Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 2607-65491.Approval of the Minutes of the Utilities Advisory Commission Meeting Held on June 3, 2026 Utilities Advisory Commission Staff Report Report Type: APPROVAL OF MINUTES 6:25PM - 6:30PM Lead Department: Utilities Meeting Date: August 5, 2026 Report #:2607-6549 TITLE Approval of the Minutes of the Utilities Advisory Commission Meeting Held on June 3, 2026 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Utility Advisory Commission review and approve the June 3,2026 minutes. Commissioner ______ moved to approve the draft minutes of the June 3, 2026 meeting as submitted/amended. Commissioner ____ seconded the motion. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: June 3, 2026 Draft Minutes APPROVED BY: Alan Kurotori, Director Utilities Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 1 of 22 UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 3, 2026, SPECIAL MEETING CALL TO ORDER Chair Mauter called the meeting of the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) to order at 6:45 p.m. Present: Chair Mauter, Vice Chair Phillips, Commissioners Croft, Metz, and Tucher Vice Chair Phillips participated remotely via Just Cause Alternative Teleconference because a disability-related need could not be accommodated at this meeting. Absent: Commissioners Scharff and Gupta AGENDA REVIEW AND REVISIONS Agenda Item Number 2 was deferred to an uncertain date due to the absence of 2 commissioners. Chair Mauter called attention to a new section in the Commission’s packets: the Utilities Director's response to questions raised by the Commission . IN-PERSON PUBLIC COMMENT 1. Sven T. expressed gratitude to the Commission for supporting the induction stove rebate program and for raising awareness in the community about climate change and the health risks associated with natural gas stoves. Sven T. emphasized that having a natural gas stove at home is comparable to being exposed to secondhand smoke due to the levels of benzene, formaldehyde, nitrogen oxides (NOx), and other toxic substances. To align with the city's climate goals, Sven T. encouraged Palo Alto to lead by example and eliminate the use of natural gas, particularly in the residential sector, by 2045. Sven T. referenced David Coale's email from May 13, 2026, which mentioned that about one - third of newly built homes still have natural gas hookups, primarily for st oves. Sven T. Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 2 of 22 suggested that homeowners with natural gas stoves should sign a notarized document acknowledging the health risks and should post a bond to cover the decommissioning of the gas line once natural gas usage is phased out. The Air District's regulations will eventually ban gas appliances, and allowing new gas lines in residential areas would create a financial burden for residents. Sven T. pointed out that the Buena Vista Mobile Home project had gas lines that would remain operational until 2045 or 2050. Sven T. proposed that the cost of new gas lines should be three times higher, given that their lifespan is only one-third that of gas lines in use for over 70 years. Instead of investing in new gas lines, Sven T. recommended directing funds toward electrification and education initiatives. 2. Avroh S., a student at Palo Alto High School, had been following the Ninth Circuit ruling in the case of the Restaurant Association versus the City of Berkeley. Avroh S. believed that between 25 percent and 33 percent of new homes had gas lines, primarily for natural gas stoves. Avroh S. urged the UAC to recommend that Utilities take action to facilitate the transition toward our climate goals by decommissioning gas lines and , hopefully, abandoning them in the future. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES ITEM 1: ACTION: Approval of the Minutes of the Utilities Advisory Commission Meeting Held on May 6, 2026 To clarify his comment, Commissioner Metz requested the following addition to the minutes: “I found the meeting unrealistically positive about data center impacts with inadequate examination of the challenges.” Commissioner Tucher wanted to understand how the minutes were prepared, whether it was a manual process, and whether it was the best and most efficient way to prepare minutes. Staff explained that while they were exploring the use of AI for this task, the City Clerk’s Office currently relied on an external transcriptionist. They had been reviewing transcripts from past meetings and experimenting with various AI tools to determine the best option. MOTION: Commissioner Croft moved, seconded by Commissioner Metz, to approve the meeting minutes of May 6, 2026, with the following amendment: Under Commissioner Comments and Reports from Meetings/Events , include Commissioner Metz’s comment regarding the Stanford Sustainability Data Center Symposium: “I found the meeting unrealistically positive about data center impacts with inadequate examination of the challenges.” MOTION PASSED: 5-0-2, Commissioners Scharff and Gupta absent. Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 3 of 22 UTILITIES DIRECTOR REPORT Utilities Director Alan Kurotori provided an update on recent City Council approvals. These include a contract amendment with VertexOne for the WaterSmart utilities customer portal, a professional services agreement with Concourse Tech and Prospect Silicon Valley to deliver technical assistance and project analysis aimed at helping non -residential customers evaluate and implement building electrification projects, and a purchase order with Jensen Precast and Oldcastle Infrastructure for underground electric utility boxes. At a recent meeting, staff presented an update on the Utilities Rules and Regulations to the City Council. The Foothills utilities undergrounding project involved approximately 9 miles of overhead power lines located on the other side of Highway 280, with 1,200 feet remaining to be completed. Director Kurotori anticipated the remaining conduit would be finished by the end of June, with most of the work occurring within the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. The next steps included undergrounding secondary service lines to customers, followed by de -energizing that line in November. T&D World magazine featured our Foothills undergrounding project, highlighting Palo Alto as a leader in addressing high -fire-risk areas. The Chili Cook-off will take place on July 4, from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m., and will feature a n induction cooktop demonstration. Utilities will have a booth at the event, promoting a $500 rebate (or $1,000 for income-qualified customers) for installing a permanent induction cooktop or range. A $50 rebate (or $100 for income-qualified customers) is available for portable induction cooktops. Those rebates were the highest offered among neighboring agencies. Utilities is purchasing an additional dozen units for the induction cooktop loaner program at the Palo Alto Library. The City will showcase its services and programs at the annual Municipal Service Center Open House on July 25, where the community can see how water leaks are repaired, enjoy food trucks and displays, and experience a ride in the aerial bucket. NEW BUSINESS ITEM 2: DISCUSSION: Special Presentation and Discussion on partnering norms between staff and Commissioners for maximum effectiveness. CEQA – Not a Project AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 2 NOT HEARD AND DEFERRED TO AN UNCERTAIN DATE Chair Mauter anticipated that this item would be postponed until the next meeting, in hopes that more commissioners could attend. ITEM 3: ACTION: Review and Recommend Utilities Advisory Commission FY 2026-2027 Work Plan for City Council Approval Utilities Director Alan Kurotori explained the work plan process, noting that staff had updated it to mirror the City Council. Staff requested that commissioners identify their top 5 or 6 priority