Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBatch 101 Hicks, Bailey From:Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Thursday, March 8, 2018 5:39 PM To:Read, Chris Cc:Tom Habashi;Bren Lehr;Mark Bachman Subject:RE: City of San Luis Obispo / MBCP Check-In Hi Chris,    Thank you for reaching out.    Tom has asked Bren to schedule a conference call to include Tom, Mark Bachman and myself.    She will reach out to you with some preferred times for a 30‐60 minute call.    We look forward to circling back, now that we have launched Phase I, to hear what progress you are making in SLO and  how we might assist in your efforts.    Best Regards,  ‐Marc      Marc Adato, Community Outreach & Events Coordinator  m:(831) 234‐4668 o:(831) 641‐7210  madato@mbcommunitypower.org                 Local Choice • Clean Energy • Economic Vitality         70 Garden Court, Suite 300         Monterey, CA 93940         mbcommunitypower.org    From: Read, Chris [mailto:cread@slocity.org]   Sent: Thursday, March 8, 2018 3:17 PM  To: Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>; Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Hill, Robert <rhill@slocity.org>  Subject: City of San Luis Obispo / MBCP Check‐In    Hi Tom and Marc, I hope you are well. When we last spoke, I was helping lead the County of San Luis Obispo CCE effort. Since then, I have transitioned to a new role at the City of San Luis Obispo. CCE is a top priority for the City this year. As Marc saw, our Council’s direction in December was to consider creating our own regional CCE, while also learning more about the MBCP option as an alternative approach. 2 Given the length of time since we last spoke, I am hoping to reconnect on a number of issues related to potentially joining MBCP. Let us know if you have some availability in the next several weeks to talk for 30 to 60 minutes, and we will work to accommodate your schedule. Thank you for you time; we look forward to speaking with you. Best, Chris Read Sustainability Manager City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E cread@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  3 Hicks, Bailey From:Read, Chris Sent:Thursday, March 8, 2018 3:17 PM To:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org;madato@mbcommunitypower.org Cc:Hill, Robert Subject:City of San Luis Obispo / MBCP Check-In Hi Tom and Marc, I hope you are well. When we last spoke, I was helping lead the County of San Luis Obispo CCE effort. Since then, I have transitioned to a new role at the City of San Luis Obispo. CCE is a top priority for the City this year. As Marc saw, our Council’s direction in December was to consider creating our own regional CCE, while also learning more about the MBCP option as an alternative approach. Given the length of time since we last spoke, I am hoping to reconnect on a number of issues related to potentially joining MBCP. Let us know if you have some availability in the next several weeks to talk for 30 to 60 minutes, and we will work to accommodate your schedule. Thank you for you time; we look forward to speaking with you. Best, Chris Read Sustainability Manager City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E cread@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  4 Hicks, Bailey From:Read, Chris Sent:Thursday, March 8, 2018 3:17 PM To:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org;madato@mbcommunitypower.org Cc:Hill, Robert Subject:City of San Luis Obispo / MBCP Check-In Hi Tom and Marc, I hope you are well. When we last spoke, I was helping lead the County of San Luis Obispo CCE effort. Since then, I have transitioned to a new role at the City of San Luis Obispo. CCE is a top priority for the City this year. As Marc saw, our Council’s direction in December was to consider creating our own regional CCE, while also learning more about the MBCP option as an alternative approach. Given the length of time since we last spoke, I am hoping to reconnect on a number of issues related to potentially joining MBCP. Let us know if you have some availability in the next several weeks to talk for 30 to 60 minutes, and we will work to accommodate your schedule. Thank you for you time; we look forward to speaking with you. Best, Chris Read Sustainability Manager City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E cread@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  5 Hicks, Bailey From:Johnson, Derek Sent:Friday, January 12, 2018 2:57 PM To:Goldstein, Jamie (jgoldstein@ci.capitola.ca.us) Subject:RE: Latest decisions by CPUC Yes, we have a backup plan that is good. From: Goldstein, Jamie (jgoldstein@ci.capitola.ca.us) [mailto:jgoldstein@ci.capitola.ca.us]   Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 12:06 PM  To: Johnson, Derek <djohnson@slocity.org>  Subject: FW: Latest decisions by CPUC    Bummer the Diablo deal got scraped. Assume you knew that was coming?    From: Tom Habashi [mailto:thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 8:19 AM  Subject: Latest decisions by CPUC    I thought you might be interested in the following decisions by the CPUC. They clearly  indicate support for electrification and energy storage and lack thereof for mitigating  economic impact on SLO. I hope to see you and your alternates on Saturday 1/20, which  promises an interesting and engaging workshop.      The California Public Utilities Commission on Thursday voted 5‐0 to retire Diablo Canyon,  the last nuclear plant in the state. Regulators will allow Pacific Gas & Electric to recover  $241.2 million for retirement costs, most of which will go towards employ retention.   The commission rejected an $85 million request for a Community Impact Mitigation  Program that had been agreed to by the utility and community stakeholders in San Luis  Obispo, where the plant is located. Regulators also rejected PG&E's plan to replace the  plant's capacity with renewable energy and storage, saying replacement resources will be  determined in its integrated resource plan (IRP).   In a separate proceeding, the commission approved 15 utility pilot projects aimed at  accelerating the transition towards electrified transportation, with particular emphasis on  heavy duty and fleet vehicles. Regulators also authorized PG&E to issue a request for offers  (RFO) for battery storage projects to replace three gas plants that don't have long‐term  contracts but are needed for local reliability.    6     Tom Habashi, CEO   (831) 313‐5557  thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org        7 Hicks, Bailey From:Goldstein, Jamie (jgoldstein@ci.capitola.ca.us) <jgoldstein@ci.capitola.ca.us> Sent:Friday, January 12, 2018 12:06 PM To:Johnson, Derek Subject:FW: Latest decisions by CPUC Bummer the Diablo deal got scraped. Assume you knew that was coming?    From: Tom Habashi [mailto:thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 8:19 AM  Subject: Latest decisions by CPUC    I thought you might be interested in the following decisions by the CPUC. They clearly  indicate support for electrification and energy storage and lack thereof for mitigating  economic impact on SLO. I hope to see you and your alternates on Saturday 1/20, which  promises an interesting and engaging workshop.      The California Public Utilities Commission on Thursday voted 5‐0 to retire Diablo Canyon,  the last nuclear plant in the state. Regulators will allow Pacific Gas & Electric to recover  $241.2 million for retirement costs, most of which will go towards employ retention.   The commission rejected an $85 million request for a Community Impact Mitigation  Program that had been agreed to by the utility and community stakeholders in San Luis  Obispo, where the plant is located. Regulators also rejected PG&E's plan to replace the  plant's capacity with renewable energy and storage, saying replacement resources will be  determined in its integrated resource plan (IRP).   In a separate proceeding, the commission approved 15 utility pilot projects aimed at  accelerating the transition towards electrified transportation, with particular emphasis on  heavy duty and fleet vehicles. Regulators also authorized PG&E to issue a request for offers  (RFO) for battery storage projects to replace three gas plants that don't have long‐term  contracts but are needed for local reliability.        Tom Habashi, CEO   (831) 313‐5557  thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org    8     9 Hicks, Bailey From:Monterey Bay Community Power <info@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Friday, December 29, 2017 3:17 PM To:Carloni, Marcus Subject:January 3: Meeting of MBCP's Operations Board     Monterey Bay Community Power News To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Please Join Us! Meeting of Monterey Bay Community Power Operations Board of Directors Wednesday, January 3 9 a.m. View Agenda Here Meeting Location: City of Watsonville  City Council Chambers  275 Main Street, 4th Floor  Watsonville, CA 95076    10 Learn more about Monterey Bay Community Power in this video. To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Monterey Bay Community Power Monterey Bay Community Power To heprivaOfficeautomof thithe In To help prprivacy, Mprevented download from the In MBCommunityPower.org info@MBCommunityPower.org     Monterey Bay Community Power, 70 Garden Court, Suite 300, Monterey, CA 93940 SafeUnsubscribe™ mcarloni@slocity.org Forward this email | Update Profile | About our service provider Sent by info@mbcommunitypower.org in collaboration with To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Constant Contact Try it free today     11 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Tuesday, December 19, 2017 2:58 PM To:Gallagher, Carrie Subject:RE: Quick Questions Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged See spelling and org name below. From: Marc Adato [mailto:madato@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 10:25 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Mark Bachman <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>; Tom Habashi  <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: Quick Questions    Hi Gregg,    Thank you for raising some of your City Council’s concerns prior to today’s meeting.    Product Mix‐    We are providing our 100% carbon free portfolio primarily with large hydro‐electric power from the Pacific NW. Our  portfolio will have 30% Renewable Energy from “Bucket 1”sourced from RE produced within California or delivering  power directly to CA (wind, solar, biomass). There is no nuclear power or unbundled RECs in our portfolio.    Governance‐  With respect to rates, our Board has full discretion over rate setting so long as we conform to the RPS set by the CPUC.  Our Board has full discretion as to what kind of energy we buy.    With respect to decision‐making authority, if the City of SLO decides to request inclusion in the MBCP program by  submitting a Resolution of Intent to our Policy Board, MBCP staff would make a recommendation to our Board, prior to  the adoption of the Ordinance, that the City of SLO have a permanent seat on Policy Board.     ‐Precedent for this was made for the County of San Benito which has a population of less than 50,000. As the City of SLO  is currently the only interested local government in San Luis Obispo County interested in joining at this time, this would  be our recommendation.    