LOW INCOME CONSUMER ADVISORY TASK FORCE SEPTEMBER 4, 2015 9:00AM – 12:00 PM TOWN LAKE CENTER – ROOM 100 721 BARTON SPRINGS ROAD AUSTIN, TEXAS 78704 For more information: http://www.austintexas.gov/content/low-income-consumer-advisory-task- force AGENDA CALL TO ORDER 1. CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONS The first 5 speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three-minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Approve minutes from the August 21, 2015 meeting 3. OLD BUSINESS a. Discussion and possible action on the low income weatherization budget. (25 min.) b. Discussion and possible action on Austin Energy’s overall energy (kWh) and demand (KW) goals and kWh and KW goals for programs for low income and low moderate income customers. (25 min.) c. Discussion and possible action on ECAD (Energy Conservation Audit Disclosure) online audit and disclosure postings and expanding the scope of disclosure requirements. (10 min.) d. Discussion and possible action on energy efficiency rate true-up proceeding. (10 min.) e. Discussion and possible action on Building Codes. (10 min.) f. Discussion and possible action on audit of the billing system. (5 min.) g. Discussion and possible action on final report. (90 min.) 4. BRIEFINGS & REPORTS a. Austin Energy staff update on the weatherization program job status b. Status of data requests c. Committee Reports – possible reports from the Low Income Energy Efficiency Program Committee, Low-Moderate Income Energy Efficiency Program Committee, and/or Affordable Rental Property Committee 5. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS a. Discussion regarding future agenda items including a schedule of topics and issues and topics raised during briefings and citizen communications The City of Austin is committed to compliance with the American with Disabilities Act. Reasonable modifications and equal access to communications will be provided upon request. Meeting locations are planned with wheelchair access. If requiring Sign Language Interpreters or alternative formats, please give notice at least 2 days (48 hours) before the meeting date. Please call Liz Jambor at Austin Energy Department, 513-322-6353, for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. For more information on the Low Income Consumer Advisory Task Force, please contact Liz Jambor at 512-322-6353 ADJOURNMENT Page 2 of 2
Page 1 of 4 LOW INCOME CONSUMER ADVISORY TASK FORCE MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 21, 2015 The Low Income Consumer Advisory Task Force convened in a regular meeting at Town Lake Center, 721 Barton Springs Road, Room 100, in Austin, Texas. Chairperson, Carol Biedrzycki called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m. Task Force Members in Attendance: Carol Biedrzycki (Chair), Lanetta Cooper, Richard Halpin, Dan Pruett, Cyrus Reed, Chris Strand, and Michael Wong. Tim Arndt (Vice Chair) and Karen Hadden were not present at the call to order, but arrived later. Staff in Attendance: Austin Energy (AE) staff included Debbie Kimberly, Mark Dreyfus, Liz Jambor, Denise Kuehn, Ronnie Mendoza, and Hayden Migl. Neighborhood Housing and Community Development Department (NHCD) staff included Cara Welch. 1. CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONS: GENERAL There were no citizens signed up for Citizen Communications. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Approve minutes from August 7, and August 14, 2015 meeting- A motion was made by Member Dan Pruett to approve the August 7, 2015 meeting minutes and seconded by Member Richard Halpin. All members approved on a 7-0 vote. A motion was made by Member Michael Wong to approve the August 14, 2015 meeting minutes and seconded by Member Richard Halpin. One amendment was proposed. Under Future Agenda Items, second sentence: Edit to read, “…suggesting that a new group be formed by the 10-1 Council to continue the work…” Member Wong and Member Halpin accepted the amendment and all members approved on a 7-0 vote. 3. OLD BUSINESS a. Discussion and possible action on on-bill repayment and financing arrangements - Member Cyrus Reed introduced the document “On-Bill Repayment Recommendation” (Back-up Item 3a, August 21, 2015 meeting) and highlighted changes since the previous meeting. Member Lanetta Cooper distributed the document “Customer Protections” (Back-up Item 3a, August 21, 2015 meeting) to be associated with this recommendation. Member Richard Halpin motioned approval of the recommendation, and Member Chris Strand seconded. Discussion included concerns regarding the target market and customer protections. An amendment was proposed and accepted to include “as the program is developed, the following customer protections are to be considered,” in the recommendation. The motion passed 6-2 with Chair Biedrzycki and Member Cooper voting against and Vice Chair Arndt not yet in attendance. b. Discussion and possible action on amendments to the multifamily energy efficiency program - This item was not discussed. Page 2 of 4 c. Discussion and possible action on …
