HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-08-22 Climate Action and Sustainability Committee Summary MinutesCLIMATE ACTION &
SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 1 of 9
Regular Meeting
August 22, 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), Burt
Present Remotely: None
Absent: Lu
Call to Order
Vice Mayor Veenker called the meeting to order.
The clerk called roll.
Vice Mayor Veenker declared there was a quorum.
Public Comments
There were no public comments.
Standing Verbal Reports
A. Staff Comments
Director, Public Works Department, Brad Eggleston provided an update on the YCAB, which will consist
of 11 high school students from 4 schools. The new Sustainability and Climate Action Communications
and Engagement Report will report on ongoing and upcoming engagements. In the second quarter of
2025, there had been a giveaway campaign for a heat pump water heater, and the winner will be
announced soon. Postcards were mailed to all single-family homes in Palo Alto regarding the heat pump
water heater programs, which has information on the Emergency Replacement Program. Marketing
related to the California Tech Program for heat pump water heaters and heat pump HVAC systems will
continue until the funds are exhausted, which will likely happen in September. Lawn signs promoting
electrification are available as well as an on-line sign-up sheets. A new contract will be launched soon to
enhance communication and engagement efforts. The first efforts will audit existing work, and an
annual strategy will be created. A mailer with a sticker for single-family homeowners to place on their
gas water heaters is being finalized. It will include emergency safety tips, resources, and information
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 2 of 9
Climate Action & Sustainability Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 8/22/2025
related to switching to a heat pump water heater. New social media for home electrification will start
this week, which will share programs, resources, and educational information about the benefits of
home electrification. As part of the Heat Pump Water Heater Program, it is expected that a refer-a-
neighbor campaign will launch this quarter. Staff is starting to collaborate with the YCAB team on efforts
to share Instagram posts, etc.
Vice Mayor Veenker asked if the gas water heater stickers will address the Emergency Replacement
Program and if CASC could have an interaction with YCAB.
Director Eggleston confirmed that the Emergency Replacement Program is an important component of
the water heater stickers. CASC could have an interaction with YCAB.
Committee Member Comments and Announcements
Councilmember Burt suggested the September 5 meeting start at 3 p.m., and that YCAB attend that
meeting.
Director Eggleston stated meetings are scheduled for September 5 and 19. Staff will try to reschedule
the October 3 meeting. He will look into YCAB attending the September 5 meeting.
Vice Mayor Veenker mentioned that the general manager of NCPA announced his retirement, which will
probably occur the end of January, so the Executive Committee will search for a successor this fall. As
there has been misinformation circulating regarding Air District rules, she invited folks to reach out to
her or the Air District directly with questions or concerns. The County Recycling and Waste Reduction
Commission will meet on Wednesday.
Councilmember Burt queried if there could be a study session for City Council related to the Foothill
Wildfire Prevention Plan or an update brought before the CASC.
Director Eggleston will follow up with the City Manager regarding that. The Wildfire Audit is upcoming.
Vice Mayor Veenker added that there is a plan to discuss wildfire mitigation in the next couple months.
Agenda Items
1. Sustainability Priorities for the 2026-2027 Sustainability and Climate Action Plan(S/CAP) Work Plan;
CEQA Status - Not a Project Approval of Schedule for 2025 Climate Action and Sustainability
Committee Meetings
Sustainability Program Manager Christine Luong provided slides and an overview. Key S/CAP areas have
been divided into climate action areas and into 4 sustainability areas. There are 16 proposed
sustainability priorities for 2026-2027 – 3 in water areas, 5 in climate adaptation and sea level rise, 5 in
the natural environment area, and 3 in zero waste. She outlined the strategy for each. The proposals
had been discussed with the Climate Action Working Group. There was overwhelming support for the
WaterSmart Portal. It was suggested that awareness be raised related to practical things the community
can do to address sea level rise. There was a suggestion to make increasing the tree canopy in South
Palo Alto more goal oriented and/or measurable and achievable. There was a request for metrics to
assess the health of existing trees and a request for more community education about impervious
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 3 of 9
Climate Action & Sustainability Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 8/22/2025
surfaces. A final 2026-2027 S/CAP Work Plan final draft will be presented to the Committee for review,
and then it will go to Council for review and possibly approval.
Public Comments
There were no comments.
