant Director, Climate Action, provided a slide presentation to the
Committee to ensure the scope will get the answers, results, and information needed to make
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 4 of 9
Climate Action & Sustainability Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 6/13/2025
policy decisions. City, state, and regional policies drive building electrification. If successful, gas
use will decline significantly. The City must plan for financial, physical, and safety impacts to
enable a safe, smooth, equitable transition. This was a Council priority. The study will address
operational and financial impacts, provide the costs of gas main and service abandonment, and
provide data to understand how electrification will affect gas utility costs and cost impacts to
other utilities in the General Fund. This data will be used to manage the transition safely and
responsibly. Strategies will be developed to facilitate abandonment and mitigate physical and
financial impacts.
The 4 scenarios for modeling purposes were presented; however, those scenarios excluded
medical and industrial electrification. Blocks of gas infrastructure identified as underused or
unused will be retired. Gas mains of certain sizes may need to be retained for operational
purposes. The cost efficiency of block-level gas system retirement showed abandoning by block
versus by service was less expensive. One of the main drawbacks included homeowners having
to remove all gas appliances before the retirement can be accomplished. There could be a
reduction in the workload of the gas utility but not enough to cause staff attrition. This would
increase the per-unit gas cost for remaining customers. Shared costs may shift to other utilities.
Preliminary results will be shared by fall of 2025 with an anticipated final report by early 2026.
Vice Mayor Veenker mentioned that the staff did not request any particular action but wanted
feedback on the scope of the study.
Councilmember Lu felt the direction and approach were great. The timelines were appreciated,
and good clarification was provided. One of the major concerns was how to incentivize
residents and how the program could work outside of this study. The percentage of homes that
disconnected corresponded to the percentage reduction in climate emissions. Councilmember
Lu thought it was important to track the number of people incrementally electrifying appliances
and look at the trajectory. It was queried if the modeling was repeatable and flexible. The
question was posed if there was a difference in cost projection when evaluating a multifamily
block disconnection versus a single-family block disconnection. Using real-world data from
other pilots was suggested, such as possibly data from Albany and Zurich.
Director Abendschein commented there was a meeting with the working group this past week.
A lot of the questions focused on how this could affect the likelihood that people will retire
their gas systems. It was affirmed that the FY26 budget provided funding for learning about
related programs and the involvement of pilots. The gas financial model can be used to look at
the current state of the system and any simulations. The goal was to look at the usage of each
parcel. A lot of work must be done before removing a single gas connection to a multifamily
building. A multifamily building with 30 units was analogous to a block with 30 single family
homes.
Councilmember Burt asked which other Cities or utilities had similar programs and meaningful
data or models because he thought it was beneficial to engage with any of those entities. It was
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 5 of 9
Climate Action & Sustainability Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 6/13/2025
mentioned that Stanford University might have an interest in collaborating, and there could be
a high value with their research and partnership.
Vice Mayor Veenker circled back to the 20 percent medical and industrial left over and the fact
that this excluded the cost of retiring the entire system. The question was raised if there would
be significant additional costs, which was beneficial to know as early as possible. It was felt that
the block-by-block approach was good because of safety and efficiency; however, there must
be 100 percent consensus.
Director Abendschein stated that when operational costs were considered regarding the 80
percent scenario, there will be an idea of what the savings are, and then a calculation can be
made of the entire physical abandonment cost. Currently, it cannot be accurately estimated
what other costs might be encountered. The working group was thinking about strategies to get
the holdouts to agree to retire gas appliances.
To consider how aggressive the program policy should be, Councilmember Lu suggested
simulating that when 70, 80, and 90 percent electrification was achieved on a block that the
block would be disconnected 1 year later.
Director Abendschein responded that there was a maximum orderly and maximum disorderly
electrification scenario performed in 2021 for the Utilities Advisory Commission. This scenario
showed rates that matched the forecast at the time, and maximum disorderly was 50 percent
higher than the gas forecast. The current program used more of a random simulation approach.
It will assign likelihoods to see what is achieved depending upon the number of simulations.
The analysis will provide the information needed to assist with modeling policy options and
aggressiveness. This would be part of the second phase of the analysis in 2026/2027.
Item 2 Public Comment
1. Stephen R. (Zoom) opined it seemed there was an assumption that industrial users
systems cannot be retired, which should be looked at very carefully. There were plenty
of ways to replace natural gas as a heat source using either electric heaters or heat
pumps. The remaining few gas customers needed to assume gas rates will go up very
quickly, as the cost will fall completely on them. A cost penalty for this should be in
place. A lot of help will come from the Bay Area Air District Rules 9-4 and 9-6, which
prevented the sales of gas, hot water, and space-heating appliances on a timetable
going out to 2030. Harvest Thermal had a unit that combined space heating, air-
conditioning, hot water, and energy storage in a single system and might be a way to get
people to switch over quickly.
2. Tom K. commented that he was glad this effort was being undertaken. The large
decommissioning costs of gas utilization should be estimated and allocated now for
volumetric changes. Incentivize escaping those costs by participating in electrification.
