Village of Oak Park President and Board of Trustees met June 11.
Here is the minutes provided by the Board:
I. Call to Order
Village President Abu-Taleb called the Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. Roll Call
Present: 6 - Village Trustee Button, Village Trustee Taglia, Village President Abu-Taleb, Village Trustee Tucker, Village Trustee Boutet, and Village Trustee Andrews
Absent: 1 - Village Trustee Moroney III. Agenda Approval
It was moved by Village Trustee Andrews, seconded by Village Trustee Boutet, to approve the Agenda. A voice vote was taken and the motion was approved.
IV. Public Comment
There were no non-agenda public comments.
V. Regular Agenda
A. ID 18-891 Presentation and Discussion of Pilot Streetlighting Program
Director of Public Works John Wielebnicki stated that this is a follow-up to to the February 12 Board Meeting regarding streetlights. Tonight's discussion will focus on the 2,500 residential streetlights. At the prior meeting, he presented four options; 1) maintain the existing system and just replace the lamps; 2,3) look at various types of retro-fit LED lamps and 4) replace the entire fixture. Since that time, the Public Works Department put in four different LED corn-cob type lamps on four different blocks. He described the locations, each lamp type and their Kelvin rating, which affects color. He encouraged the Board to look at the lamps and see which they prefer. They all cost the same and offer the same incentives from Com Ed. Once there is direction, staff can propose a Capital Improvement Program at $100,000 per year for five years. Mr. Wielebnicki added that there have been no comments from residents. He discussed what several other communities use regarding Kelvin rating, with 2500 being the lowest and 4000 being the highest.
Mr. Wielebnicki stated that the cost is $69 per lamp and approximately $100 to install. In addition, if the Village bought all 2,500 lamps right now, Com Ed will contribute $55 towards the cost of each lamp. They will then have $69 lamps for $14. Village Trustee Andrews wanted to make sure there will be a future discussion on funding. Mr. Wielebnicki is looking for direction in order to budget for the project in 2019.
Village Trustee Taglia asked how the public was being made aware of the pilot program. Mr. Wielebnicki stated that they are being notified through the Communications Department. Village Trustee Andrews suggested an online poll for residents to convey their preferences. Village Trustee Taglia was also interested in getting information regarding the Village's return on investment.
Village Trustee Boutet asked if all the lamps would be done at once or wait until their useful life is over. Mr. Wielebnicki commented that within five years, all existing lamps will be much dimmer. Village Trustee Boutet asked how long the Come Ed rebate will be available. Mr. Wielebnicki was not sure. There was a discussion regarding the cost, including installation, as well as the time frame.
Village Trustee Tucker asked for more information about the Com Ed program. He was also interested in community input.
Village Trustee Button asked when the project will begin. Mr. Wielebnicki stated that he was originally going to proposed this for 2019 but can move it up to later this year at the direction of the Board. Village Trustee Button also asked for information about alley lighting.
Village President Abu-Taleb was in favor of spreading this out over five years at approximately $60,000 per year. Village Trustee Boutet was in favor of three years. Village President Abu-Taleb asked the Board if there was consensus to direct staff to move forward. Village Trustees Andrews, Button, Taglia and Tucker agreed that the project should be spread out over three years. Village President Abu-Taleb directed Mr. Wielebnicki to come back with exact figures for the project over three years.
B. ID 18-893 Economic Analysis of Renewable Energy Projects
Deputy Village Manager Shelley stated that in March, the Board asked staff to review multiple projects to potentially be paid for out of the Sustainability Fund.
Sustainability Coordinator Mindy Agnew discussed the efforts of the Environment and Energy Commission regarding this project. Based on Board direction, staff has come back with seven recommendations. She described the rating criteria used for each option. She discussed Utility Scale Solar, which the Board had asked staff to pursue. Staff has determined that it is a possibility, but would be very complex and results would be long delayed. In addition, this could increase energy bills for both residential and business accounts. Ms. Agnew acknowledged the State and Federal financial initiatives. Based on tonight's direction, staff will put together a comprehensive timeline and budget.
Mark Pruitt of the Illinois Community Choice Aggregation Network referred to the seven options and described the key metrics; sustainability, economics, resource requirements, unknowns, longevity, complexity, scalability and calendar.
Village Trustee Boutet asked for clarification regarding the need to commit to a project in 2018 and if it relates to the Future Energy Jobs Act. None of the funding information included that incentive. Mr. Pruitt commented that it was the direction of the Board to deploy the aggregation funds in the near future rather than letting them accumulate. In addition, each project is eligible to receive some level of funding through the Future Energy Jobs Act. He explained how the various incentives through the Future Energy Jobs Act are structured and which programs would be applicable to Oak Park. Mr. Pruitt gave an overview of each project's metrics scoring results and ranked them one through six.
Stephen Morales, member of the Environment and Energy Commission. Mr. Morales would like the commission to review the ratings on the metrics at their next meeting. He would also like a control for the rankings for the sake of comparison.
Jim Babcock, representing Interfaith Green Network. Mr. Babcock urged the Board to understand the need for sustainability projects as a necessity for combating global warming. He discussed some of its current and potential effects.