RECOMMENDATION Recommendation: The City Council should set a goal that a minimum of 20% of the Energy Efficiency Services budget should be spent on programs that help low and low-moderate income residential customers, with roughly half of this dedicated to a free weatherization program serving those at 200 percent or less of the federal poverty level. Reasoning: The current low and low to moderate income energy efficiency programs consist of a free weatherization program as well as a Multifamily program that is believed to serve many low and low-to-moderate customers. In addition, a relatively small amount of AE energy efficiency expenditures have been made to provide solar incentives on multi-family properties. The residential program is the low income weatherization program. AE’s energy efficiency funding for this program is transparent; that is, the monies did actually get spent for the direct benefit of low-income customers with a small amount paid for administration of the program. The multi-family weatherization program is not so transparent. While it appears that AE invested energy efficiency dollars for the most part in multi-family properties located in zip codes where incomes show low and low to moderate households reside, there is not a direct accountability that a significant number of low and low-moderate income tenants reside in the multi-family properties where AE spent the EE dollars. Nonetheless, the Task Force reasonably assumes that some low and low to moderate income customers were tenants of multi-family properties in which AE invested energy efficiency dollars. Lastly, the Task Force did not receive any energy efficiency dollar amount that AE invested in solar programs for low and low to moderate income customers during any of the fiscal years; although we were made aware of solar projects such as those run by Foundation Communities. We are also aware of individual “Green Building” projects that benefit low-income and low-moderate income individuals such as the Guadalupe-Saldaña net-zero home project. Still, the Task Force finds that funding for designated low-income and low-moderate income residents has made up a relatively small part of the energy efficiency budget. An energy efficiency budget goal of twenty per cent to be spent on low and low-moderate income energy efficiency programs is reasonable for a number of reasons. The first is that the amount of energy efficiency revenues AE receives from its low and low-moderate income customers is higher. For fiscal year 2014, assuming an average monthly use of …
RECOMMENDATION Recommendation: The City Council should direct the City Manager to investigate operating practices that could potentially reduce the costs of the low income weatherization program and report back to the council in six months with a strategy for implementation. Reasoning: Several of our recommendations have included changes in current program costs that should reduce the costs of the low income weatherization program. While the current contract is averaging roughly $4,000 per home, we believe that long-term this cost could be reduced substantially. One of our recommendations is having AE obtain price discounts through commitments to purchase a minimum number of window air conditioning and/or heating units from retailer/manufacturers. The Task Force has assumed a twenty percent discount. This would provide 100 units for the costs it currently incurs for eighty. Another recommendation the Task Force has made is to leverage the low income weatherization program with the various affordable housing programs the City of Austin offers thereby providing some efficiencies in scope. An additional advantage of the leverage program is that AE will realize the additional energy and demand savings attributable to the affordable housing services such as home repair and will thereby drive down the dollar per KW savings investment attributable to the low income weatherization program. The Task Force believes that there are several avenues of cost reduction that should be explored. These avenues include: Obtaining price discounts by offering to do sole business with a solar screen manufacturer (local to ensure quick delivery) or from a few solar screen manufacturers. This is the same concept with the window units. Obtaining price discounts for any product that is being purchased for the low income weatherization program; Using a local geographic approach such as neighborhood by neighborhood approach to minimize the travel between jobs; Consider whether some or all of the current contract work for the low income weatherization program could be takin internally. Consider whether AE leveraging its low income weatherization services with nonprofits and other entities engaged in providing funding or services involving affordable housing projects achieve economies of scope as well as provide additional demand and energy savings. Using a “voucher” or “rebate” system with a wider universe of contractors at least for a portion of the weatherization program rather than relying on set contracts with a relatively small number of contractors. Considering a more limited pilot project …