This gives residents freedom of choice.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 6 of 9
Climate Action & Sustainability Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 6/13/2025
Director Abendschein clarified there was not an assumption that industrial users will not be
able to decrease usage but there was uncertainty on how to model it. There were tools to
allocate costs to remaining gas customers. It would be a policy choice for the City to subsidize.
Revenue sources must be consistent with state, constitutional, and regulatory law.
3. Recommendation to City Council to Accept the E-Mobility Strategic Roadmap; CEQA Status -
Under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, Projects Consistent with an Existing General or
Comprehensive Plan do not Require Additional CEQA Review
Director Abendschein presented the goals, which included the City Council acceptance of the E-
Mobility Strategic Roadmap. E-mobility included cars, e-scooters, e-bikes, e-trucks, and e-
aviation. Guidelines on other work plans were implemented to incorporate e-mobility. A
consultant study needed assessment to determine how many chargers were required for
different levels of vehicle adoption. VMT reduction can be short or long term. GHG reduction
was being sought in the shorter term. Transportation goals were to seek as much VMT
reduction as possible. Last-mile solutions, maintenance barriers to e-bike adoption, bike safety,
and benefits of VMT reduction were discussed. S/CAP transportation goals included the
reduction of VMT and reduction of emissions for the remaining VMT. Co-benefits of VMT
reduction were reduction of air pollution, congestion, and health benefits of active
transportation. Shared vehicles, loaner bikes, e-bikes, and rental programs can help expand the
program. The scope of the E-Mobility Strategic Roadmap extended into other plans and
programs including hydrogen transportation, electric grid planning, and the Bicycle and
Pedestrian Transportation Plan. The focus of the Roadmap was to promote e-mobility for
emissions reduction and to ensure adequate infrastructure for e-mobility vehicles. Using e-
mobility solutions and infrastructure enhanced planned active transportation and public transit.
Electric grid solutions will be integrated into e-mobility programs. This effort will guide the
development of the 2026-2027 Work Plan. There were 5 strategies, with 3 overarching ones
that included promotion, infrastructure, and coordination with related plans.
Next steps: 6/13/25, committee recommendation; August, City Council acceptance of the E-
Mobility Strategic Roadmap; fall 2025, align existing programs with the Roadmap, align
proposals for new programs, review the Roadmap with any other relevant stakeholders, and
integrate work items aligned with Roadmap into proposed S/CAP 2026-2027 Work Plan.
Item 3 Public Comment: David C. stated that since this is a bike-friendly city, encouraging bike
use should be a part of every advertised event. This mode of transportation does not require
infrastructure.
Councilmember Lu agreed the plan made sense. The emphasis on micromobility was great.
There were safety considerations, including how explicitly streets acknowledge e-mobility and
the unique risks of e-mobility. The quietness of electric vehicles and e-bikes may have a blind
spot. The streets need to be looked at with an e-mobility lens. If this was an emergent safety
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 7 of 9
Climate Action & Sustainability Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 6/13/2025
issue, it was wondered if there was speculation on how this would inform any other parties 2
years from now. This was a broad set of projects or concepts with short and medium-term
actions.
Ria Lo, Chief Transportation Official, shared details of the Safety Action Plan, which was
adopted last week. There was expressed concern regarding the weight of an EV. This will be
explored.
Director Abendschein mentioned the issue of overpowered e-bikes was being addressed in the
plans. Director Abendschein stated this Roadmap was the beginning with more efforts to
follow. If there were gaps, the 2026-2027 plan will be modified. There was a high-level vision in
the longer term. Any areas of focus should be shared.
Councilmember Burt asked about the feedback received from the S/CAP working group. The
function of e-transit, electrified trains and busses, and mode shift to transit was facilitated by
last-mile things such as e-bikes. Councilmember Burt wondered if this was in the redline.
making the transit hubs stronger provides momentum. It helped to facilitate bus to train and
train to bus. There was a sense of urgency with trying to reign in the excessive use of e-
motorcycles that was creating safety hazards. The co-benefits should be highlighted throughout
the community regarding safety, parking, less traffic, and air quality. There should be a greater
focus on shared vehicle hubs, Zipcar rentals, and e-bike sharing. Charging rates were then
discussed mentioning a $0.40 per kWh. This would be a bit above PG&E rates for charging at
home. The City chargers were $0.25 per kWh, which included maintenance charges. The
installation cost was grant-based. There needed to be attractive pricing for charging. The lowest
cost of electricity was when there was the greatest solar generation, and this was when
commuters would be charging.
Director Abendschein explained that people using electrified transit were within the scope of
the Office of Transportation and Mobility efforts. The Roadmap referred to how to facilitate
electrified transit. The focus of the transit hubs will be on all 3 and not just downtown, ensuring
those were well connected with opportunities to switch to active transportation and
micromobility. For weekend inbound commuters, it was important that the charging rates were
attractive. There have been buildings measured for greenhouse gas reduction from VMT
projects. It may not be able to be measured directly but it should not stop the measurement
that is being done.