Thank you for your interest and consideration.      Marc Adato, Community Outreach Coordinator  Monterey Bay Community Power  70 Garden Court, Suite #300  Monterey, CA 93940  C. (831) 234‐4668  E. madato@mbcommunitypower.org  12 W. www.mbcommunitypower.org                   From: Codron, Michael [mailto:mcodron@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:47 AM  To: Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>; Mark Bachman <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>; Tom  Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Fwd: Quick Questions    Looping in Marc and Mark. -Michael Codron From: Hermann, Greg  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:41:29 AM  To: Tom Habashi  Cc: Codron, Michael  Subject: Quick Questions      Hi Tom,    Michael and I are getting some final questions in advance of the presentation tonight and I was hoping you could assist with answering two related to MBCP:    1. What is current split on large vs. small hydro procurement?  2. What are the policy commitments of MBCP vs the discretion of the governing board? How much could the board change with respect to rates equaling PG&E, 100% carbon free, etc. Our City Council wants to know what decision making authority they are giving up by only having a rotating seat and what commitments from MBCP they can count on.    Please let us know when you get a chance or perhaps have your representative be able to answer at this afternoon’s hearing. Thanks for all of your help!    Greg  13 Hicks, Bailey From:Codron, Michael Sent:Thursday, December 14, 2017 10:15 AM To:Hermann, Greg Subject:FW: San Luis Obispo - CCEA - follow up fyi From: Marc Adato [mailto:madato@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2017 10:08 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Cc: Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>; Shawn Marshall <shawnmarshall@leanenergyus.org>;  Gine.Johnson@santacruzcounty.us; Mark Bachman <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: Re: San Luis Obispo ‐ CCEA ‐ follow up    Hi Michael,     Excellent ‐ thank you for confirming my summary take away on your Council’s Decision.    We look forward to your progress. We will continue to make ourselves available to assist your effort in whatever  capacity that we can to help your community realize the benefits of CCE.    Best Regards,  ‐Marc      Sent from my iPhone    On Dec 14, 2017, at 7:51 AM, Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org> wrote:  Hi Marc, the information you provided was very helpful. We greatly appreciate how open and supportive the whole MBCP team has been of our efforts. You have the Council action correctly summarized. In addition to the items you noted, we also took away direction to identify appropriate off-ramps as we head down the path of starting our own CCE.     We are looking forward to collaborating in the future, and will be in touch as we develop our RFP and prepare to return to the Council with additional recommendations.     All the best,    Michael Codron Director of Community Development <image001.png> Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org  14     From: Marc Adato [mailto:madato@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 4:58 PM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Cc: Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: San Luis Obispo ‐ CCEA ‐ follow up     Michael,     Thank you again for inviting us to your City Council meeting to discuss potential on‐ramping with  MBCP.     I was on the phone with Shawn Marshall, CEO, LEAN US inquiring about a possible expedited path  forward before 2‐1‐18 ‐ should your Council have decided to move forward yesterday. As such I missed  the summary decision by your Council.     We certainly understand the difficulty in deciding how to balance expediency and lower cost  implementation with local control, representation and autonomy.     I wanted to confirm my understanding of the final meeting outcome for moving your CCE effort  forward.     From Packet Pg. 18:  A1. The City Council will continue to pursue CCE.  B1,2 and 3. City only; City with others; City with Santa Barbara – All To be explored through an RFP  process (with which you have $25,000 of partial funding to  pursue).                                                                                                                     C1. Join MBPC ‐ Not at this time.  D1 a‐e Evaluation Factors. To be worked through prior to or during the RFP process.     Incubator Model  I am glad we were able to broach the incubator model similar to Lancaster City. While this is not  business that MBCP is actively looking to solicit, Tom Habashi reiterated that he would advocate  favorably to our Policy Board should the City of San Luis Obispo inquire about using MBCP’s resources  and infrastructure to help with comprehensive services to support development, financing, launch and  operations. This would require the City of San Luis Obispo to form its own JPA. One potential advantage  to this incubator model as you continue to explore options ‐ is that MBCP would not be looking to take a  percentage of the net revenues as other vendors in the market.     CPUC  The timing of the CPUC Ruling to slow CCE submittals and include a wait period was unfortunate ‐ as this  added an urgency factor that made potential on‐ramping with MBCP more difficult to consider.     We are here to assist you in whatever capacity we can to accelerate your launch and help you achieve  your community’s goals.     Best Regards,     Marc     Marc Adato, Community Outreach Coordinator  15 (831) 234‐4668  madato@mbcommunitypower.org     <image003.jpg>    70 Garden Court, Suite 300  Monterey, CA 93940  mbcommunitypower.org        16 Hicks, Bailey From:Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Thursday, December 14, 2017 10:08 AM To:Codron, Michael Cc:Tom Habashi;Shawn Marshall;Gine.Johnson@santacruzcounty.us;Mark Bachman Subject:Re: San Luis Obispo - CCEA - follow up Hi Michael,     Excellent ‐ thank you for confirming my summary take away on your Council’s Decision.    We look forward to your progress. We will continue to make ourselves available to assist your effort in whatever  capacity that we can to help your community realize the benefits of CCE.    Best Regards,  ‐Marc      Sent from my iPhone    On Dec 14, 2017, at 7:51 AM, Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org> wrote:  Hi Marc, the information you provided was very helpful. We greatly appreciate how open and supportive the whole MBCP team has been of our efforts. You have the Council action correctly summarized. In addition to the items you noted, we also took away direction to identify appropriate off-ramps as we head down the path of starting our own CCE.     We are looking forward to collaborating in the future, and will be in touch as we develop our RFP and prepare to return to the Council with additional recommendations.     All the best,    Michael Codron Director of Community Development <image001.png> Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org      From: Marc Adato [mailto:madato@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 4:58 PM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Cc: Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: San Luis Obispo ‐ CCEA ‐ follow up     17 Michael,     Thank you again for inviting us to your City Council meeting to discuss potential on‐ramping with  MBCP.     I was on the phone with Shawn Marshall, CEO, LEAN US inquiring about a possible expedited path  forward before 2‐1‐18 ‐ should your Council have decided to move forward yesterday. As such I missed  the summary decision by your Council.     We certainly understand the difficulty in deciding how to balance expediency and lower cost  implementation with local control, representation and autonomy.     I wanted to confirm my understanding of the final meeting outcome for moving your CCE effort  forward.     From Packet Pg. 18:  A1. The City Council will continue to pursue CCE.  B1,2 and 3. City only; City with others; City with Santa Barbara – All To be explored through an RFP  process (with which you have $25,000 of partial funding to  pursue).                                                                                                                     C1. Join MBPC ‐ Not at this time.  D1 a‐e Evaluation Factors. To be worked through prior to or during the RFP process.     Incubator Model  I am glad we were able to broach the incubator model similar to Lancaster City. While this is not  business that MBCP is actively looking to solicit, Tom Habashi reiterated that he would advocate  favorably to our Policy Board should the City of San Luis Obispo inquire about using MBCP’s resources  and infrastructure to help with comprehensive services to support development, financing, launch and  operations. This would require the City of San Luis Obispo to form its own JPA. One potential advantage  to this incubator model as you continue to explore options ‐ is that MBCP would not be looking to take a  percentage of the net revenues as other vendors in the market.     CPUC  The timing of the CPUC Ruling to slow CCE submittals and include a wait period was unfortunate ‐ as this  added an urgency factor that made potential on‐ramping with MBCP more difficult to consider.     We are here to assist you in whatever capacity we can to accelerate your launch and help you achieve  your community’s goals.     Best Regards,     Marc     Marc Adato, Community Outreach Coordinator  (831) 234‐4668  madato@mbcommunitypower.org     <image003.jpg>    70 Garden Court, Suite 300  Monterey, CA 93940  mbcommunitypower.org     18    19 Hicks, Bailey From:Codron, Michael Sent:Thursday, December 14, 2017 7:52 AM To:Marc Adato Cc:Hermann, Greg;Tom Habashi Subject:RE: San Luis Obispo - CCEA - follow up Hi Marc, the information you provided was very helpful. We greatly appreciate how open and supportive the whole MBCP team has been of our efforts. You have the Council action correctly summarized. In addition to the items you noted, we also took away direction to identify appropriate off-ramps as we head down the path of starting our own CCE. We are looking forward to collaborating in the future, and will be in touch as we develop our RFP and prepare to return to the Council with additional recommendations. All the best, Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org From: Marc Adato [mailto:madato@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 4:58 PM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Cc: Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: San Luis Obispo ‐ CCEA ‐ follow up    Michael,    Thank you again for inviting us to your City Council meeting to discuss potential on‐ramping with MBCP.    I was on the phone with Shawn Marshall, CEO, LEAN US inquiring about a possible expedited path forward before 2‐1‐18  ‐ should your Council have decided to move forward yesterday. As such I missed the summary decision by your Council.    We certainly understand the difficulty in deciding how to balance expediency and lower cost implementation with local  control, representation and autonomy.    I wanted to confirm my understanding of the final meeting outcome for moving your CCE effort forward.    20 From Packet Pg. 18:  A1. The City Council will continue to pursue CCE.  