Councilmember Burt spoke of the nexus between wildfires and water impacts. A potential and
significant risk is flood protection programs and plans being based on the protection of a watershed that
will hold back flashflood waters, and a major fire in a watershed could change the ability to have the
desired flood protection. He suggested that flooding impacts as a result of climate change be an
additional topic. He discussed a flier which indicates the tree canopy is at 44 percent and asked if the
percentage has increased because certain geographic areas are now included. He will forward a copy of
the flier to Director Eggleston.
Urban Forester Peter Gollinger replied that he is unfamiliar with the flier. The 44 percent sounds correct
for the entire city limits. Studies primarily focus on urban areas. Excluding urban areas, it is not 44
percent but more in the mid-30s if averaged out.
Manager Luong added that she believes the 44 percent is from Google Environmental Insights Explorer
data.
Director, Public Works Department, Brad Eggleston stated he will look into the flier. The goals and key
actions in the S/CAP and the KPIs do not include the Foothills, etc.
Vice Mayor Veenker understood that it is at 37 percent and aiming at 40 percent.
Councilmember Burt addressed green stormwater and queried if filtration systems that run off heavily
used roadways should be considered. Sea level rise should be adequately communicated to the
community and City departments. He discussed Utility staff not being aware of certain requirements. He
questioned what the boundaries are for the horizontal levees and if there has been a projection of
anticipated water use based on continuing the efficiency trend combined with the impacts of new
development, which is primarily housing.
Assistant Director, Public Works, Karin North voiced that education is important, and Utility staff was
recently trained on sea level rise requirements. Departments are being made aware of available maps
and being reminded of the Sea Level Rise Policy adopted by Council. She outlined the boundaries of the
horizontal levees.
Director Eggleston added that the maps are in the GIS system and show ground water levels and
projected levels of ground water increase. Tools are being built to address the concerns raised by
Councilmember Burt.
Assistant Director, Utilities, Karla Daley responded regarding projecting anticipated water use that they
are in the process of reviewing a new demand study facilitated by the Bay Area Water Conservation
Agency. There are preliminary numbers, which staff has questions about. They are being compared to
the urban water use objectives. The information will be shared when it is ready. A first look at the
demand study is tentatively scheduled for the December UAC meeting.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 4 of 9
Climate Action & Sustainability Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 8/22/2025
Vice Mayor Veenker spoke of particulate matter from tires and brakes as it relates to green stormwater
and filtration systems. She requested that staff speak to the concerns related to water distribution
system risks from climate change.
Director, Utilities, Alan Kurotori responded that on the water distribution side they are investigating fire
hardening facilities and defensible space around such facilities. All pump stations have backup diesel
generation. Electric infrastructure is being undergrounded, and fiber is being provided to all facilities.
Vice Mayor Veenker asked if generators have to be diesel, if there is a sense of grant funding for sea
level rise and the outlook for the grant for the RSAP Program, where information can be found regarding
the horizontal levee, if there will be financial interaction between the horizontal levee and the existing
levee repair, how the City interacts with the county program on food waste, and what is being done
about textiles.
Director Eggleston answered that generators use renewable diesel, which has significantly lower GHG
emissions. Concerning the RSAP Program, the SB1 grant is for the coordinated County effort. There will
not be any financial interactions between the horizontal levee and the existing levee repair.
Watershed Protection Manager Julie Weiss replied that the county is optimistic about grant funding for
sea level rise. She is cautiously optimistic. The proposal is solid. The hard deadline is September 30, but
they expect to hear something in the next 2 weeks.
Assistant Director North answered that information on the horizontal levee can be found on the
website. There is a product factsheet. It is grant funded through the San Francisco Estuary Partnership.
Hopefully ground will be broken in the next month or so. It will likely take 2 years to complete.
Regarding food waste, staff is actively involved in the county program and sits on the committees, etc.
Environmental Control Program Manager Maybo AuYeung replied regarding food waste that the City is
following SB1383 and focusing on composting. The City has a recycling and composting ordinance. There
is an edible food recovery requirement that is part of SB1383, which is addressed through a countywide
effort through RWRC with joint ventures, which provides education and inspection of food service
establishments. The City depends on the county program because it is efficient. Staff focuses on
community education. The curbside program does not consider textiles recyclable. However, it is part of
the clean-up day, and there is a Repair Cafe Program.