deliverables. Based on the input received from commissioners up until May 28, staff developed Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 4 of 22 draft objectives. Attachment B included a list of submissions from the commissioners, along with the UAC’s purpose and duties. Vice Chair Phillips asked whether the number order of the priorities mattered, and if the list provided represented staff’s recommended prioritization or if it was arranged randomly. Chair Mauter explained that if the UAC focused on 1 significant item each month over a 12- month rolling calendar, the Commission could realistically address 11 items. However, in many cases, it was not possible to get through 1 item in each meeting . For instance, the UAC reviewed preliminary rates before the final approval of those rates. Some priorities may be only briefly discussed or incorporated into other agenda items. Mr. Kurotori clarified that the list was in no order. Commissioner Tucher asked if the staff sent out the list of the commissioners’ 5 priorities in advance. Chair Mauter confirmed that staff sent the attachments to the commissioners in advance. The order in the packet was alphabetical. Commissioner Croft outlined 3 priorities: time-of-use (TOU) rates, electric affordability, and communication. Commissioner Croft requested that the UAC review the TOU rates pilot program, as well as the rollout and promotion of TOU rates within the City. Commissioner Croft wanted updates on the status and plans for TOU rates, including extending th ose rates to Net Energy Metering (NEM) customers. Commissioner Croft highlighted the importance of understanding the sources of our energy. The City’s Sustainab ility and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) goal was to reduce the carbon footprint of our power. However, the shift towards electrification could lead to higher energy prices, particularly as more people switch to electric vehicles and charge them during peak hours when they return home. Regarding electric affordability, Commissioner Croft emphasized the need to maintain Palo Alto’s competitive pricing compared to neighboring cities. Keeping energy costs low was crucial to encourage the adoption of electrification. Commissioner Croft wondered whether the community was aware of our priorities and what we were doing. Commissioner Croft suggested the development of a communication plan and collecting digital contact information from every customer. This would enable the City to notify residents about important matters, such as leaks, and provide annual updates on the City’s goals. For customers who do not wish to share digital contact information, staff could offer the option to receive communications by mail. Chair Mauter presented Commissioner Gupta’s priorities in his absence, which include: rate affordability and transparency, interactions with SFPUC and BAWSCA around independent analysis of the SFPUC water protections, energy transition coherence around unifying plans for gas and electric utilities, wastewater and its capital improvement plan as well as the associated increases in projected rates, and fiber to the premises. Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 5 of 22 One of Chair Mauter’s recommended priorities was to review the performance of the recycled water utility and advise on any modifications to the City's strategy regarding recycled water. During Chair Mauter's tenure, the Commission had not addressed recycled water, which she believed was a crucial component of the City’s water supply portfolio and vital for maintaining wastewater utility affordability in the future. Chair Mauter wanted a focused analysis on the recycled water utility, which was undergoing significant transition and upgrade. Second, Chair Mauter suggested a review of the capital improvement plans and operating expenses for the wastewater utility more broadly in preparation for future rate increases and to help identify potential cost-saving measures. While the wastewater utility did not experience the largest increase in costs, it accounted for some of the fastest increases. Chair Mauter believed that the UAC’s support could strengthen the capital improvement planning efforts for the wastewater utility and help us anticipate when and to what extent rate increases would be necessary. Commissioner Metz outlined his priorities. First, a long-term (10 to 20 years) business strategy for the gas utility that addressed the technical aspects, capital economics, and legal issues, which were extremely important when dealing with stranded assets. Second, a business strategy and strategic planning process for the electric utility. Given the high uncertainty in future demand shown in the CPAU forecast, Commissioner Metz believed it was essential to have a planning approach that was suited for that business strategy that included the financial, economic, and technical aspects. Commissioner Metz thought that a unified transformation strategy that incorporated the gas and electric utilities was crucial, especially as we anticipate transitioning away from gas to electricity. Third, improving the operational effectiveness of the UAC will enable the Commission to better advise the City Council. A significant challenge was timing, as addressing complex issues, such as those related to the electric and gas utilities, required ample time for thoughtful consideration and analysis to provide sound recommendations. The fourth priority was emergency preparedness. Last year, the Commission agreed to incorporate emergency preparedness into the reliability, resilience, and adaptation standing topic. Fifth, increase Fiber to the Premises (FTTP) cash flow. Commissioner Metz believed there may be ways to accelerate cash flow, thus enhancing the financial outlook of fiber. The sixth priority was reliability. For electrification, Commissioner Metz felt it was important to set specific reliability goals accompanied by quantitative metrics and effectively communicate those to residents, especially as we ask them to commit to using electricity exclusively. Vice Chair Phillips recommended that each priority item start with a verb to allow the UAC to assess at the end of the year whether it was completed. Vice Chair Phillips shared his priorities as follows: First, review the fiber-to-the-premises business plan and outlook, then provide a clear recommendation to the Council on whether to proceed with fiber-to-the-premises. Second, examine the existing reserve management policies and consider modifications as needed. Vice Chair Phillips noted that there was a lot of uncertainty surrounding the Baker Tilly report. The minutes indicated that the reserve management policies would be addressed at the July UAC meeting but Vice Chair Phillips did not see this item on the agenda. Third, have a clear strategy for addressing potential demand from data centers. Fourth, have a long-term strategy Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 6 of 22 for natural gas that aligns with S/CAP. While this may not be as high a priority as some other items, it was necessary given that 85 percent of households have at least 1 gas appliance and that did not seem to be shifting rapidly. Lastly, clearly convey the UAC’s concerns regarding the SFPUC’s water policies to BAWSCA and the SFPUC. Commissioner Tucher noted that last year’s work plan listed accomplishments primarily attributable to the CPAU, not the UAC, such as the AMI rollout and gas main replacements. Some priorities in last year’s work plan were not completed, including the development of a gas transition or abandonment plan. Commissioner Tucher submitted a public memo containing 10 questions on grid modernization that he would like the UAC to address. Commissioner Tucher emphasized that grid modernization was CPAU’s most important priority given its scale, hence it warranted considerable attention from the UAC and the Council . In the current budget, the grid modernization