Village Trustee Tucker liked the option of "Promoting Existing Utility Efficiency Programs" and felt that would greatly benefit residents. He asked if funds were available to offer some Village incentives for some of these programs. Ms. Agnew said yes, and noted that the rationale behind this is to make the public more aware of the Com Ed cost savings. There is room for more incentives. Village Trustee Tucker discussed the "Rooftop Solar Array for Village Hall". The Village does not pay for its electrical consumption. He also expressed concern regarding Village Hall being an historic structure, the slope of the roof and its weight bearing capacity. Mr. Pruitt explained how the panels would be placed but agreed that this would not offset costs. Another option would be to make the electrical output available to residents or Village facilities that do pay an electric bill. Ms. Agnew discussed the use of solar film that is currently being used by some commercial buildings in the Village. They are also looking into additional available space, such as a canopy over the parking lot. Village Trustee Tucker directed Deputy Village Manager Shelley to ask the Historic Preservation Commission to look into this. He also asked if there was staff capacity to do this. Mr. Pruitt stated that this would require a contract between the Village and a developer, similar to electricity purchasing.
Village Trustee Button didn't want to rule out doing a solar array and asked for clarification on the value of Village Hall owned solar panels. Ms. Agnew explained. Village Trustee Button wanted to hear the opinion of the Environment and Energy Commission regarding the ratings. She asked how soon this can come back to the Board. Ms. Agnew stated it would be in August. Deputy Village Manager Shelley clarified that staff is only asking for general feedback right now, such as options to eliminate. Village Trustee Button directed staff to provide estimated annual costs for each proposal. Mr. Pruitt commented that the solar array cost includes ongoing maintenance. Village Trustee Button also liked "Promoting Existing Utility Efficiency Programs".
Village Trustee Andrews was opposed to a rooftop solar array at Village Hall, but not opposed to having one elsewhere. He stated that whether or not the streetlights were ever intended to be part of this fund, saving 70% of the Village's energy cost is an obvious benefit. He is very comfortable having that come solely out of this fund instead of using taxpayer dollars. In addition, he would like to see a significant portion of this go to grants or loans to help residents make their homes more energy efficient. He is not in favor of a utility scale solar array and would rather see that money reinvested in the Village.
Village Trustee Taglia asked if tariffs are affecting sustainability costs. Mr. Pruitt stated that they are not but there is a risk that incentives will be negatively affected if Federal funding changes. Village Trustee Taglia also wants to hear feedback from the Environment and Energy Commission, as well as their thoughts on using the funds for the LED streetlights. He wants to deploy these funds sooner rather than later.
Village Trustee Boutet agreed with Village Trustee Tucker regarding Village Hall solar panels. She wanted more information regarding the option of solar panels in the Village Hall parking lot. She was in favor of using the funds for the streetlights, as it will be giving the money back to the community. Village Trustee Boutet wanted to see more residential energy efficiency incentives. She also pointed out that this is focusing strictly on electricity; she would like to touch on water management as well as exploring geothermal for Village Hall. Mr. Pruitt clarified the difference between purchasing RECs versus the "Offsite Community Solar Subscription" options. Village Trustee Boutet supported low interest loans or grants for residential projects not limited to energy efficiency but other initiatives as well.
Village President Abu-Taleb asked for information on the cost and savings of the "Utility Scale Solar Array" option at $200 million. Mr. Pruitt explained. Village President Abu-Taleb discussed the impact that this project would have in the community. However, the cost is too high. He would like to see the electrical cost to the Village offset by 15-20 percent rather than 100 percent. He spoke about the history of the Sustainability Fund. He was in favor of funding the LED streetlights from this fund because it benefits the Village as a whole and the project would not require the use of any taxpayer dollars. He did not like the idea of solar panels on the roof of Village Hall. There was consensus to fund the LED streetlights at $100,000 per year from this fund and promote energy efficiency. Village President Abu-Taleb was not in favor of taking money from this fund for residential grants or loans. Village Trustees Boutet and Button disagreed. Village Trustee Button asked about options for installing solar panels at an alternate building in the Village. Village Trustee Andrews agreed. He also supported some portion of the fund going towards grants for residential energy efficiency upgrades. Ms. Agnew discussed the incentives that they can pursue. There was consensus to explore the residential grants and solar panel options and bring back additional information.
C. ID 18-892 Update on the Electric Power Supply Contract with Constellation Energy for the Village’s Community Choice Electrical Aggregation (CCA) Program
Deputy Village Manager Shelley stated that the Village is seeking bids from electricity suppliers to be presented to the Board at the end of July.
Ms. Agnew described the electrical aggregation process and the opt out procedure.
Mr. Pruitt acknowledged that the Board has been through this process a number of times. Because there are more options coming into the market, it might make sense to prompt the supply company to come forward with alternate proposals. There may be retail electrical suppliers that would be willing to provide the Village with a price that would include a 10% solar content from a community solar project or series of projects. They may be able to guarantee a price equal to Com Ed's to compare every month, even with Com Ed's adjustments. This will eliminate any objection that the Village's price is higher than the Com Ed price. The Village is not obligated to enter into any agreement or to continue with its current supplier. It is his recommendation to get the price in the same format as before but be open to other opportunities that may be available.
Ms. Agnew added that bids will be back and proposed to the Board on July 30.
VI. Adjourn
It was moved by Village Trustee Boutet, seconded by Village Trustee Andrews, to adjourn. A voice vote was taken and the motion was approved. Meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m., Monday, June 11, 2018.
https://oak-park.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx
Alerts Sign-up