B1,2 and 3. City only; City with others; City with Santa Barbara – All To be explored through an RFP process (with  which you have $25,000 of partial funding to  pursue).                                                                                                                     C1. Join MBPC ‐ Not at this time.  D1 a‐e Evaluation Factors. To be worked through prior to or during the RFP process.    Incubator Model  I am glad we were able to broach the incubator model similar to Lancaster City. While this is not business that MBCP is  actively looking to solicit, Tom Habashi reiterated that he would advocate favorably to our Policy Board should the City  of San Luis Obispo inquire about using MBCP’s resources and infrastructure to help with comprehensive services to  support development, financing, launch and operations. This would require the City of San Luis Obispo to form its own  JPA. One potential advantage to this incubator model as you continue to explore options ‐ is that MBCP would not be  looking to take a percentage of the net revenues as other vendors in the market.    CPUC  The timing of the CPUC Ruling to slow CCE submittals and include a wait period was unfortunate ‐ as this added an  urgency factor that made potential on‐ramping with MBCP more difficult to consider.    We are here to assist you in whatever capacity we can to accelerate your launch and help you achieve your community’s  goals.    Best Regards,    Marc    Marc Adato, Community Outreach Coordinator  (831) 234‐4668  madato@mbcommunitypower.org        70 Garden Court, Suite 300  Monterey, CA 93940  mbcommunitypower.org      21 Hicks, Bailey From:Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Wednesday, December 13, 2017 4:58 PM To:Codron, Michael Cc:Tom Habashi Subject:San Luis Obispo - CCEA - follow up Michael,    Thank you again for inviting us to your City Council meeting to discuss potential on‐ramping with MBCP.    I was on the phone with Shawn Marshall, CEO, LEAN US inquiring about a possible expedited path forward before 2‐1‐18  ‐ should your Council have decided to move forward yesterday. As such I missed the summary decision by your Council.    We certainly understand the difficulty in deciding how to balance expediency and lower cost implementation with local  control, representation and autonomy.    I wanted to confirm my understanding of the final meeting outcome for moving your CCE effort forward.    From Packet Pg. 18:  A1. The City Council will continue to pursue CCE.  B1,2 and 3. City only; City with others; City with Santa Barbara – All To be explored through an RFP process (with  which you have $25,000 of partial funding to  pursue).                                                                                                                     C1. Join MBPC ‐ Not at this time.  D1 a‐e Evaluation Factors. To be worked through prior to or during the RFP process.    Incubator Model  I am glad we were able to broach the incubator model similar to Lancaster City. While this is not business that MBCP is  actively looking to solicit, Tom Habashi reiterated that he would advocate favorably to our Policy Board should the City  of San Luis Obispo inquire about using MBCP’s resources and infrastructure to help with comprehensive services to  support development, financing, launch and operations. This would require the City of San Luis Obispo to form its own  JPA. One potential advantage to this incubator model as you continue to explore options ‐ is that MBCP would not be  looking to take a percentage of the net revenues as other vendors in the market.    CPUC  The timing of the CPUC Ruling to slow CCE submittals and include a wait period was unfortunate ‐ as this added an  urgency factor that made potential on‐ramping with MBCP more difficult to consider.    We are here to assist you in whatever capacity we can to accelerate your launch and help you achieve your community’s  goals.    Best Regards,    Marc    Marc Adato, Community Outreach Coordinator  (831) 234‐4668  madato@mbcommunitypower.org  22       70 Garden Court, Suite 300  Monterey, CA 93940  mbcommunitypower.org      23 Hicks, Bailey From:Codron, Michael Sent:Wednesday, December 13, 2017 4:57 PM To:Dietrick, Christine Cc:Hermann, Greg Subject:FW: CalCCA and City of San Luis Obispo intro re: CPUC proposal to delay CCA process Attachments:FW: CPUC INformation alert; CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Hi Christine, fyi regarding resources on our communication to the CPUC. Let’s discuss a plan to get something out before the 1/11 vote! -mc From: Chris Read [mailto:cread@co.slo.ca.us]   Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 4:46 PM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Cc: hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org; beth@cal‐cca.org; Jon Griesser <jgriesser@co.slo.ca.us>; Cregar, Jennifer  <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Subject: CalCCA and City of San Luis Obispo intro re: CPUC proposal to delay CCA process    Hi Greg and Michael, I joined Jen Cregar on today’s CalCCA call where they discussed the CPUC’s proposed resolution to delay the CCA formation/process. In short, the CPUC is proposing a 1- to 2-year delay for any new or expanded CCAs. As proposed:  If a CCA submits a new/amended implementation plan by 2/1/18, the earliest the CCA could start/expand service is 1/1/19.  If a CCA submits a new/amended implementation plan between 2/2/18-12/31/18, the earliest the CCA could start/expand service is 1/1/20.  Going forward, any CCA that submits a new/amended implementation plan by the end of the current calendar year could start/expand service on January 1 of the calendar year after next. For example, a CCA that submits an implementation plan 3/15/19, would have to wait until 1/1/21 to start service. The CPUC currently plans to take action on the resolution at their 1/11/18 meeting. There is more information attached. As I understand it, CalCCA is interested in identifying local governments that may be impacted by the CPUC’s proposed resolution. Given your Council’s action yesterday and given Mayor Harmon’s interest in engaging the CPUC on this issue, I am connecting you with Beth Vaughan, CalCCA Operations Director, and Hilary Staver, CalCCA Regulatory Committee Chair. I am hopeful they can provide more information about the proposal and opportunities to influence the CPUC’s decision. Beth and Hilary, Greg Hermann and Michael Codron are the CCA staff leads for the City of San Luis Obispo. Please let me know if you need anything else from me. Best, Chris Read Senior Energy Program Coordinator County of San Luis Obispo 24 805-781-1172 cread@co.slo.ca.us   25 Hicks, Bailey From:Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us> Sent:Wednesday, December 13, 2017 4:46 PM To:Hermann, Greg;Codron, Michael Cc:hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org;beth@cal-cca.org;Jon Griesser;Cregar, Jennifer Subject:CalCCA and City of San Luis Obispo intro re: CPUC proposal to delay CCA process Attachments:FW: CPUC INformation alert; CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Hi Greg and Michael, I joined Jen Cregar on today’s CalCCA call where they discussed the CPUC’s proposed resolution to delay the CCA formation/process. In short, the CPUC is proposing a 1- to 2-year delay for any new or expanded CCAs. As proposed:  If a CCA submits a new/amended implementation plan by 2/1/18, the earliest the CCA could start/expand service is 1/1/19.  If a CCA submits a new/amended implementation plan between 2/2/18-12/31/18, the earliest the CCA could start/expand service is 1/1/20.  Going forward, any CCA that submits a new/amended implementation plan by the end of the current calendar year could start/expand service on January 1 of the calendar year after next. For example, a CCA that submits an implementation plan 3/15/19, would have to wait until 1/1/21 to start service. The CPUC currently plans to take action on the resolution at their 1/11/18 meeting. There is more information attached. As I understand it, CalCCA is interested in identifying local governments that may be impacted by the CPUC’s proposed resolution. Given your Council’s action yesterday and given Mayor Harmon’s interest in engaging the CPUC on this issue, I am connecting you with Beth Vaughan, CalCCA Operations Director, and Hilary Staver, CalCCA Regulatory Committee Chair. I am hopeful they can provide more information about the proposal and opportunities to influence the CPUC’s decision. Beth and Hilary, Greg Hermann and Michael Codron are the CCA staff leads for the City of San Luis Obispo. Please let me know if you need anything else from me. Best, Chris Read Senior Energy Program Coordinator County of San Luis Obispo 805-781-1172 cread@co.slo.ca.us   26 Hicks, Bailey From:Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:20 PM To:Hermann, Greg Subject:RE: RE: Quick Questions Best of luck and glad to have helped    From: Hermann, Greg [mailto:GHermann@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 6:26 PM  To: Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Sustainability <sustainability@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: RE: Quick Questions    Thanks Tom. It was great to have your staff present to address questions. Ultimately, our Council decided to pursue establishing a new CCE, but would move towards joining an existing program if at any point that became infeasible or impractical. We will keep you posted on our progress and thank you again for the conversations and assistance to this point. Greg From: Tom Habashi [mailto:thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 12:41 PM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: RE: Quick Questions    We will be willing to have others join when they are ready, although it’s always best to join en masse. There is no size  limit for the agencies to join.  You can always terminate as you see fit as outlined in MBCP’s JPA. To the extent that you are looking for an incubator  approach, that also could be arranged as long as you’re comfortable with the notion that you’ll start as your own CCA  Mark Backman and Marc Adato will be there to answer the basics. If you decided to pursue working with MBCP in any  capacity, then we can have a more in‐depth discussion re the pros and cons of the various options in accordance to  which we will be structuring our relationship    From: Hermann, Greg [mailto:GHermann@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 10:25 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>; Marc Adato  <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>; Mark Bachman <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: RE: Quick Questions    And one more! 4. What is the cycle time for the rotating seat? How often do you anticipate that we would have seat? Thanks, 27 Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:48 AM  To: tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org; Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>; Mark Bachman  <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Fwd: RE: Quick Questions    One more. -Michael Codron From: Hermann, Greg  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46:14 AM  To: Tom Habashi  Cc: Codron, Michael  Subject: RE: Quick Questions      Hi Tom,    One more just came in!    3. If we pursue MBCP, then later our County and all the other cities decide they also want CCE, would MBCP be open to taking everyone? Or is there a size limit they are targeting? Is it reasonable to think we may get a stronger voice if we were to join en masse?    