Vice Mayor Veenker asked that the redline information be shared. Another point was on the
scope of the Roadmap. There will be a lot of questions surrounding bicycle storage, batteries,
and fires, so those items needed further explanation.
Director Abendschein explained that the redline content of the Roadmap was presented for
approval today. If this input was included, it must be incorporated into the motion. The redline
backup slides were presented. Roadmap Strategy 4 concerned the use of e-bikes and e-scooters
to enhance last-mile employer commuter programs. Action 3 added the use of e-mobility to
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 8 of 9
Climate Action & Sustainability Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 6/13/2025
enhance community VMT reduction efforts, with behavioral programs around e-mobility
strategies with active transportation and public transit. Residents of Palo Alto were included
but residents could not be added to the employee commute portion. Potential Strategy 2,
Action 4, provided more explicit wording. Getting EV charging and infrastructure into all parts
of the community and doing it cost effectively, trying to avoid transformer panels or other
electrical upgrades. Solar storage was a big dimension to this. The group will need to take time
to work through this. There will be an effort to make sure every heavy-duty charger installed
will be well utilized. The first opportunity to test this will be in the next phase. Strategy 5,
Action 1, rate design that facilitated employee daytime charging, could fall under the Strategy
2, Actions 2 and 4, and more explicit language can be added. The promotion of e-mobility to
complement public transit was in Strategy 1, Action 2 but charging for transit was under
Strategy 2, Action 3. There may be some benefit to adding public transit centers to the list. This
is where it can ease the provision of electrical infrastructure for support chargers.
Councilmember Lu emphasized the importance of spreading out the cost of the transformer for
equitable distribution.
Vice Mayor Veenker underscored safety. The staff report mentioned the promotion of e-bikes
and e-scooters came after Safe Routes to School, so coordination with Safe Streets policies was
important. Legislation was underway in Sacramento regarding e-bikes. E-bikes should be
promoted in a safe way. There must be a needs assessment done to avoid overbuilding. Light
EV chargers and robust EV chargers were of note. The public fast chargers seemed like a hybrid
between light and robust. Strategically, adding public fast chargers made sense.
Councilmember Burt spoke on pricing for commercial charging to incentivize within Palo Alto
with preferred variable rates for lowest cost and greenest electricity. Strategy 1 needed to be
explicit and clearer on the intent. Facilitating electrified air transit should be included. Air
transportation should be referenced as a form of e-mobility and pursuing decarbonization
related to electrified or other decarbonized air transportation. The program should include
everything related to VMT and address all forms of electrified transportation opportunities.
Director Abendschein queried how this should be captured in this document. There should be
more of a tie-in with the Reliability and Resilency Strategy and the Airport Plan. If the
Committee was interested, electrified air transit could be included under Strategy 2, Action 3
but it was noted it was outside the realm of VMT reduction and electrification. Charging and
infrastructure for e-aviation had to be determined. The airport should be consulted on
acceptable language.
Vice Mayor Veenker asked for agreement, in terms of ground infrastructure, that the program
will facilitate, promote, and support without acting as if the airways were within the control of
this program. There was agreement with low-cost rates and daytime charging. Palo Alto’s
charging cost was similar to home charging. It was emphasized that projects needed to be
approached carefully to avoid underutilization.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 9 of 9
Climate Action & Sustainability Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 6/13/2025
Councilmember Burt stated that $0.25 per kWh was a fraction of what was charged by privately
owned commercial charging providers. The cost per kWh must include maintenance and
replacement costs. The rates have to keep the program sustainable. Utilizing power when
electricity was greenest and the lowest commodity cost should be the goal. The City received 2
forms of General Fund revenue. Additional revenue could be put back into this program.
Director Eggleston had been approached by several companies developing eVTOL, electric
vertical takeoff and landing. This was a new area of aviation, and the Palo Alto Airport was
identified as an optimal spot for providing these services. There was hesitancy last year with the
City Council on a long-range facility and sustainability plan for the airport.
MOTION: Councilmember Burt moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Veenker, to recommend the
City Council accept the E-Mobility Strategic Roadmap, as amended below:
• Include Strategy 4 and Strategy 2 redline edits from backup slides of staff presentation.
• Add residents to Strategy 4 Overview.
• Review wording for Strategy 5, Action 1, for clarity and intent to promote public and
workplace EV charging at advantageous rates where feasible.
• Add transit and mobility hubs and e-aviation facilities to Strategy 2, Action 3.
MOTION PASSED: 3-0
Future Meetings and Agendas
Director Eggleston announced the next meeting would be August 22. The topics will include
2026-2027 Sustainability Work Plan items, the Multifamily EV Charging Program, and Reliability
and Resiliency Strategic Plan.
Vice Mayor Veenker stated the Youth Climate Summit will take place on August 9.
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 3:51 P.M.