Overall Demand and Energy Savings Goals for Austin Energy Recommendation: The Low-Income Consumer Task Force reaffirms the goal adopted by City Council that Austin Energy continue to meet its 800 MW peak reduction goal by 2020, and recommends that Austin Energy pursue achieving at least another 200 MWs of peak reduction by the beginning of 2025, subject to availability of technology, programs and budgets. Thus, the Task Force believes assuming adequate support from council this goal of achieving 1,000 MWs by the beginning of 2025 is readily achievable. In addition, Austin Energy should continue to study achieving an even greater level of peak reduction, such as 1200 MWs by the beginning of 2025. Expanded loan programs and the availability of PACE may allow the utility to achieve this ambitious goal or at least get nearer to this ambitious goal. Background. On December 11th, 2014, the City Council established a new demand reduction goal for Austin Energy, reaffirming the goal of reaching 800 MWs of peak demand between 2007 and the end of 2020, and requiring at least an additional 100 MWs of peak demand reduction by 2025. As part of this new overall 900 MW goal, Council required that at least an additional 100 MWs out of the 900 MWs be acquired from demand response. Although the Council set the new 900 MWs of demand reduction goal, Council was careful to direct Austin Energy to view this goal as a minimum, and therefore established two additional “targets.” First, City Council told Austin Energy to seek to achieve a greater amount of demand reduction, by stating that subject to further study, technological development, progress toward goals and rate and budget considerations, Austin Energy should consider the potential to reduce an additional 100 MWs of demand reduction through additional energy efficiency and demand response programs by the end of 2024. Secondly, City Council directed Austin Energy to study whether an even more ambitious goal of 1,200 MWs by the end of 2024 was economically and technically achievable. The Low Income Task Force believes that assuming improved technologies, programs and a budget commitment roughly consistent with current budgets in the $40 million range, achieving 1,000 MWs by the end of 2024 is readily achievable. Further study and analysis of course is needed. In addition, with the development of new programs like PACE, improved loan opportunities, and potentially other financial mechanisms like On-Bill Repayment, …
RECOMMENDATION Recommendation: The Council should direct Austin Energy to set an annual demand saving goal for AE’s energy efficiency programs targeting low and low-moderate income customer of no less than 5% of the utility’s annual peak demand savings and furthermore set a goal of achieving at least 10% of the utility’s annual peak demand savings by 2021 by annually raising the demand goal by one percent. While AE has set over-all demand savings goals on an annual basis, it has not done so for specific programs. Setting a demand savings goal for low and low-moderate income energy efficiency programs is one of the tasks assigned the Task Force by the Council. Austin Energy should also set corresponding energy savings goals associated with the demand goals. As an example every 1 MW of demand reduced through a low-income weatherization program should correspond to roughly 1,000 MWhs of energy saving based upon past data provided by Austin Energy. Multi-family programs, on the other hand, have generally had more success saving energy on a per unit basis, and a 1 MW of demand saved should correspond to roughly 2,000 MWhs of savings. A 5% demand savings goal for low and low-moderate income energy efficiency programs is readily achievable thereby justifying the demand savings goal be increased from 5% to 10% over the next five years. The table below presents a reasonable example of how Austin Energy might meet such a demand goal. It is meant for illustrative purposes only, but contemplates that through the two main energy efficiency programs that serve low-income residents, Austin Energy should be able to achieve a five percent goal in the short-term and a 10 percent goal within five years. Table. Illustrative Example of How Austin Energy Might Meet a Short-Term Demand Goal of 5% of Annual Demand Goals and a longer-term Demand Goal of 10% of Annual Demand Goals Low-Income Weatherization Multifamily Programs Serving Low and Low-to-Moderate Total of Two Main Programs All Demand Side Programs 2016 Demand Goal 1 MW 2 MW 3 MW 60 MWs 2016 Units Served 1,000 Homes 10,000 Units 11,000 Units 2016 Energy Saved 1,000 MWhs 4,000 MWhs 5,000 MWhs 2021 Demand Goal 2 MW 4 MW 6 MWs 60 MWs 2021 Units Served 2,000 Homes 20,000 Units 22,000 Units 2021 Energy Saved 2,000 MWhs 8,000 MWhs 10,000 MWhs The low income weatherization budget of $4 million recommended by the Task Force …