Vice Mayor Veenker suggested there be greater frequency than just the clean-up day for textile
recycling.
Director Eggleston responded that staff will further consider enhancing/upgrading textile recycling.
NO ACTION TAKEN
2. Status Update on Studies Related to the Electric Utility’s Reliability and Resiliency Strategic Plan
(RRSP) Strategies 4 and 5 and Request for Feedback on Draft Proposals for Implementation. CEQA
Status: Not a Project
Assistant Director, Public Works, Jonathan Abenschein provided a status update. Progress has been
made on all the strategies and actions in the RRSP, which is in Attachment F, and a lot of progress has
been made on Strategies 4 and 5. Slides were displayed. Julian Parsley with Buro Happold led the cost
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 5 of 9
Climate Action & Sustainability Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 8/22/2025
benefit analysis and will develop the overall report on Strategies 4 and 5 focusing on the cost benefit
and potential programs. A couple other consultants’ work will also be integrated into the final report. He
reviewed the technologies analyzed in the study, the findings on time-of-use (TOU) rates, and the cost
benefit focused on utility supply cost, potential for deferring distribution investment, and short-term
resiliencies from the technologies. All the information had been discussed with the Working Group, and
there were questions about vehicle-to-grid cost effectiveness, neighborhood microgrids, and when TOU
rates will roll out. The UAC was disappointed in the lack of opportunities for positive cost benefit;
however, they were excited about TOU rates. There were suggestions to focus on messaging to take
advantage of TOU rates, to provide guides on the types of appliances that can be used to take advantage
of TOU rates, to use price incentives, and to broadly provide messaging about the different
technologies. He shared the staff request that had been presented to the UAC. Staff is requesting clear
guidance on the direction to take the final report on Strategy 4 and 5 analyses. Staff recommends
promoting ways to reduce emissions using TOU rates; not doing incentives for demand response, stand-
alone batteries, solar and batteries but to monitor the cost-to-benefit ratios to see if they change in the
future; and looking for potential low-cost technical assistance programs. Staff wants to promote vehicle
to home and vehicle to grid if it becomes available but not promote incentives. Opportunities for large-
scale solar and battery can be explored as they become available, and he thinks they are engaged with
the Cubberley design team to look at that and the airport microgrid. Commercial customers have
approached the City, which will be considered on a case-by-case basis. They continue to pursue utility
scale solar and storage and other renewables. Staff recommends monitoring opportunities for those
doing innovative things in the space of distribution investment deferral but not pursuing additional
analysis or implementing programs at this time. It is also recommended that the City’s current policies
on microgrids and backup power be maintained but to continue to discuss long-term resiliency to
determine if there are additional opportunities. Staff recommends keeping the analysis of the microgrid
at the airport warm while the Water Quality Control Plant analyzes backup power alternatives. The
aforementioned items were presented to the UAC, and their feedback is summarized in the Staff Report.
All Commissioners supported education, reducing barriers, and the technologies overall. He believes
most commissioners supported pursuing the staff requests. The UAC suggested being explicit about
continuing to monitor cost benefits and pursuing low-cost technical assistance. The next steps are to
incorporate the feedback and work with Buro Happold to write the final report summarizing all the cost
benefit analyses done. There will not be a lot of incentive program recommendations. Strategy 5 will
bring incentive program recommendations. Low-cost technical assistance and other forms of promotion,
outreach, and education will be the main focus presented to Council. They are aiming to return to the
CASC, the UAC, and Council by the end of the year.
Director, Public Works Department, Brad Eggleston added that the Council item will include an overall
comprehensive update on all the strategies of the plan] in addition to what Assistant Director
Abenschein reviewed on the strategies.
Item 2 Public Comment
Bret A. liked what he heard at the Working Group meeting. The analysis is robust. He asked if there will
be some type of time of export pricing for the energy to motivate folks to do storage and solar and if
there will be a peak rate for exporting energy to the utility when automobiles eventually tie into the grid
into the home.
Vice Mayor Veenker inquired if export rates are contemplated.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 6 of 9
Climate Action & Sustainability Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 8/22/2025
Assistant Director Abenschein answered that export rates are in place with the Net Energy Metering.