I believe you mentioned that the smaller agencies would need to join as a group, but I’m not sure on the size limit question. We’ve also had a question about the ability to exit the program and reiterated your statement about an interest in long-term partners, but that may come up as well.  Greg    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:41 AM  To: 'Tom Habashi' <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Quick Questions     Hi Tom,    Michael and I are getting some final questions in advance of the presentation tonight and I was hoping you could assist with answering two related to MBCP:    1. What is current split on large vs. small hydro procurement?  2. What are the policy commitments of MBCP vs the discretion of the governing board? How much could the board change with respect to rates equaling PG&E, 100% carbon free, etc. Our City Council wants to know what decision making authority they are giving up by only having a rotating seat and what commitments from MBCP they can count on.    Please let us know when you get a chance or perhaps have your representative be able to answer at this afternoon’s hearing. Thanks for all of your help!    28 Greg  29 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 6:26 PM To:Tom Habashi Cc:Codron, Michael;Sustainability Subject:RE: RE: Quick Questions Thanks Tom. It was great to have your staff present to address questions. Ultimately, our Council decided to pursue establishing a new CCE, but would move towards joining an existing program if at any point that became infeasible or impractical. We will keep you posted on our progress and thank you again for the conversations and assistance to this point. Greg From: Tom Habashi [mailto:thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 12:41 PM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: RE: Quick Questions    We will be willing to have others join when they are ready, although it’s always best to join en masse. There is no size  limit for the agencies to join.  You can always terminate as you see fit as outlined in MBCP’s JPA. To the extent that you are looking for an incubator  approach, that also could be arranged as long as you’re comfortable with the notion that you’ll start as your own CCA  Mark Backman and Marc Adato will be there to answer the basics. If you decided to pursue working with MBCP in any  capacity, then we can have a more in‐depth discussion re the pros and cons of the various options in accordance to  which we will be structuring our relationship    From: Hermann, Greg [mailto:GHermann@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 10:25 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>; Marc Adato  <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>; Mark Bachman <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: RE: Quick Questions    And one more! 4. What is the cycle time for the rotating seat? How often do you anticipate that we would have seat? Thanks, Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:48 AM  To: tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org; Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>; Mark Bachman  <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>  30 Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Fwd: RE: Quick Questions    One more. -Michael Codron From: Hermann, Greg  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46:14 AM  To: Tom Habashi  Cc: Codron, Michael  Subject: RE: Quick Questions      Hi Tom,    One more just came in!    3. If we pursue MBCP, then later our County and all the other cities decide they also want CCE, would MBCP be open to taking everyone? Or is there a size limit they are targeting? Is it reasonable to think we may get a stronger voice if we were to join en masse?    I believe you mentioned that the smaller agencies would need to join as a group, but I’m not sure on the size limit question. We’ve also had a question about the ability to exit the program and reiterated your statement about an interest in long-term partners, but that may come up as well.  Greg    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:41 AM  To: 'Tom Habashi' <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Quick Questions     Hi Tom,    Michael and I are getting some final questions in advance of the presentation tonight and I was hoping you could assist with answering two related to MBCP:    1. What is current split on large vs. small hydro procurement?  2. What are the policy commitments of MBCP vs the discretion of the governing board? How much could the board change with respect to rates equaling PG&E, 100% carbon free, etc. Our City Council wants to know what decision making authority they are giving up by only having a rotating seat and what commitments from MBCP they can count on.    Please let us know when you get a chance or perhaps have your representative be able to answer at this afternoon’s hearing. Thanks for all of your help!    Greg  31 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 6:26 PM To:Tom Habashi Cc:Codron, Michael;Sustainability Subject:RE: RE: Quick Questions Thanks Tom. It was great to have your staff present to address questions. Ultimately, our Council decided to pursue establishing a new CCE, but would move towards joining an existing program if at any point that became infeasible or impractical. We will keep you posted on our progress and thank you again for the conversations and assistance to this point. Greg From: Tom Habashi [mailto:thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 12:41 PM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: RE: Quick Questions    We will be willing to have others join when they are ready, although it’s always best to join en masse. There is no size  limit for the agencies to join.  You can always terminate as you see fit as outlined in MBCP’s JPA. To the extent that you are looking for an incubator  approach, that also could be arranged as long as you’re comfortable with the notion that you’ll start as your own CCA  Mark Backman and Marc Adato will be there to answer the basics. If you decided to pursue working with MBCP in any  capacity, then we can have a more in‐depth discussion re the pros and cons of the various options in accordance to  which we will be structuring our relationship    From: Hermann, Greg [mailto:GHermann@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 10:25 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>; Marc Adato  <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>; Mark Bachman <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: RE: Quick Questions    And one more! 4. What is the cycle time for the rotating seat? How often do you anticipate that we would have seat? Thanks, Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:48 AM  To: tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org; Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>; Mark Bachman  <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>  32 Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Fwd: RE: Quick Questions    One more. -Michael Codron From: Hermann, Greg  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46:14 AM  To: Tom Habashi  Cc: Codron, Michael  Subject: RE: Quick Questions      Hi Tom,    One more just came in!    3. If we pursue MBCP, then later our County and all the other cities decide they also want CCE, would MBCP be open to taking everyone? Or is there a size limit they are targeting? Is it reasonable to think we may get a stronger voice if we were to join en masse?    I believe you mentioned that the smaller agencies would need to join as a group, but I’m not sure on the size limit question. We’ve also had a question about the ability to exit the program and reiterated your statement about an interest in long-term partners, but that may come up as well.  Greg    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:41 AM  To: 'Tom Habashi' <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Quick Questions     Hi Tom,    Michael and I are getting some final questions in advance of the presentation tonight and I was hoping you could assist with answering two related to MBCP:    1. What is current split on large vs. small hydro procurement?  2. What are the policy commitments of MBCP vs the discretion of the governing board? How much could the board change with respect to rates equaling PG&E, 100% carbon free, etc. Our City Council wants to know what decision making authority they are giving up by only having a rotating seat and what commitments from MBCP they can count on.    Please let us know when you get a chance or perhaps have your representative be able to answer at this afternoon’s hearing. Thanks for all of your help!    Greg  33 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 1:40 PM To:Codron, Michael Subject:FW: RE: Quick Questions FYI. From: Tom Habashi [mailto:thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 12:41 PM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: RE: Quick Questions    We will be willing to have others join when they are ready, although it’s always best to join en masse. There is no size  limit for the agencies to join.  You can always terminate as you see fit as outlined in MBCP’s JPA. To the extent that you are looking for an incubator  approach, that also could be arranged as long as you’re comfortable with the notion that you’ll start as your own CCA  Mark Backman and Marc Adato will be there to answer the basics. If you decided to pursue working with MBCP in any  capacity, then we can have a more in‐depth discussion re the pros and cons of the various options in accordance to  which we will be structuring our relationship    From: Hermann, Greg [mailto:GHermann@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 10:25 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>; Marc Adato  <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>; Mark Bachman <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: RE: Quick Questions    And one more! 4. What is the cycle time for the rotating seat? How often do you anticipate that we would have seat? Thanks, Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:48 AM  To: tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org; Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>; Mark Bachman  <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Fwd: RE: Quick Questions    One more. -Michael Codron From: Hermann, Greg  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46:14 AM  To: Tom Habashi  34 Cc: Codron, Michael  Subject: RE: Quick Questions      Hi Tom,    One more just came in!    3. If we pursue MBCP, then later our County and all the other cities decide they also want CCE, would MBCP be open to taking everyone? Or is there a size limit they are targeting? Is it reasonable to think we may get a stronger voice if we were to join en masse?    I believe you mentioned that the smaller agencies would need to join as a group, but I’m not sure on the size limit question. We’ve also had a question about the ability to exit the program and reiterated your statement about an interest in long-term partners, but that may come up as well.  