Recommendation Number _____1 Online Access of ECAD Results Targeted Underserved Group: All Renters Recommendation: Make the results of ECAD audits and disclosure forms for multi-family properties available on the city’s website. Time Schedule: Implementation in 2016 Budget Impact: The budget impact is unknown at this time. It is anticipated that the posting of documents on a website should be achievable at a reasonable cost and may therefore be possible within the current ECAD budget allocation. Community Need: The ECAD ordinance was adopted in 2008 and amended in 2011. In 2013, 54.9%2 of all households in Austin were renters. The survey further shows that 32.8% of renter households have annual income under $25,000 and another 31.1% have income between $25,000 and $49,999. Thus, 63.9% of renter households have income under $50,000 per year.3 Median household income for renters is $37,538 compared to $85,246 for homeowners. As utilities become a more significant part of the affordable housing equation ECAD can provide important guidance to consumers choosing a different apartment to rent. The problem is that the average consumer is unaware of ECAD and the information it provides. At the July 17, 2015 Austin Energy Affordable Energy Summit, and informal poll taken by hand indicated that 4 attendees knew about the program. Program Description: Under the city’s Energy Conservation Audit Disclosure (ECAD) ordinance, apartments with 5 or more units were required to have an energy audit conducted by June 1, 2011. The results are to be made available in three ways. 1) the results must be prominently displayed in facility common areas where public and legal notices are regularly posted, 2) copies of the audit must be available for review at the leasing or manager’s office, and 3) the standardized audit disclosure form must be provided to a prospective tenant prior to the tenant’s signing of a lease application or if no application is required prior to the signing of a lease. Searching the Internet for information about rental properties is a common practice. Having the ECAD documents posted on the city’s website would give consumers the ability to access and compare the documents early in the process of searching for housing. 1 Number will be assigned in final report. 2 U.S. Census Bureau, American Fact Finder , S2503 FINANCIAL CHARACTERISTICS, 2009-2013 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. 3 Ibid.
Recommendation Number ____ Amend the ECAD ordinance to include small rental properties Recommendation: Amend Austin City Code Chapter 6-7 and Austin Energy Rule R161-11.32 to provide the Energy Conservation Audit Disclosure to renters of single family homes, duplexes, triplexes and fourplexes. Targeted Underserved Group: All renters Time Schedule: Enact the expanded scope in 2015 and begin enforcement in 2016. Budget Impact: Accomplish within current budget for 2015 and proposed budget for 2016 Brief Description: Amend the ECAD ordinance to add a category for rental properties not exceeding four dwelling units. Moreover amend the ECAD rules to require landlords to provide energy audit disclosure information to prospective tenants in the same or similar manner as the energy audit information is disclosed tor renters in large apartment complexes.. Community Need: Consumers should be provided the information they need to make an educated decision about where to live. The ECAD ordinance was adopted with provisions to better inform families entering into leases in apartments of how the utility bills of current residents compare with the bills of other renters in the city. The status quo is that renters are often blindsided by high electric bills after signing a lease. After an exhaustive search for an affordable unit or a unit that accepts housing vouchers what appears to be affordable is not because of unexpectedly high utility bills. In some cases, a rental property with higher rent, but lower electric bills would be more affordable overall. In 2013, 54.9%1 of all households in Austin were renters. According to U.S. census data, 44% of renter-occupied housing units are in complexes that contain between 5 and 50 units. The remaining 37% of housing units are single-family, attached, duplex, triplex and four-plex structures.2 Data further show that 32.8% of renter households have annual income under $25,000 and another 31.1% have income between $25,000 and $49,999. Thus, 63.9% of renter households have income under $50,000 per year.3 Median household income for renters is $37,538 compared to $85,246 for homeowners.4 Program Description: The proposed amendment to the ECAD ordinance would provide the energy audit information to all renters, not just those in large apartment complexes. Landlords of single-family homes, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and units designated as condominiums won’t be required to make energy efficiency upgrades, but will have to get energy audits done on 1 U.S. Census Bureau, American Fact Finder , S2503 FINANCIAL CHARACTERISTICS, 2009-2013 American Community Survey …