multiyear project was estimated to cost between $375M and $450M and will require the City to enter the bond market this fiscal year. Grid modernizati on will influence rates this year and through the foreseeable future. Commissioner Tucher acknowledged the need for grid modernization but felt it was poorly understood and that the sales pitch to the community regarding this significant investment was neither clear nor compelling. For instance, localized heat maps at the substation or feeder level to identify issues and necessary upgrades would help provide clarity to the UAC and the community. Commissioner Tucher highlighted the rising cost of battery storage. Commissioner Tucher thought that battery storage would eventually become widespread across the grid in America, and he wished Palo Alto could get there sooner rather than later. Commissioner Tucher expressed disappointment that Palo Alto’s approach to grid modernization appeared to be an effort to keep up with 2030 rather than being visionary, bold, and exemplary. Regarding the water utility, Commissioner Tucher’s priority was to adopt a more proactive stance toward the SFPUC and BAWSCA. Commissioner Tucher believed that the UAC, CPAU, and City Council needed a strategy to address the lack of a good faith partnership with SFPUC, as well as concerns that BAWSCA was not adequately representing our interests. Commissioner Tucher’s third priority was to expedite and provide clear communication about the gas abandonment or transition plan. This would involve specifically identifying which neighborhoods would be prioritized, the timeline for these transitions, and the criteria that would trigger these actions. Fourth, Commissioner Tucher emphasized that discussing fiber would be challenging if we do not find a way to be candid. Fifth, Commissioner Tucher stressed the importance of process or operational effectiveness. Councilmember Lauing noted that many projects were multi-year efforts. Councilmember Lauing pointed out that the UAC was not restricted to 12 meetings a year. While ad hoc committees were highly effective, a potential downside was that not all 7 commissioners were involved in every detail but that was acceptable. Increasing either the number of regular meetings or ad hoc meetings could expand the UAC’s capabilities. To avoid duplication of efforts, some ad hoc committees could serve as liaisons to the work taking place in various Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 7 of 22 departments within the City. This approach would lead to increased communication between the liaison and the staff, rather than requiring lengthy report -outs to the full UAC. Chair Mauter would like to see a significant expansion of the UAC’s use of ad hoc committees as the Commission proceeded through their work plan over the next year to streamline how commissioners approach staff and how they reach consensus. Assistant City Manager Kiely Nose stated that while the UAC could hold more meetings and set additional priorities, staff resources were limited. This raised questions about what might not be completed and what additional resources were needed. Ms. Nose reminded the Commission that only the next 12 months were before the UAC for consideration. Staff displayed the FY 2027 Draft Objectives on the screen. Commissioner Croft suggested combining several items. For example, Electric Utility: Review and advise on major priorities, including prioritizing affordability with the goal of retaining the percentage discount to PG&E; define goals for grid modernization project timing, metrics, residential amperage, policies, and pricing; new technology assessment and integration; expand TOU offering to all residential customers; report on updates in load shift and customer savings; perform an additional COSA if required; and a new data center policy and price tiers. Chair Mauter requested the commissioners to clearly define the UAC’s responsibilities in their proposed work plan items, using verbs such as review, advise, and recommend. The UAC can review a new COSA for the electric utility but does not have the authority to perform a new COSA. Mr. Kurotori believed that having discrete deliverables was beneficial because different teams work on the items, and it is clear whether they are complete when those deliverables are brought back to the UAC. This approach allowed for ad hoc committees to work on an item, such as TOU rates. Commissioner Tucher believed that the work plan had not been an effective tool for the UAC and questioned whether it would change this year. Chair Mauter explained that the discrete items on the work plan could be agendized on the 12 - month calendar. In the past, the work plan did not facilitate discrete action. Commissioners Croft and Tucher asked where grid modernization was on the list of FY 2027 draft objectives. Ms. Nose replied that the staff considered their current workload when developing the FY 2027 Draft Objectives. Ms. Nose suggested adding grid modernization to Line 5. Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 8 of 22 Regarding Line 1, Vice Chair Phillips stated the goal should be to adopt a gas transition study. Vice Chair Phillips was not overly concerned about the coordination between electric and gas planning. Vice Chair Phillips thought that gas planning would span a significantly long time since 85 percent or more of our households use at least 1 gas appliance; customers were not changing out those gas appliances quickly, nor was there a plan in place to do so. The City did not have a way to force people to transition away from gas. Therefore, Vice Chair Phillips believed it was essential to maintain the current gas infrastructure for a substantial period. Mr. Kurotori suggested that Line 1 state “The UAC will review the gas transition study.” This would enable the Commission to examine the baseline assumption maps and possibly create or recommend policy implementation. Chair Mauter recalled two discussions this year regarding the gas transition. Chair Mauter asked the staff what steps were necessary before formally adopting a gas transition study, whether it was feasible for the staff to complete this study within the next year, and whether it would involve any policy or judgment issues that could benefit from input from Palo Alto residents. Mr. Kurotori stated that the next step would be modeling the gas system. The calculations presented to the UAC did not account for the actual system. Staff now had updated models to perform that analysis, although it would be a significant effort. Terry Crowley, the Chief Operating Officer of Utilities, explained that staff’s intent was to develop a base model. This process involved fixing errors and making corrections to the existing model. The base model will be used to analyze load flow to understand the implications of decommissioning certain sections of gas infrastructure and identify which portions of the main line it would prevent from replacement. Mr. Crowley estimated that the staff could likely complete the base model within the next 12 months; however, he believed it was unrealistic for the staff to finish a comprehensive 10- to 20-year gas transition plan within that timeframe. Mr. Crowley mentioned that the team could establish some guiding principles regarding what such a long-term plan might entail. First, the staff needed to finalize the base model, identify areas with high potential for decommissioning, and understand the associated cost model. The process of creating this base model was primarily technical. However, once the initial base model was completed, there may be policy-driven considerations to address, such as the pace of the transition and areas of focus. For the FY 2027 work plan, staff could be directed to complete the base model and provide an initial update, which could take the form of an informational item. After that, staff will incorporate guiding principles into the FY 2028 work plan to determine how to progress toward a 10- to 20-year model and what the pace of that progression should look like. Mr. Kurotori indicated that the UAC could recommend policy decisions for the City Council to consider. Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 9 of 22 Ms. Nose stated that staff would likely address Line 1 in the latter portion of FY 2027, and it may extend into FY 2028. Chair Mauter emphasized that without data on costs and budget implications, the UAC cannot effectively engage in policy discussions or make recommendations. Chair Mauter suggested for Line 1: The UAC would review expected economic impacts of a gas transition plan and advise on policy related to the pace of transitioning as soon as Q4. Ms. Nose proposed the following language for Line 1: Review baseline infrastructure maps and explore potential targeted electrification utilizing selection criteria aligned with these frameworks and cost-effectiveness. Commissioner Metz observed that 4 commissioners recommended the creation of long-term business strategies for the gas utility. Commissioner Metz emphasized the importance of developing a comprehensive 10- to 20-year business plan for the gas utility and similarly for the electric utility because a clear framework was essential for making good decisions regarding capital investments, economic considerations, and technical aspects. This business plan should address strategic, financial, operational, organizational, and resource concerns ; and explore the costs of alternative plans and their impact on the community for the City Council to consider. Commissioner Metz recommended investigating what other cities have done in their efforts to transition away from gas, examining their successes and failures from technical, capital, business, and sustainability perspectives. Commissioner Metz was not in favor of limiting the work plan to what the UAC could accomplish in a single year, believing that accepting a broader goal allowed for more options in achieving desired outcomes. Commissioner Tucher suggested having a right-sized 5-year business plan that encompassed all aspects related to gas, including capital expenditures (CapEx). The main reason Commissioner Tucher voted against the gas rates was that they were based on a business plan that treated gas as a growth sector when the City wanted to exit this business in the long term. Vice Chair Phillips suggested that the UAC review a draft gas transition study to gain clarity on any necessary changes; it did not have to be a formal study. Vice Chair Phillips wants to see some results within the next year so that the UAC can make informed recommendations. Chair Mauter proposed an edit to Line 1: The UAC will review progress toward a draft gas transition study that addresses the political, economic, legal, environmental, regulatory, and operational elements of a potential gas decommissioning. Chair Mauter did not think the UAC needed to see infrastructure maps and suggested deleting the remainder of Line 1. Vice Chair Phillips proposed removing “draft.” Ms. Nose explained that the UAC would use the infrastructure maps to inform selection criteria. The Commission sought clarification from staff on what Line 2 would entail. Mr. Kurotori responded that Line 2 referred to how we keep the water system running during emergencies Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 10 of 22 and our preparedness, which was related to compliance. The UAC could revise this line or remove it from the work plan. Commissioner Tucher stated that emergency preparedness was a top priority. Commissioner Metz said that if Line 2 were revised to address reliability and resilience in general, the first objective would be to establish specific reliability goals, quantify those goals, and effectively communicate them to the community. The second objective would be to define what constitutes a design emergency and create a risk framework. Mr. Kurotori mentioned that the staff received Council comments regarding reliability metrics. Mr. Crowley suggested that Line 2 focus on the reliability and resiliency of the water and electric utilities over the next 12 months. Staff will develop policies and reliability metrics and goals for the electric and water systems to include long-term resiliency. When staff presents the electric reliability goals to the UAC, Mr. Crowley would like to discuss developing metrics that were meaningful for the community, the UAC, and the Council, as well as how to achieve those metrics. Regarding the water system, Mr. Crowley would like to discuss with the UAC the amount of money to invest in the reliability and resiliency of the water system and how we get there through the capital improvement program. Other topics for discussion will include determining the desired level of reliability and resiliency of the water system, the ability to recover from a significant earthquake or other natural disaster, how to prepare for emergencies by making investments in the system, and the pace of executing the CIP plan. Mr. Crowley spoke of redundancy in reference to the City maintaining the distribution system, storage, and pumping. Mr. Kurotori explained that distribution included the connections to SFPUC, the storage, the pumps, and various other components. Chair Mauter suggested editing Line 2 to include “backup supply and distribution of water and power”. Mr. Kurotori stated that the electric utility did not have a backup supply; therefore, “backup” supply was edited to “local” supply. Chair Mauter proposed the inclusion of recycled water in Line 3. Chair Mauter inquired about the timing of the most recent Cost of Service Analyses (COSAs) for the various utilities. Chair Mauter asked whether there had been any discussions regarding reliability, access, and maintenance costs related to the consumptive charges for the electric power utility. Chair Mauter wanted to know if the COSA included a specific recommendation concerning the balance between a fixed charge and a variable charge, or if that was a policy decision. Chair Mauter questioned whether staff believed that the amount of the fixed charge remained valid considering our grid modernization efforts. Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 11 of 22 Mr. Kurotori indicated that the water COSA was planned for this year, and he thought the electric COSA was done in 2024. The electric fixed charge was $5.00, which was low compared to approximately $25.00 for surrounding entities and other investor-owned utilities (IOUs). Mr. Kurotori cautioned that conducting another electric COSA would require additional engagement and could delay other tasks due to limited staff availability. In the future, if the Commission wishes to include requirements for examining the fixed cost in the electric COSA, they can bring this up during development of the scope. Utilities Assistant Director Lisa Bilir mentioned that Palo Alto went from a $0 fixed charge to a $5.00 fixed charge as a result of the most recent COSA. Mr. Crowley explained that there was an art and a science involved in rate-setting. The financial model used to establish rates was strict and detailed in allocating costs. The allocation of costs to different customer classes and finding a balance between fixed and variable charges was where the art of rate development came into play, and this involved some policy discussions. Typically, the fixed charge for water was about 30 percent of the total revenue requirement, whereas for electricity it tended to be much less. However, the electric industry was shifting toward adopting a fixed charge that was more comparable to that of water. The most recent electric COSA was conducted for fiscal year 2023/2024. Commissioner Tucher emphasized that the grid modernization project will significantly alter the fixed costs , so a new electric COSA was needed in the next 2 or 3 years. Palo Alto’s largest commercial customers were concentrated in specific