Vice Mayor Veenker suggested addressing the 8 items individually. She agrees with the
recommendation in the Staff Report related to Item 1.
Councilmember Burt queried what point in time is being used for the costs and the benefits.
Assistant Director Abenschein replied they are using the next 30 years for the costs and the benefits,
which changes. He thinks the cost benefit data was pulled in the early spring, which is the current cost of
equipment.
Buro Happold Julian Parsley added that projected reductions in equipment costs were not incorporated.
It addresses the projections for changes in utility costs over time. The capital costs were done in today’s
dollars.
Councilmember Burt questioned if Palo Alto’s specific electricity costs in the 5-year anticipated cost
increases were used.
Assistant Director Abenschein responded that it was not a retail analysis. The supply cost is about utility
supply cost savings, not the savings to the customer. The program analyses have customer profiles, so
the customer could experience savings, but it will provide a cost to the utility as a whole, and those
details will be in the final report. This costs benefit is for the community as a whole. Based on current
capital costs, in most cases it will not be worthwhile for the community to do this and it will not reduce
overall community energy supply costs.
Councilmember Burt discussed current capital costs and there being a solar reduction over the last 20
years. There is a drastic reduction in storage costs. He is not interested in the cost benefit of current
storage costs but instead projections going forward, which are projected to be significant across all
storage technologies and sectors. Regarding incentivizing residential storage, he inquired what is being
assumed for the trends occurring in residential solar and storage independent of new incentives and the
how much solar and storage there is. Much of the decision-making is not being based upon real cost
benefits to the residents. He asked how those inherent trends will be leveraged toward the benefit
versus what has to happen to take advantage of them.
Assistant Director Abenschein stated he understands that the reflection of storage costs should be what
the cost benefit will be in 3 or 5 years, not what it is currently. Promotion, outreach, resources, and
reducing barriers helps with cost benefits to residents. He requested that the following numbers not be
quoted but he believes Palo Alto is close to 21 megawatts in solar and that 30 to 100 kilowatts is
installed every year in residential, which Palo Alto promotes and which is being built on, and it could all
help leverage the technologies to the community’s benefit without extra investment in incentives or a
lot of operating costs.
Councilmember Burt voiced that he wants to see the going-forward projections.
Vice Mayor Veenker commented she is inclined to not add incentives at this time.
Councilmember Burt expressed that he wants a better sense of the projections in terms of opportunities
going forward to leverage more and not necessarily the subsidized mold.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 7 of 9
Climate Action & Sustainability Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 8/22/2025
Assistant Director Abenschein noted that he has enough information from the CASC on Item 1 and that 2
through 4 are the same, just listing different technologies.
Councilmember Burt addressed Item 3 and noted that benefit to cost ratios will change. He requested
this be reframed around expectations of equipment costs declining and electricity costs rising. Other
than subsidies, he wants it to include actions that will be taken to leverage what is going to happen and
greater potential adoption at whatever point that is. He desires a plan to leverage what is happening as
opposed to a cause and acceleration.
Assistant Director Abenschein stated he has a good sense how to frame things in the final report.
Vice Mayor Veenker queried what the technology is for vehicle to grid and why it is costly.
Assistant Director Abenschein answered that vehicle to grid is costly relative to the small benefit that
demand response provides and essentially vehicle to grid ends up being demand response in a lot of
ways.
Buro Happold Parsley spoke of the technology needed for vehicle to grid, which is developing quicky, so
it may become more common and less expensive over time.
Vice Mayor Veenker addressed Item 5 and inquired if it is close to making cost benefit and economic
sense now. She requested clarification of the recommendation.
Assistant Director Abenschein responded that, with the investment tax credit, Item 5 is close to making
cost benefit and economic sense now, but he expects it to fall significantly. The recommendation is to
look at solar and storage projects on a case-by-case basis. The UAC had suggested pursuing solar and
storage projects at the utility scale and other places even if there will not be widespread commercial
local solar and storage investment. That is what staff has been doing and will continue to do.
Councilmember Burt noted it is referencing utility scale solar and storage and asked if just storage is also
being considered.
Assistant Director Abenschein confirmed that just storage and other renewables will also be considered.
Vice Mayor Veenker explained why the distribution investment deferral related to Item 6 makes her
nervous. There seems to be a lot of variables without a lot of return, so she is not excited about pursuing
it.