STRUCTURAL RECOMMENDATION NO.______ Recommendation for an annual energy efficiency true-up 08.21.2015 Resubmit 09.01.15 1 Recommendation: The City Council should establish a true up proceeding for the energy efficiency rates within six months after the close of each fiscal year to reconcile any over or under recovery of AE energy efficiency revenues, realized and imputed, attributable to the energy efficiency rate for that recently closed fiscal year with that fiscal year’s energy efficiency expenses, including operations and maintenance, incurred by AE. The true up proceeding may result in no further action, a reduction or increase in the energy efficiency rate, and/or an amendment to the then-current energy efficiency budget, including the transfer of funds from one program to another to increase the effectiveness of the programs. Reasoning: Energy efficiency rates were separated out of base rates in the last contested rate case based in part on the advocacy of the environmental community. A primary concern from that community was that funding for the energy efficiency program was diverted to other utility operations. A separate rate they argued should promote greater accountability ensuring funds realized from energy efficiency rates would be spent on energy efficiency programs or refunded back to the customers. This recommendation is responsive to this public policy concern. According to Austin Energy in its response to the Task Force’s Interim Recommendations, audited data on the current FY energy efficiency revenues and expenses will not be available until some six months after the close of this fiscal year. This time lag between the end of fiscal year and having audited data available proved to be the case for the FY 2014 energy efficiency data. At last year’s budget and rate hearings, Austin Energy informed the council that true ups of the then-current FY should not occur until the FY’s data was audited. Consequently, the first opportunity the council has to correct any imbalances between revenues realized and expenses incurred in the energy efficiency program is six months after the close of the FY, mid-way into the next 1 Austin Energy, “Response to the Low Income Consumer Task Force’s Interim Report” (August 7, 2015), p.2. year’s FY’s operations. A true up proceeding at this time would provide up to date adjustments to the then current FY EE programs and/or rates in a timely manner. Without this true-up the regulatory risk increases that funds collected with EE rates are spent elsewhere in …
Recommendation on Building Codes – Revised Version August 20, 2015 The Task Force finds that continued improvement in base energy codes to reduce peak and overall energy use is of benefit to low-income and middle-income residents and to Austin Energy overall. Austin Energy has consistently worked with the City and its departments to improve base energy codes every three years, making new homes and remodeled homes and other buildings more energy efficient. By reducing the energy use of new and rehabilitated buildings Austin can lower emissions and water use from existing fossil fuel plants, reduce the need to buy expensive peak power off the market and potentially provide demand response capabilities to meet peak demand or even participate in energy markets. The Task Force reaffirms the goal of making new home construction in Austin, Texas to be net-zero energy capable by the end of 2015, while recognizing the challenges with fully meeting this goal. We recommend in 2015 that City Council direct the city manager to work with Austin Energy and the relevant advisory committees, and city departments to accomplish the following actions: 1. Adopt the 2015 IECC codes for residential construction, including local amendments to reach the net-zero-energy capable homes approved by City Council in 2007. The Task Force believes that the net-zero-energy capable home goal is achievable, but recognizes that certain homes will be unable to meet this goal in 2015 depending on whether the home is all-electric or includes gas heating and gas water heating, the size of the home and other issues like orientation of the design and the behavior of occupants. Assuming Austin Energy recommends and city council approves an updated more energy efficient code for new and remodeled homes, Austin Energy should continue to consider other amendments and programs to fully realize the net-zero capable homes goal beyond 2015; 2. Further the goal of net-zero energy capable homes by considering local amendments to the energy code and suggest amendments to other building codes to encourage the adoption of new technologies like solar PV, demand response, energy storage and electric vehicle charging technologies as appropriate. As an example, Austin Energy should work with the electrical code to assure that there is sufficient panel capacity to allow for EV charging stations. 3. Encourage the widespread adoption of solar PV technology by: a. Adopting a version of Appendix RB of the 2015 IECC that requires that all …
CLARIFICATION OF PROPOSED (d) TO THE Task Force’s RECOMMENDATION ON TRANSPARENCY, REPORTING AND ACCOUNTING Request for Clarification:.. Paragraph (d) to the Task Force’s Recommendation on Transparency, Reporting and Accounting should read as follows: Austin Energy should develop better tracking data by energy efficiency program and by city council district to: . . . . .