Greg    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:41 AM  To: 'Tom Habashi' <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Quick Questions     Hi Tom,    Michael and I are getting some final questions in advance of the presentation tonight and I was hoping you could assist with answering two related to MBCP:    1. What is current split on large vs. small hydro procurement?  2. What are the policy commitments of MBCP vs the discretion of the governing board? How much could the board change with respect to rates equaling PG&E, 100% carbon free, etc. Our City Council wants to know what decision making authority they are giving up by only having a rotating seat and what commitments from MBCP they can count on.    Please let us know when you get a chance or perhaps have your representative be able to answer at this afternoon’s hearing. Thanks for all of your help!    Greg  35 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 1:40 PM To:Codron, Michael Subject:FW: RE: Quick Questions FYI. From: Tom Habashi [mailto:thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 12:41 PM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: RE: Quick Questions    We will be willing to have others join when they are ready, although it’s always best to join en masse. There is no size  limit for the agencies to join.  You can always terminate as you see fit as outlined in MBCP’s JPA. To the extent that you are looking for an incubator  approach, that also could be arranged as long as you’re comfortable with the notion that you’ll start as your own CCA  Mark Backman and Marc Adato will be there to answer the basics. If you decided to pursue working with MBCP in any  capacity, then we can have a more in‐depth discussion re the pros and cons of the various options in accordance to  which we will be structuring our relationship    From: Hermann, Greg [mailto:GHermann@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 10:25 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>; Marc Adato  <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>; Mark Bachman <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: RE: Quick Questions    And one more! 4. What is the cycle time for the rotating seat? How often do you anticipate that we would have seat? Thanks, Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:48 AM  To: tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org; Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>; Mark Bachman  <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Fwd: RE: Quick Questions    One more. -Michael Codron From: Hermann, Greg  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46:14 AM  To: Tom Habashi  36 Cc: Codron, Michael  Subject: RE: Quick Questions      Hi Tom,    One more just came in!    3. If we pursue MBCP, then later our County and all the other cities decide they also want CCE, would MBCP be open to taking everyone? Or is there a size limit they are targeting? Is it reasonable to think we may get a stronger voice if we were to join en masse?    I believe you mentioned that the smaller agencies would need to join as a group, but I’m not sure on the size limit question. We’ve also had a question about the ability to exit the program and reiterated your statement about an interest in long-term partners, but that may come up as well.  Greg    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:41 AM  To: 'Tom Habashi' <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Quick Questions     Hi Tom,    Michael and I are getting some final questions in advance of the presentation tonight and I was hoping you could assist with answering two related to MBCP:    1. What is current split on large vs. small hydro procurement?  2. What are the policy commitments of MBCP vs the discretion of the governing board? How much could the board change with respect to rates equaling PG&E, 100% carbon free, etc. Our City Council wants to know what decision making authority they are giving up by only having a rotating seat and what commitments from MBCP they can count on.    Please let us know when you get a chance or perhaps have your representative be able to answer at this afternoon’s hearing. Thanks for all of your help!    Greg  37 Hicks, Bailey From:Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 12:41 PM To:Hermann, Greg Subject:RE: RE: Quick Questions We will be willing to have others join when they are ready, although it’s always best to join en masse. There is no size  limit for the agencies to join.  You can always terminate as you see fit as outlined in MBCP’s JPA. To the extent that you are looking for an incubator  approach, that also could be arranged as long as you’re comfortable with the notion that you’ll start as your own CCA  Mark Backman and Marc Adato will be there to answer the basics. If you decided to pursue working with MBCP in any  capacity, then we can have a more in‐depth discussion re the pros and cons of the various options in accordance to  which we will be structuring our relationship    From: Hermann, Greg [mailto:GHermann@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 10:25 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>; Marc Adato  <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>; Mark Bachman <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: RE: Quick Questions    And one more! 4. What is the cycle time for the rotating seat? How often do you anticipate that we would have seat? Thanks, Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:48 AM  To: tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org; Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>; Mark Bachman  <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Fwd: RE: Quick Questions    One more. -Michael Codron From: Hermann, Greg  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46:14 AM  To: Tom Habashi  Cc: Codron, Michael  Subject: RE: Quick Questions      Hi Tom,    One more just came in!    38 3. If we pursue MBCP, then later our County and all the other cities decide they also want CCE, would MBCP be open to taking everyone? Or is there a size limit they are targeting? Is it reasonable to think we may get a stronger voice if we were to join en masse?    I believe you mentioned that the smaller agencies would need to join as a group, but I’m not sure on the size limit question. We’ve also had a question about the ability to exit the program and reiterated your statement about an interest in long-term partners, but that may come up as well.  Greg    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:41 AM  To: 'Tom Habashi' <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Quick Questions     Hi Tom,    Michael and I are getting some final questions in advance of the presentation tonight and I was hoping you could assist with answering two related to MBCP:    1. What is current split on large vs. small hydro procurement?  2. What are the policy commitments of MBCP vs the discretion of the governing board? How much could the board change with respect to rates equaling PG&E, 100% carbon free, etc. Our City Council wants to know what decision making authority they are giving up by only having a rotating seat and what commitments from MBCP they can count on.    Please let us know when you get a chance or perhaps have your representative be able to answer at this afternoon’s hearing. Thanks for all of your help!    Greg  39 Hicks, Bailey From:Codron, Michael Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:55 AM To:Hermann, Greg;Cregar, Jennifer Subject:Re: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Leaving now. -Michael Codron From: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:49:51 AM  To: Hermann, Greg; Codron, Michael  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Ok. Should we make it 12:15 then? And SLO Provisions sounds good.    Looking forward to meeting you,  Jen  From: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:47 AM  To: Codron, Michael; Cregar, Jennifer  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Michael and I are running a little late.    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:36 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Can we meet at SLO Provisions (1255 Monterey Street) at noon? It’s just up the street from the County Offices.    Greg    From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Giuseppe's, Eureka, Old SLO BBQ, Petra... in no particular order...  -Michael Codron    40 From: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:10:31 AM  To: Codron, Michael  Cc: Hermann, Greg  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Sure, let’s do it. I’m working from the County offices with Jon & Chris, so I can let them know. Any recommendations for  where we should meet?  Sent from my iPhone    On Dec 12, 2017, at 9:02 AM, Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org> wrote:  We can invite Chris and Jon from the County, too. -mc    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:54 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     I’m happy to join as well if that works.  Greg    From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:14 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Hi Jen, sorry to hear you are displaced! Hopefully you are enjoying SLO and able to relax and breathe a little easier. Are you free for lunch today? My schedule is jam packed otherwise. -Michael    From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 9:14 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Glad it's useful. FYI, I am in SLO now due to voluntary evacuation from Santa Barbara. Please let me know if  you'd like to touch base before tomorrow afternoon.     Also, there was a typo in my email over the weekend. The CPUC plans to vote on this proposal on January 11,  2018 (not January 1).     All the best,  Jen  From: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:40 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; Hermann, Greg  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      41 Thanks, Jen. Super helpful of you to forward this info to us and I will distribute it to our Council and Climate Action Task Force.     From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Michael and Greg,      Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.     Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     42 January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  43 San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102          MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/    44 Hicks, Bailey From:Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa-barbara.ca.us> Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:53 AM To:Hermann, Greg Subject:Re: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Ok, see you there.  From: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:51 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Yes. Let’s do 12:15.    Greg    From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:50 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Ok. Should we make it 12:15 then? And SLO Provisions sounds good.     Looking forward to meeting you,  Jen  From: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:47 AM  To: Codron, Michael; Cregar, Jennifer  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Michael and I are running a little late.    