areas and not evenly distributed across substations, so the effects of grid modernization will vary by location. Chair Mauter noted that 5 years was the standard timing for new COSAs. As part of this year's rate study, Chair Mauter wanted to see an analysis or further di scussion on the art of rate setting, particularly the balance between fixed and variable charges in the power utility. This was crucial considering the growth of on-site generation, the reliability of services provided through grid connectivity, and the planned investments in grid modernization. Chair Mauter requested that staff evaluate the potential benefits of increasing fixed charges while decreasing variable charges. Specifically addressing this perspective in rate setting would facilitate electrification. Chair Mauter asked whether increasing fixed charges more than variable charges necessitated a new COSA and if the current COSA allowed any flexibility in rebalancing fixed versus variable charges within the electric power utility. Chair Mauter emphasized the importance of revisiting the balance between fixed and variable charges as discussions about the electric power utility continue in the future. Vice Chair Phillips thought rates could not be changed without a COSA. Mr. Kurotori confirmed a COSA was needed to make changes. Ms. Nose recalled that the gas COSA data was reassessed, the COSA was revised, and staff returned with the findings. Any changes to the ratio of fixed and variable charges would require Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 12 of 22 going through the same process. A COSA was a combination of reasonable assumptions according to legal precedent. Commissioner Croft suggested adding a focus or prioritization of affordability of electric and water rates. The phrase "with priority on affordability" was added to Line 3. While it was important to prioritize the stability of our reserves overall, after reviewing the Baker Tilly report, Commissioner Croft questioned whether the UAC should commit to prioritizing it at this point, noting that doing so may lead to increased rates. Chair Mauter reminded the Commission that the prioritization discussion would take place after making the necessary edits. Line 4 was not edited. For Line 5, Commissioner Tucher wanted to explicitly mention entering the bond market, not just financing mechanisms. Vice Chair Phillips asked whether there were other financing mechanisms, aside from bond finance and pay-as-you-go, that staff was considering. Mr. Kurotori responded that we had state revolving fund loans but revenue funds could be added to Line 5 if the Commission desired. Commissioner Croft added that we also had grants. Chair Mauter observed that the capital improvement program was mentioned as a single CIP, so she sought clarity on whether the intent was to address it utility by utility. Chair Mauter acknowledged the interest in prioritizing electric power, and she expressed her desire to prioritize wastewater. Mr. Crowley clarified that the staff intended to include all utilities in a single line item of the work plan but each utility’s capital improvement plan would be discussed separately. Mr. Kurotori suggested that the Commission could add “with a priority focus on the electric utility and wastewater utility” to Line 5. Commissioner Tucher wanted a line added to the work plan to “discuss grid modernization.” Chair Mauter proposed adding to Line 5 “with a special focus on the electric and wastewater utilities” because that is where the largest capital improvement investments will be and where the UAC wanted staff to prioritize their time and effort. Vice Chair Phillips expressed his interest in the gas utility. Chair Mauter thought that the UAC would have a lot of discussion about the gas transition study. Commissioner Metz suggested adding “discussion of grid modernization” in Line 7. Commissioner Metz pointed out that the wastewater treatment plant CapEx was not within the UAC’s purview. Commissioner Metz offered to discuss further with Chair Mauter offline whether there should be potential action such as a colleague’s memo on the topic. Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 13 of 22 Chair Mauter identified a problem with the wastewater treatment plant's capital expenditure being outside the UAC’s control in that it complicated rate setting. For Line 6, Vice Chair Phillips suggested that the UAC commit to making a recommendation to the City Council regarding the continuation of the Fiber to the Premises (FTTP) expansion, rather than just reviewing the pilot results. Chair Mauter asked if Phase 0 and Phase 1 would be completed within 12 months, and she wondered how the Council would respond to the UAC making recommendations before the conclusion of Phase 1. Ms. Nose believed that the entirety of Phase 1 would not be complete in time to report all the data within 12 months. Ms. Nose anticipated having data related to the initial pilot area which could be used to make informed assumptions and engage in policy discussions. Councilmember Lauing stated that if there were any concerns about previously approved items by the Council, the UAC should bring those concerns to the staff’s attention and use the appropriate format to communicate that information to the Council. This could involve the staff scheduling a study session rather than presenting it as an action item on the pilot. Commissioner Metz highlighted the importance of monitoring business metrics, especially given the City's fiscal situation, such as revenue (or projected revenue based on the take rate), cash flow, the number of customers signed up, and CapEx. Commissioner Metz suggested that accelerating cash flow could be achieved through enhanced sales and marketing efforts or by exploring alternative connection methods beyond fiber-to-the-premises. If the take rate was lower than expected, it was crucial to understand the reasons, as it could be due to customers changing their minds, the need to do a better job at sales, or other factors. Commissioner Croft suggested the phrase "revised long-term financial model and capital expenditure estimates" instead of "financial forecast projection." Commissioner Croft believed it was essential for the UAC to review the KPIs collected by staff, and that a working financial model should always be maintained that outlines the projected costs as the project is rolled out. Commissioner Croft stated that staff could easily adjust assumptions regardin g the take rate and pricing within the model, and she stressed the importance of incorporating the exact costs associated with installing the cable and connecting each house into the revised model. Commissioner Tucher commented that if Phase 1 was not actionable or completed in the upcoming fiscal year and Phase 0 will not provide take rate or revenue projections, the UAC will not be able to make any assumptions or recommendations regarding fiber. The TOU pilot has fewer than 10 users, making it impossible to develop a model from that data. Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 14 of 22 Ms. Nose noted that the initial phase involved nearly 1,000 passings, providing an initial snapshot. The staff intended to update the business model to identify any early red flags and bring that forward to the UAC. Staff intended to monitor those flags closely so that informed decisions could be made. Councilmember Lauing suggested conducting a competitor assessment at that stage as well. Vice Chair Phillips recalled that staff previously shared an economic model projecting 35 years into the future. By updating this model with the latest information, such as take rates and actual costs, we can determine whether the initial projections were overly optimistic, overly pessimistic, or reasonably accurate. Vice Chair Phillips asked whether Line 7 referred to grid modernization or data centers. Mr. Kurotori explained that Line 7 referred to large commercial loads related to research and development, not grid modernization. While some may associate those loads with data centers, that is not the case in Palo Alto; instead, we are observing larger loads associated with research and development and tech companies. Commissioner Croft inquired whether "a financial charge for the reservation of electric system capacity" referred to the long-term reservation of that capacity to prevent companies with large loads from coming in, leaving, and not having any liabilities. Mr. Crowley mentioned that staff wanted to develop a policy regarding new businesses that want to know the available capacity at specific sites, and then seek to reserve that capacity for the project they are developing, raising the question of whether such reservations should come at no cost or if there should be a nominal fee to reserve that capacity. The policy will include consideration of the rate structure for larger research and development loads, whether the existing large commercial rate was appropriate for those customers, or whether there should be a demand charge unique to that customer class. The policy will also address the cost recovery agreement, whether to require payment of all costs upfront or an option to pay a portion upfront and the rest over time, and the potential for additional fees if they do not meet specific metrics related to their load and usage. There is competition for available capacity. Therefore, it is important to allocate available system capacity without allowing one entity to reserve it for free, which could prevent others from coming in and providing a broader benefit to the community. The cost recovery aspect could include provisions for the long-term reservation of electric system capacity or be incorporated into the rate agreement. Vice Chair Phillips inquired whether the staff was planning to conduct a comprehensive study and propose a new policy and rate structure within the next 12 months for large commercial loads and individuals looking to reserve capacity. Vice Chair Phillips assumed that staff needed to present any new rates to the UAC and City Council. Vice Chair Phillips asked whether staff would consider options such as interruptible loads. Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 15 of 22 Mr. Crowley stated that the staff will hold initial discussions with the UAC regarding the policy for reserving system capacity, a policy for cost recovery through the development of the project, and potentially discuss the appropriateness of existing rates or how those may be adjusted for large customers, which could include standby charges or special facility charges. Line 7 was unchanged. Instead of “rate design” in Line 8, Commissioner Croft suggested “rate pilot, changes in.” Line 8 was revised to: Review and evaluate preliminary results of the E-1 T Electric Utility time-of-use rate pilot, changes in energy usage patterns and financial impacts to customers and utility to inform further implementation to the full Palo Alto community. For Line 9, Chair Mauter pointed out that the UAC did not procure new power purchase agreements. Mr. Kurotori suggested “review and recommend approval of new power purchase agreements.” Commissioner Tucher asked if Line 9 included the Integrated Resources Plan (IRP) status. Commissioner Croft noticed in the power portfolio that the staff conducted periodic IRPs and recalled that the last IRP took place in 2023. If another IRP was due, Commissioner Croft suggested including it in the work plan. If not, Commissioner Croft recommended adding to Line 9, “review the power portfolio into the future.” Mr. Kurotori suggested adding to Line 9 “and the Integrated Resources Plan.” Commissioner Metz wanted to add “demand forecast” to Line 9. Line 9 was edited to: Review and recommend approval of new power purchase agreements or other supplies to ensure electric supply contracts are cost-effective and aligned with the City's long-term electric portfolio strategy and the Integrated Resources Plan. Regarding Line 10, Chair Mauter stated there was a meeting on Friday about S/CAP. Commissioner Tucher wondered whether Line 10 was a UAC priority or if it should be deleted. Commissioner Croft inquired if the UAC saw the funding and financing because staff was considering taking money from Cap and Trade. Commissioner Croft suggested, “review S/CAP goals and progress and strategies for aligning the Utility with those goals.” Commissioner Metz agreed about the alignment of CPAU with S/CAP. Mr. Kurotori said that many of the available funds were restricted Utility revenues that benefit the Utility, the customers, and the climate and sustainability goals, such as the Cap and Invest Fund, the Public Benefits Charge, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard Credits. Using those funds will have an impact on affordability and priorities. Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 16 of 22 After hearing staff’s explanation, Commissioner Croft was okay with the language in Line 10. Regarding Line 11, Chair Mauter did not think she would “report on and seek advisory positions” on legislative proposals. Staff did the reporting and the UAC advises whether we should lobby for it; therefore, Vice Chair Phillips suggested: “provide advice on UAC positions.” Commissioner Tucher suggested “advise Council” or “advise on.” Ms. Nose stated the Muni code language was “formulate and review legislative proposals for recommendation to City Council.” Ms. Nose and Chair Mauter agreed on “review and recommend advisory positions.” For Line 12, Vice Chair Phillips suggested changing “Annual report on” to “review and approve.” Commissioner Croft wondered whether the community knew what the UAC was doing and whether there should be a more formulaic way of communicating. Chair Mauter felt that communication was extremely important. Mr. Kurotori pointed out that the UAC did not approve customer survey results. Line 12 was changed from “Annual report on” to “Review.” “Provide advise” was changed to “Provide advice” in Line 13. Commissioner Croft asked whether Vice Mayor Stone was the sole person responsible for sharing the UAC's comments on the SFPUC or if other Commission Members wanted to collaborate with Vice Mayor Stone on strategies. Councilmember Lauing thought that the staff and Council must lead the cooperative effort, with Vice Mayor Stone serving as the main point of contact. Chair Mauter noted that there had been a request for information rather than a demand for changes. Chair Mauter emphasized that the UAC was not oppos ing an action, but rather the long-term hypothetical planning that can only be implemented through capital improvements, and the SFPUC needed approval from BAWSCA before proceeding with any significant capital improvements. If the UAC wanted the staff to seek information, Chair Mauter suggested clearly stating this in Line 13 or deprioritizing it, as there may be doubts about the feasibility or importance of obtaining that information this year, especially since both this year and last year were wet years. Mr. Kurotori thought that information on deliverables could be helpful in the UAC setting their priorities. Mr. Kurotori highlighted that key decisions regarding alternative water supplies were expected in the 2028 timeframe, making it a 2028 UAC priority. Staff could possibly provide the UAC with a timeline of actionable items in the next phases that the SFPUC is required to provide to BAWSCA, allowing the UAC to decide which ones they would like to have discussions on and make recommendations on positions or potential positions. Vice Mayor Stone serves as our BAWSCA representative, which is the mechanism for all 26 agencies to have conversations with SFPUC. Staff members attend those conversations. Mr. Kurotori listened to reports and public comments when he attended the last BAWSCA meeting. Mr. Kurotori emphasized that BAWSCA and SFPUC were not obligated to report to the UAC. The UAC function ed as an advisory body. Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 17 of 22 Chair Mauter asked what steps the Utility needed to take to prepare for 2028. Chair Mauter wanted to be specific about the information that the UAC was seeking. Significant decisions will be made in 2028, and Chair Mauter stressed the need for education before the UAC approves those decisions, which raised the question of what education will be essential for the UAC to have ahead of 2028, as well as the need for strong engagement from staff and the community regarding this education Chair Mauter believed it was vital for the community to understand the necessity of new water supply sources, the reasons the City might need to invest in different types of resilient supply, clarify how recycled water fits into our overall resource portfolio, and provide some initial indicators of how those changes may impact future rates. Commissioner Metz noted a few Commission Members were very interested in this topic, so he suggested letting an ad hoc committee address the question that Chair Mauter raised. Chair Mauter thought there were several items that might warrant an ad hoc committee but she did not want to commit to any ad hoc committees tonight. Commissioner Tucher asked Chair Mauter what she meant by recycled water. Chair Mauter clarified that the SFPUC could pursue alternative water supply development as they see fit, and that the City would draw its own conclusions on the matter. Chair Mauter expressed concern about preparing for good decision-making in 2028, as decisions made at that time will impact rates. Mr. Kurotori suggested that the staff return to the UAC with details about upcoming deliverables, actions, and activities related to the SFPUC's decision -making process; and present specific items stipulated in San Francisco’s agreement with the cities on how they will or will not provide water to other cities in 2028. Chair Mauter suggested editing Line 13 to read: The UAC wi ll review the upcoming action items on the BAWSCA agenda and materials that are material to forthcoming decisions. Commissioner Tucher noted we are facing rate increases of 10 percent this year and in subsequent years. In addition to alternative water supplies, Commissioner Tucher raised the issues of SFPUC’s CIP program and deferred maintenance. Commissioner Tucher stated the options were to either remain silent and accept this situation or develop a policy approach, starting with our BAWSCA Council representative, and perhaps collaborating with neighboring cities and districts. Commissioner Tucher suggested for Line 13: Provide advice to Council on a policy stance toward SFPUC and BAWSCA, with an aim toward better drought planning statistics and more collaboration. Commissioner Tucher asked what would happen in 2 years. Vice Chair Phillips suggested: “provide advice to Council on a policy stance toward BAWSCA and SFPUC.” Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 18 of 22 Commissioner Croft proposed a new Line 14: Grid Modernization: Review strategy for citywide grid upgrades, design standards and technologies, timing of investment and work, and customer impacts. Commissioner Metz suggested adding demand impacts. Chair Mauter wanted to add “review load projections” because load projections drive grid modernization. Mr. Crowley emphasized the ongoing need for the UAC to advise staff on the impact and pace of the CIP, particularly how spending affects rates. As staff attempts to minimize the impact on rates, we must prioritize projects. Staff will return to the UAC with a discussion on the grid modernization plan, its evolution, projected costs, and long-term forecasts. The proposed Line 14 will be similar to other projects brought back under the CIP review. Staff will explain in the CIP presentation why certain projects were prioritized over others and what drove the need for each project, such as load projection or the need to meet design standards. Commissioner Tucher asked if AMI had identified correlations and trends between panel upsizing and peak load. The grid modernization plan was to support 600-amp panels but Commissioner Tucher wondered if they may not be utilizing the anticipated load. Commissioner Croft wanted a better understanding of the grid modernization design standards. Commissioner Metz proposed a new Line 15, “Electric Utility Business Strategy: Develop a flexible scenario-based business strategy that incorporates impacts on CPAU of increased and highly uncertain demand from data centers and other loads, both within CPAU territory and throughout CAISO.” Commissioner Metz emphasized that, in addition to data centers, the impact of AI will significantly affect the entire power grid, regardless of local loads. Commissioner Metz commented that energy demand was skyrocketing electricity to levels not seen in decades, likely since the early days of electrification, indicating a tremendous transformation. Chair Mauter asked staff what questions they had pertaining to the electric utility business strategy. Mr. Kurotori explained that staff looked at the high load and medium forecasts, communicated with customers, and established policies and procedures. The electric utility business strategy was not a near-term priority for the staff. The CAISO served as a balancing authority throughout Northern California, posing a significant challenge for staff to take on that type of analysis. Commissioner Metz stated that while staff did not need to detail what was happening throughout CAISO, it was important to understand the potential impact on energy de mand and capital improvements as a result of decisions made globally and especially within CAISO. These decisions will affect our energy availability and our Power Purchase Agreements, particularly Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 19 of 22 concerning natural gas, as we have already observed across the country. The Utility has presented a demand forecast for the next 10 years, talking about spending capital and making major decisions regarding PPAs. Therefore, Commissioner Metz suggested implementing a planning process that would guide us in making sound decisions about large expenditures. Mr. Kurotori thought that the points raised by Commissioner Metz were included in Line 14 about reviewing load projections and how that ties to grid modernization. CEC and CAISO had many moving parts. Mr. Kurotori said grid modernization was an area of focus for staff. Commissioner Metz noted that Line 14 was a capital plan. For a capital-intensive business with unpredictable, dramatically changing demand that affects revenue, costs of energy, and capital, Commissioner Metz emphasized the need for a framework to think about it. Commissioner Croft suggested that her point about the affordability of electricity could add something that acknowledged the current environment. Commissioner Croft recommended focusing on long-term affordability for 5 years. Commissioner Croft stated that market rates will likely become more expensive, and we may become more exposed to market rates because we cannot procure power purchase agreements. Mr. Kurotori suggested that the activities this year on Lines 1, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, and 15 related to electric might help inform a larger strategy later on. Ms. Nose explained that the UAC’s work plan included what the UAC recommended as priorities to address and what Council has asked the UAC to look at. The work plan met a muni code requirement. Mr. Kurotori stated that after the Council reviews, makes any changes, and adopts the UAC’s work plan, the UAC can prioritize at a later date. Ms. Nose said staff will work with the UAC on calendaring for the next 12 months. Commissioner Croft wanted to move grid modernization to the top of the list to demonstrate to the Council the items that the UAC cares about at the top. Councilmember Lauing suggested assigning items as an A or B level of priority. Chair Mauter thought that clustering the electrical items would be helpful . Commissioner Tucher suggested clustering the things that the UAC does on an ongoing basis such as review rates, CapEx, and customer surveys. Chair Mauter would like Council to strike anything they do not want the UAC to advise on, and it would be helpful for the UAC to know Council’s level A and B priorities. The UAC received Council’s approval of last year’s work plan a couple of months ago. Chair Mauter asked when the UAC work plan would be on the Council’s agenda for discussion. Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 20 of 22 Mr. Kurotori said staff intended to bring the UAC work plan to the Council as soon as August 10. Ms. Nose explained that Commission work plans were typically bundled. The bundle with the UAC typically goes to the Council in September or October. Staff will work with the Mayor to determine whether the work plan will be a consent item or an action item. Ms. Nose suggested adding to the motion: Identify and group work plan item objectives by utility as well as categories such as key priorities or ongoing. MOTION: Commissioner Metz moved, seconded by Vice Chair Phillips, to recommend that the City Council approve the Utilities Advisory Commission FY 2026-2027 Work Plan, incorporating the changes as shown below and 1. Identify and group work plan item objectives by utility as well as categories such as key priorities or ongoing. Line # FY 2027 DRAFT OBJECTIVES 1 The UAC will review progress towards a gas transition study that addresses the political, economic, legal, environmental, regulatory, and operational elements of a potential gas decommissioning. -Staff expects to complete the gas transition study including capital investment criteria for a managed transition - enables review of baseline infrastructure maps that explore potential targeted electrification utilizing selection criteria aligned with state level (CPUC/SB1221) frameworks. (PAMC 2.23.050.(b).(1).(A) & 2.23.050.(b).(4)) 2 Advise on updates to ensure Water Utility regulatory compliance such as but not limited to the Risk and Resiliency Assessment (RRA) and emergency response and preparedness plan. Review and recommend reliability, resiliency, emergency response, and preparedness metrics and goals related to the local supplies and distribution of water and power. (PAMC 2.23.050.(b).(2)) 3 Review and recommend to City Council FY 2028 rate changes to Water (including advise on a new Cost of Service Study), Gas, Electric, including Time of Use Rates), Wastewater Collection, Recycled Water, and Fiber Optic Services with priority on affordability. (PAMC 2.23.050.(b).(4)) 4 Review and advise on reserve policies changes informed by the Baker Tilly Utility Reserve Assessment that balance the need to be attractive to private markets and rates that are affordable to residents and competitive to businesses, for inclusion in the FY 2028 rate setting. (PAMC 2.23.050.(b).(4)) 5 Recommend FY 2028 and five-year capital improvement program, including projects to be included, timing of the projects, pace of infrastructure replacements, and use of financing mechanisms vs pay-go to ensure affordability across the five-year rate projections and financial plans with a special focus on the electric and wastewater utilities. (PAMC 2.23.050.(b).(4)) 6 Review Fiber to the Premises (FTTP) pilot results including use of key performance indicators (KPI) and recommend next steps. to inform a recommendation to continue the build out of the whole FTTP phase 1 expansion geographic area. (Examples of KPIs include: take rate, customer satisfaction, cost per passing, revised long-term financial model, and capital expenditure estimatesfinancial forecast projection) (PAMC 2.23.050.(b).(5)) Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 21 of 22 7 Develop policies and fee and rate structures specifically for large electric load growth including but not limited to a financial charge for the reservation of electric system capacity, expansion of the large non-residential electric rate (E-7) or new rate structure for large commercial loads within Palo Alto. (PAMC 2.23.050.(b).(1) and 2.23.050.(b).(4)) 8 Review and evaluate preliminary results of the E-1 T Electric Utility time-of-use rate pilot, changes in design on energy usage patterns and to inform further implementation to the full Palo Alto community, financial impacts to customers and utility to inform further implementation to the full Palo Alto community. (PAMC 2.23.050.(b).(2) and 2.23.050.(b).(4)) 9 Procure Review and recommend approval of new Power Purchase Agreements or other supplies to ensure electric supply contracts are cost-effective and aligned with the City's long-term electric portfolio strategy and the integrated resources plan. (PAMC 2.23.050.(b).(2)) 10 Advise on funding and financing strategies for S/CAP for City Council consideration (see S/CAP 2026-2027 Work Plan Item CA13) and advise on revision to current Carbon Neutral and Cap and Invest (C&I) funding City Council spending resolutions to clarify uses balancing S/CAP strategies, long-term affordability, and decarbonization incentives. (PAMC 2.23.050.(b).(5) 11 Report on and seek Review and recommend advisory positions on legislative proposals at the local, state, and federal level impacting any of the five utilities through new laws, regulations, or ordinances. (PAMC 2.23.050.(b).(3)) 12 Annual report on Review customer survey results, communication methods, and new initiatives for the year (e.g., implementation of leak notifications), including review of effectiveness of engagements to inform continued iterative changes. (PAMC 2.23.050.(b).(5).(c)) 13 Provide advise to the BAWSCA Board Director (Vice Mayor Stone) clearly communicating UAC’s recommendation for Palo Alto’s perspectives and priorities regarding San Francisco Public Utilities Commission water policies. Review materials that inform upcoming action items on the BAWSCA agenda regarding SFPUC water policies and provide advice to Council on a policy stance toward BAWSCA and SFPUC. (PAMC 2.23.050.(b).(1).(B)) 14 Electric Grid Modernization: Review load projections and strategy for City-wide grid upgrades, design standards and technologies, timing of investment and work, and customer impacts. 15 Electric Utility Business Strategy: Develop a flexible scenario-based business strategy that incorporates impacts on CPAU of increased and highly uncertain demand from data centers and other loads, both within CPAU territory and throughout CAISO. MOTION PASSED: 5-0-2, Commissioners Scharff and Gupta absent. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND REPORTS FROM MEETINGS/EVENTS About 10 days ago, Commissioner Tucher received a WaterSmart text message notifying him of a leak at his house, which was wasting 300 to 400 gallons of water each day. Commissioner Tucher appreciated getting the alert because it allowed him to address the issue promptly. As an electric vehicle owner, Commissioner Tucher found it interesting that the Utility sent him a letter acknowledging he had an EV, which he assumed was based on data from the DMV. Vice Chair Phillips wanted to discuss the 12 -month rolling calendar. In the last meeting, it was mentioned that the reserve policy would be addressed in July but Vice Chair Phillips did not see Utilities Advisory Commission Minutes – June 3, 2026 Page 22 of 22 it included in the calendar. Utilities Director Alan Kurotori acknowledged the comment and confirmed that staff would look into the calendar. Chair Mauter clarif ied that the 12-month rolling calendar was not on today’s agenda, so the UAC cannot discuss it. Chair Mauter mentioned there were several issues regarding July and requested the commissioners to monitor their emails for coordination messages that would be sent out in the next couple of hours. VIRTUAL PUBLIC COMMENT None. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:23 p.m.