1 LOW INCOME CONSUMER ADVISORY TASK FORCE FINAL REPORT DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION September 4, 2015 This draft report is the product of a working group consisting of Task Force Members Lanetta Cooper, Cyrus Reed, Chris Strand and Carol Biedrzycki. You will see in reviewing the draft that there are placeholders for agenda items that are posted for discussion at the on September 4, 2015 task force meeting. At Friday’s meeting please make your comments specific to this draft. For example, if you believe something needs to be added please have copies of a draft of the material available for the group and have a specific suggestion as to where you would like it to fit into the draft. At the meeting there has been discussion about listing appropriate topics and areas of discussion for the future. This section of the report still needs to be drafted. The report working group plans to have the next draft on September 11th that will incorporate all the recommendations made to date and comments submitted to the task force on September 4th. 2 Executive Summary 3 I. Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION 5 II. BACKGROUND 5 A. Summary of Task Force Activities 6 1. Mission 6 2. Membership 6 3. Activities 7 4. Briefings and Reports 8 B. Demographics 9 C. History of Low and Low Moderate Income Programs 12 D. Equity 13 III. RECOMMENDATIONS 14 A. Global Recommendations 14 1. Program Evaluation Policies 15 2. Transparency, Reporting, and Accounting 16 3. Energy Efficiency True-Up Correction for Energy Efficiency Services Budget Implementation 21 4. Better Building Codes and Planning Review Process 21 5. Establishing goals for demand and energy savings for all programs 21 6. Establishing goals for demand and energy savings for low and low moderate income energy efficiency programs including the weatherization program. 22 7. Establishing budget goals for low and low moderate income energy efficiency programs including the weatherization program. 22 B. Program Goals 23 C. Residential 24 1. Rollover of Unspent Weatherization Funds 25 2. Universal Application with Automatic Referral Process 26 3. Provision of Air Conditioners in Low Income Weatherization Program 27 4. On-Bill Repayment 29 5. Contractor Rebate Pilot program in conjunction with Affordable Housing projects 31 6. Energy Star Window Heating and Cooling Units for Vulnerable Populations 33 7. Low Interest Loans for Installation of Energy Star Window Units 34 8. Low Interest Loans for Comprehensive Energy …
AE Weatherization Program job status as of September 1, 2015 1 ReferralsDuplicates Loaded to SFHomeownersRentersUnable to ServeUnable to Contact Able to ServeTotal Screened11,2392,0379,2023,9591,3602,3728406713,883ReferralsUnscreenedScreenedAE Weatherization ContractorsClients AssignedAssessments in Process and CompletedInspections PassedInspections FailedHomes Invoiced YTDHomes with DOAmt Obligated YTDAmt Paid YTDAirtech66664784766$230,271$110,536American Conservation101101721368101$456,616$243,252American Youth Works22221141022$71,278$28,144City Conservation 106106862184106$405,034$263,072Climate Mechanical222217111522$81,280$46,592Conservation Specialist43434204243$164,921$139,994Go Green818168166781$283,090$187,973McCullough60601841260$245,803$49,979Valdez30302571830$98,905$52,787Total53153138684363531$2,037,198$1,122,329Note 1: Of the 531 homes, 46 are rentersNote 2: 2015 values will include costs incurred for AWU reimbursement of water related improvements, unvouchered AP transactions and Refrigerator Recycling costs. These values may change after financial audited values are confirmed and may not be reflected in the weekly report generated by the department for the weatherization program.