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:36 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Can we meet at SLO Provisions (1255 Monterey Street) at noon? It’s just up the street from the County Offices.    Greg    From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  45 Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Giuseppe's, Eureka, Old SLO BBQ, Petra... in no particular order...  -Michael Codron    From: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:10:31 AM  To: Codron, Michael  Cc: Hermann, Greg  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Sure, let’s do it. I’m working from the County offices with Jon & Chris, so I can let them know. Any recommendations for  where we should meet?  Sent from my iPhone    On Dec 12, 2017, at 9:02 AM, Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org> wrote:  We can invite Chris and Jon from the County, too. -mc    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:54 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     I’m happy to join as well if that works.  Greg    From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:14 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Hi Jen, sorry to hear you are displaced! Hopefully you are enjoying SLO and able to relax and breathe a little easier. Are you free for lunch today? My schedule is jam packed otherwise. -Michael    From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 9:14 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Glad it's useful. FYI, I am in SLO now due to voluntary evacuation from Santa Barbara. Please let me know if  you'd like to touch base before tomorrow afternoon.     Also, there was a typo in my email over the weekend. The CPUC plans to vote on this proposal on January 11,  2018 (not January 1).     All the best,  46 Jen  From: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:40 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; Hermann, Greg  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Thanks, Jen. Super helpful of you to forward this info to us and I will distribute it to our Council and Climate Action Task Force.     From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Michael and Greg,      Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.     Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.  47    Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn  48       Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102          MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/    49 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:52 AM To:Cregar, Jennifer Subject:RE: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Yes. Let’s do 12:15. Greg From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:50 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Ok. Should we make it 12:15 then? And SLO Provisions sounds good.    Looking forward to meeting you,  Jen  From: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:47 AM  To: Codron, Michael; Cregar, Jennifer  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Michael and I are running a little late.    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:36 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Can we meet at SLO Provisions (1255 Monterey Street) at noon? It’s just up the street from the County Offices.    Greg    From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     50 Giuseppe's, Eureka, Old SLO BBQ, Petra... in no particular order...  -Michael Codron    From: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:10:31 AM  To: Codron, Michael  Cc: Hermann, Greg  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Sure, let’s do it. I’m working from the County offices with Jon & Chris, so I can let them know. Any recommendations for  where we should meet?  Sent from my iPhone    On Dec 12, 2017, at 9:02 AM, Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org> wrote:  We can invite Chris and Jon from the County, too. -mc    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:54 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     I’m happy to join as well if that works.  Greg    From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:14 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Hi Jen, sorry to hear you are displaced! Hopefully you are enjoying SLO and able to relax and breathe a little easier. Are you free for lunch today? My schedule is jam packed otherwise. -Michael    From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 9:14 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Glad it's useful. FYI, I am in SLO now due to voluntary evacuation from Santa Barbara. Please let me know if  you'd like to touch base before tomorrow afternoon.     Also, there was a typo in my email over the weekend. The CPUC plans to vote on this proposal on January 11,  2018 (not January 1).     51 All the best,  Jen  From: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:40 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; Hermann, Greg  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Thanks, Jen. Super helpful of you to forward this info to us and I will distribute it to our Council and Climate Action Task Force.     From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Michael and Greg,      Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.     Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.  52    The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:  53  a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102          MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/    54 Hicks, Bailey From:Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa-barbara.ca.us> Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:50 AM To:Hermann, Greg;Codron, Michael Subject:Re: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Ok. Should we make it 12:15 then? And SLO Provisions sounds good.    Looking forward to meeting you,  Jen  From: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:47 AM  To: Codron, Michael; Cregar, Jennifer  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Michael and I are running a little late.    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:36 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Can we meet at SLO Provisions (1255 Monterey Street) at noon? It’s just up the street from the County Offices.    Greg    From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Giuseppe's, Eureka, Old SLO BBQ, Petra... in no particular order...  -Michael Codron    From: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:10:31 AM  To: Codron, Michael  Cc: Hermann, Greg  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Sure, let’s do it. I’m working from the County offices with Jon & Chris, so I can let them know. Any recommendations for  where we should meet?  Sent from my iPhone  55   On Dec 12, 2017, at 9:02 AM, Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org> wrote:  We can invite Chris and Jon from the County, too. -mc    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:54 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     I’m happy to join as well if that works.  Greg    From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:14 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Hi Jen, sorry to hear you are displaced! Hopefully you are enjoying SLO and able to relax and breathe a little easier. Are you free for lunch today? My schedule is jam packed otherwise. -Michael    From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 9:14 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Glad it's useful. FYI, I am in SLO now due to voluntary evacuation from Santa Barbara. Please let me know if  you'd like to touch base before tomorrow afternoon.     Also, there was a typo in my email over the weekend. The CPUC plans to vote on this proposal on January 11,  2018 (not January 1).     All the best,  Jen  From: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:40 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; Hermann, Greg  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Thanks, Jen. Super helpful of you to forward this info to us and I will distribute it to our Council and Climate Action Task Force.     From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Michael and Greg,      56 Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.     Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn  57       Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.  58    Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102          MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/    59 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:48 AM To:Codron, Michael;Cregar, Jennifer Subject:RE: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Michael and I are running a little late. From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:36 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Can we meet at SLO Provisions (1255 Monterey Street) at noon? It’s just up the street from the County Offices. Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Giuseppe's, Eureka, Old SLO BBQ, Petra... in no particular order... -Michael Codron From: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:10:31 AM  To: Codron, Michael  Cc: Hermann, Greg  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Sure, let’s do it. I’m working from the County offices with Jon & Chris, so I can let them know. Any recommendations for  where we should meet?  Sent from my iPhone    On Dec 12, 2017, at 9:02 AM, Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org> wrote:  We can invite Chris and Jon from the County, too. -mc    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:54 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     60 I’m happy to join as well if that works.  Greg    From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:14 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Hi Jen, sorry to hear you are displaced! Hopefully you are enjoying SLO and able to relax and breathe a little easier. Are you free for lunch today? My schedule is jam packed otherwise. -Michael    From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 9:14 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Glad it's useful. FYI, I am in SLO now due to voluntary evacuation from Santa Barbara. Please let me know if  you'd like to touch base before tomorrow afternoon.     Also, there was a typo in my email over the weekend. The CPUC plans to vote on this proposal on January 11,  2018 (not January 1).     All the best,  Jen  From: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:40 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; Hermann, Greg  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Thanks, Jen. Super helpful of you to forward this info to us and I will distribute it to our Council and Climate Action Task Force.     From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Michael and Greg,      61 Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.     Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.  62    Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):  63    Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102          MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/    64 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:36 AM To:Codron, Michael;Cregar, Jennifer Subject:RE: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Can we meet at SLO Provisions (1255 Monterey Street) at noon? It’s just up the street from the County Offices. Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Giuseppe's, Eureka, Old SLO BBQ, Petra... in no particular order... -Michael Codron From: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:10:31 AM  To: Codron, Michael  Cc: Hermann, Greg  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Sure, let’s do it. I’m working from the County offices with Jon & Chris, so I can let them know. Any recommendations for  where we should meet?  Sent from my iPhone    On Dec 12, 2017, at 9:02 AM, Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org> wrote:  We can invite Chris and Jon from the County, too. -mc    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:54 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     I’m happy to join as well if that works.  Greg    From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:14 AM  65 To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Hi Jen, sorry to hear you are displaced! Hopefully you are enjoying SLO and able to relax and breathe a little easier. Are you free for lunch today? My schedule is jam packed otherwise. -Michael    From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 9:14 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Glad it's useful. FYI, I am in SLO now due to voluntary evacuation from Santa Barbara. Please let me know if  you'd like to touch base before tomorrow afternoon.     Also, there was a typo in my email over the weekend. The CPUC plans to vote on this proposal on January 11,  2018 (not January 1).     All the best,  Jen  From: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:40 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; Hermann, Greg  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Thanks, Jen. Super helpful of you to forward this info to us and I will distribute it to our Council and Climate Action Task Force.     From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Michael and Greg,      Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  66 You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.     Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        67 Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.  68    Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102          MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/    69 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 11:36 AM To:Codron, Michael;Cregar, Jennifer Subject:RE: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Can we meet at SLO Provisions (1255 Monterey Street) at noon? It’s just up the street from the County Offices. Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Giuseppe's, Eureka, Old SLO BBQ, Petra... in no particular order... -Michael Codron From: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:10:31 AM  To: Codron, Michael  Cc: Hermann, Greg  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Sure, let’s do it. I’m working from the County offices with Jon & Chris, so I can let them know. Any recommendations for  where we should meet?  Sent from my iPhone    On Dec 12, 2017, at 9:02 AM, Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org> wrote:  We can invite Chris and Jon from the County, too. -mc    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:54 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     I’m happy to join as well if that works.  Greg    From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:14 AM  70 To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Hi Jen, sorry to hear you are displaced! Hopefully you are enjoying SLO and able to relax and breathe a little easier. Are you free for lunch today? My schedule is jam packed otherwise. -Michael    From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 9:14 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Glad it's useful. FYI, I am in SLO now due to voluntary evacuation from Santa Barbara. Please let me know if  you'd like to touch base before tomorrow afternoon.     Also, there was a typo in my email over the weekend. The CPUC plans to vote on this proposal on January 11,  2018 (not January 1).     All the best,  Jen  From: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:40 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; Hermann, Greg  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Thanks, Jen. Super helpful of you to forward this info to us and I will distribute it to our Council and Climate Action Task Force.     From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Michael and Greg,      Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  71 You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.     Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        72 Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.  73    Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102          MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/    74 Hicks, Bailey From:Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 10:25 AM To:Hermann, Greg Subject:RE: RE: Quick Questions Please see response just sent.  ‐Marc Adato    From: Hermann, Greg [mailto:GHermann@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 10:25 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>; Marc Adato  <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>; Mark Bachman <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: RE: Quick Questions    And one more! 4. What is the cycle time for the rotating seat? How often do you anticipate that we would have seat? Thanks, Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:48 AM  To: tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org; Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>; Mark Bachman  <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Fwd: RE: Quick Questions    One more. -Michael Codron From: Hermann, Greg  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46:14 AM  To: Tom Habashi  Cc: Codron, Michael  Subject: RE: Quick Questions      Hi Tom,    One more just came in!    3. If we pursue MBCP, then later our County and all the other cities decide they also want CCE, would MBCP be open to taking everyone? Or is there a size limit they are targeting? Is it reasonable to think we may get a stronger voice if we were to join en masse?    75 I believe you mentioned that the smaller agencies would need to join as a group, but I’m not sure on the size limit question. We’ve also had a question about the ability to exit the program and reiterated your statement about an interest in long-term partners, but that may come up as well.  Greg    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:41 AM  To: 'Tom Habashi' <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Quick Questions     Hi Tom,    Michael and I are getting some final questions in advance of the presentation tonight and I was hoping you could assist with answering two related to MBCP:    1. What is current split on large vs. small hydro procurement?  2. What are the policy commitments of MBCP vs the discretion of the governing board? How much could the board change with respect to rates equaling PG&E, 100% carbon free, etc. Our City Council wants to know what decision making authority they are giving up by only having a rotating seat and what commitments from MBCP they can count on.    Please let us know when you get a chance or perhaps have your representative be able to answer at this afternoon’s hearing. Thanks for all of your help!    Greg  76 Hicks, Bailey From:Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 10:25 AM To:Codron, Michael;Mark Bachman;Tom Habashi Cc:Hermann, Greg Subject:RE: Quick Questions Hi Gregg,    Thank you for raising some of your City Council’s concerns prior to today’s meeting.    Product Mix‐    We are providing our 100% carbon free portfolio primarily with large hydro‐electric power from the Pacific NW. Our  portfolio will have 30% Renewable Energy from “Bucket 1”sourced from RE produced within California or delivering  power directly to CA (wind, solar, biomass). There is no nuclear power or unbundled RECs in our portfolio.    Governance‐  With respect to rates, our Board has full discretion over rate setting so long as we conform to the RPS set by the CPUC.  Our Board has full discretion as to what kind of energy we buy.    With respect to decision‐making authority, if the City of SLO decides to request inclusion in the MBCP program by  submitting a Resolution of Intent to our Policy Board, MBCP staff would make a recommendation to our Board, prior to  the adoption of the Ordinance, that the City of SLO have a permanent seat on Policy Board.     ‐Precedent for this was made for the County of San Benito which has a population of less than 50,000. As the City of SLO  is currently the only interested local government in San Luis Obispo County interested in joining at this time, this would  be our recommendation.    Thank you for your interest and consideration.      Marc Adato, Community Outreach Coordinator  Monterey Bay Community Power  70 Garden Court, Suite #300  Monterey, CA 93940  C. (831) 234‐4668  E. madato@mbcommunitypower.org  W. www.mbcommunitypower.org                   77 From: Codron, Michael [mailto:mcodron@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:47 AM  To: Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>; Mark Bachman <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>; Tom  Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Fwd: Quick Questions    Looping in Marc and Mark. -Michael Codron From: Hermann, Greg  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:41:29 AM  To: Tom Habashi  Cc: Codron, Michael  Subject: Quick Questions      Hi Tom,    Michael and I are getting some final questions in advance of the presentation tonight and I was hoping you could assist with answering two related to MBCP:    1. What is current split on large vs. small hydro procurement?  2. What are the policy commitments of MBCP vs the discretion of the governing board? How much could the board change with respect to rates equaling PG&E, 100% carbon free, etc. Our City Council wants to know what decision making authority they are giving up by only having a rotating seat and what commitments from MBCP they can count on.    Please let us know when you get a chance or perhaps have your representative be able to answer at this afternoon’s hearing. Thanks for all of your help!    Greg  78 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 10:25 AM To:Codron, Michael;tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org;Marc Adato;Mark Bachman Subject:RE: RE: Quick Questions And one more! 4. What is the cycle time for the rotating seat? How often do you anticipate that we would have seat? Thanks, Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:48 AM  To: tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org; Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>; Mark Bachman  <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Fwd: RE: Quick Questions    One more. -Michael Codron From: Hermann, Greg  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46:14 AM  To: Tom Habashi  Cc: Codron, Michael  Subject: RE: Quick Questions      Hi Tom,    One more just came in!    3. If we pursue MBCP, then later our County and all the other cities decide they also want CCE, would MBCP be open to taking everyone? Or is there a size limit they are targeting? Is it reasonable to think we may get a stronger voice if we were to join en masse?    