Councilmember Burt mentioned that it ties into what will be seen in the next few years. He wants to do
more than monitor opportunities. He wants to project where Palo Alto might be as opposed to looking
at what has happened.
Vice Mayor Veenker agreed. It appears that it will interrupt the grid modernization and that it will have a
weird subjective effect as well.
Assistant Director Abenschein referenced Slide 8 and spoke of a hypothetical situation related to battery
costs and asked if there is a number that will make further pursuing the item worthwhile. As the
potential benefit is small and there is technical complexity, he questioned if more time should be spent
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 8 of 9
Climate Action & Sustainability Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 8/22/2025
on the item. There is value in doing projections around other technologies to understand where
advantages could be taken.
Councilmember Burt voiced more time should not be spent on the item.
Vice Mayor Veenker agreed. She addressed Item 7, microgrids and backup power, and likes the idea of
replacing backup diesel and generators. She asked what information staff wants from the CASC.
Assistant Director Abenschein answered that he understands that the UAC is mostly aligned with
keeping the current policies and that folks could put in their own microgrids but without subsidies but to
facilitate them to the extent help is needed with barrier reduction. However, there is interest in long-
term resiliency and understanding what it means to have power during a major emergency. Staff does
not have a firm idea of the path forward for that. If the CASC desires, it can be carried forward and
incentives discussed.
Vice Mayor Veenker voiced that she is not that interested in incentives if they can be avoided. There
needs to be a clearer look into the future. Long-term resiliency is important. She concurs with the UAC.
Councilmember Burt stated Item 8 is potentially one of the largest projects and that better economy at
scale would be achieved. He is interested in looking at the best perspective microgrids that would allow
the costs to be reduced either because it is at a scale or integrated with another construction project
that would build efficiency into it, such as the Cubberley Master Plan. There may be occasions to look at
integrating solar and perhaps solar and storage.
Vice Mayor Veenker moved to Item 8, which she is excited to see.
Councilmember Burt commented that solarization and storage at the airport not only potentially
supports the water control plant but the electrification of the airport and the trend of electric planes,
etc. A group of companies identified Palo Alto Muni as a prime target for the airport and the trends
there and indicated that a secondary benefit would be the ability to provide reliability and resiliency for
the wastewater treatment plant. As for the cost benefit modeling, the revenue from selling the value of
the awnings for planes exceeds revenue from the ground lease for the solar, and putting them together
provides a different economic benefit, which he explained. He wants to look at more than one factor.
Assistant Director Abenschein discussed the awnings and resiliency value and the most economical way
to achieve the backup power needs. There is a need for backup power in e-aviation, but solar and
storage delivering that is a question. There may be other alternatives.
Councilmember Burt inquired if it is for routine charging in addition to backup.
Assistant Director Abenschein replied that routine charging would be increasing the capacity of the
airport’s interconnections so it can deliver as much energy as needed for all e-aviation Solar and storge
is not needed for that. The awnings do not change the equation dramatically.
Councilmember Burt queried if that is detailed in the report.
Assistant Director Abenschein responded that he believes some of it is detailed at a high level. The
awning revenue is in the appendix to the report focused on the programs.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 9 of 9
Climate Action & Sustainability Committee Meeting
Summary Minutes: 8/22/2025
Director, Public Works Department, Brad Eggleston added that the size of a solar system that would fit
on the airport during peak season would essentially match the power use at the treatment plant.
Vice Mayor Veenker asked if there is a timetable if there should a partnership to develop the microgrid
between the airport and the Water Quality Control Plant.
Assistant Director Abenschein responded that he does not see a viable path to it being by the end of
next year.
Director Eggleston added that there is somewhat of a pause on the long-range plan for the airport,
which is planned to be picked up next year. He explained that making decisions is a process in itself.
Vice Mayor Veenker queried if there needs to be a handshake between the long-range plan for the
airport and this kind of backup.
Director Eggleston acknowledged that is correct. There should not be significant changes that would
mean starting over on the apron area tiedown and underground infrastructure.
NO ACTION TAKEN
Future Meetings and Agendas
Vice Mayor Veenker declared that a time for the September 5 meeting will be determined, the topics of
which were discussed at the beginning of this meeting.
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 3:42 p.m.