I believe you mentioned that the smaller agencies would need to join as a group, but I’m not sure on the size limit question. We’ve also had a question about the ability to exit the program and reiterated your statement about an interest in long-term partners, but that may come up as well.  Greg    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:41 AM  To: 'Tom Habashi' <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Quick Questions  79    Hi Tom,    Michael and I are getting some final questions in advance of the presentation tonight and I was hoping you could assist with answering two related to MBCP:    1. What is current split on large vs. small hydro procurement?  2. What are the policy commitments of MBCP vs the discretion of the governing board? How much could the board change with respect to rates equaling PG&E, 100% carbon free, etc. Our City Council wants to know what decision making authority they are giving up by only having a rotating seat and what commitments from MBCP they can count on.    Please let us know when you get a chance or perhaps have your representative be able to answer at this afternoon’s hearing. Thanks for all of your help!    Greg  80 Hicks, Bailey From:Codron, Michael Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:48 AM To:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org;Marc Adato;Mark Bachman Cc:Hermann, Greg Subject:Fwd: RE: Quick Questions One more. -Michael Codron From: Hermann, Greg  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46:14 AM  To: Tom Habashi  Cc: Codron, Michael  Subject: RE: Quick Questions      Hi Tom,    One more just came in!    3. If we pursue MBCP, then later our County and all the other cities decide they also want CCE, would MBCP be open to taking everyone? Or is there a size limit they are targeting? Is it reasonable to think we may get a stronger voice if we were to join en masse?    I believe you mentioned that the smaller agencies would need to join as a group, but I’m not sure on the size limit question. We’ve also had a question about the ability to exit the program and reiterated your statement about an interest in long-term partners, but that may come up as well.  Greg    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:41 AM  To: 'Tom Habashi' <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Quick Questions     Hi Tom,    Michael and I are getting some final questions in advance of the presentation tonight and I was hoping you could assist with answering two related to MBCP:    1. What is current split on large vs. small hydro procurement?  2. What are the policy commitments of MBCP vs the discretion of the governing board? How much could the board change with respect to rates equaling PG&E, 100% carbon free, etc. Our City Council wants to know what decision making authority they are giving up by only having a rotating seat and what commitments from MBCP they can count on.    Please let us know when you get a chance or perhaps have your representative be able to answer at this afternoon’s hearing. Thanks for all of your help!  81   Greg  82 Hicks, Bailey From:Codron, Michael Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:47 AM To:Marc Adato;Mark Bachman;tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org Cc:Hermann, Greg Subject:Fwd: Quick Questions Looping in Marc and Mark. -Michael Codron From: Hermann, Greg  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:41:29 AM  To: Tom Habashi  Cc: Codron, Michael  Subject: Quick Questions      Hi Tom,    Michael and I are getting some final questions in advance of the presentation tonight and I was hoping you could assist with answering two related to MBCP:    1. What is current split on large vs. small hydro procurement?  2. What are the policy commitments of MBCP vs the discretion of the governing board? How much could the board change with respect to rates equaling PG&E, 100% carbon free, etc. Our City Council wants to know what decision making authority they are giving up by only having a rotating seat and what commitments from MBCP they can count on.    Please let us know when you get a chance or perhaps have your representative be able to answer at this afternoon’s hearing. Thanks for all of your help!    Greg  83 Hicks, Bailey From:Codron, Michael Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46 AM To:Cregar, Jennifer Cc:Hermann, Greg Subject:Re: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Giuseppe's, Eureka, Old SLO BBQ, Petra... in no particular order... -Michael Codron From: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:10:31 AM  To: Codron, Michael  Cc: Hermann, Greg  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Sure, let’s do it. I’m working from the County offices with Jon & Chris, so I can let them know. Any recommendations for  where we should meet?  Sent from my iPhone    On Dec 12, 2017, at 9:02 AM, Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org> wrote:  We can invite Chris and Jon from the County, too. -mc    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:54 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     I’m happy to join as well if that works.  Greg    From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:14 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Hi Jen, sorry to hear you are displaced! Hopefully you are enjoying SLO and able to relax and breathe a little easier. Are you free for lunch today? My schedule is jam packed otherwise. - Michael    From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 9:14 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907  84    Glad it's useful. FYI, I am in SLO now due to voluntary evacuation from Santa Barbara. Please let  me know if you'd like to touch base before tomorrow afternoon.     Also, there was a typo in my email over the weekend. The CPUC plans to vote on this proposal  on January 11, 2018 (not January 1).     All the best,  Jen    From: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:40 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; Hermann, Greg  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Thanks, Jen. Super helpful of you to forward this info to us and I will distribute it to our Council and Climate Action Task Force.     From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Michael and Greg,      Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the  statewide CCA lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In  short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process,  most notably requiring at least a full calendar year between implementation plan submission  and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs. You would be affected  whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into 2019  before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on  1/1/18.     Best,  Jen  85   From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes  to expand CPUC oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions  where implementation plans have not been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs  that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017. It also imposes new requirements regarding the  start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process  concerns with this draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no  opportunity for input from the public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be  discussing our response on Monday and potential actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each  Commissioners (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would  be for CCA elected officials (or staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The  template to request these meetings is attached, and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also  attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss  potentially using external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let  me/Hilary know if you want to participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged  to participate in person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how  much their local government has spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution  undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next  week.  Let Hilary know if you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by  Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  86 To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>;  Cathy DeFalco C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>;  Don Eckert <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale,  Barbara <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine  Windeshausen <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>;  Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset  <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this  morning.  This proposed resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would  have impacts on start dates and other key elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision)  to require CCAs to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be  triggered by either the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year  after filing a plan).     This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next  steps. I just wanted to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission  Meeting Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  87 505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102          MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/    88 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:46 AM To:Tom Habashi Cc:Codron, Michael Subject:RE: Quick Questions Hi Tom, One more just came in! 3. If we pursue MBCP, then later our County and all the other cities decide they also want CCE, would MBCP be open to taking everyone? Or is there a size limit they are targeting? Is it reasonable to think we may get a stronger voice if we were to join en masse? I believe you mentioned that the smaller agencies would need to join as a group, but I’m not sure on the size limit question. We’ve also had a question about the ability to exit the program and reiterated your statement about an interest in long-term partners, but that may come up as well. Greg From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:41 AM  To: 'Tom Habashi' <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Quick Questions    Hi Tom, Michael and I are getting some final questions in advance of the presentation tonight and I was hoping you could assist with answering two related to MBCP: 1. What is current split on large vs. small hydro procurement? 2. What are the policy commitments of MBCP vs the discretion of the governing board? How much could the board change with respect to rates equaling PG&E, 100% carbon free, etc. Our City Council wants to know what decision making authority they are giving up by only having a rotating seat and what commitments from MBCP they can count on. Please let us know when you get a chance or perhaps have your representative be able to answer at this afternoon’s hearing. Thanks for all of your help! Greg 89 Hicks, Bailey From:Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa-barbara.ca.us> Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:44 AM To:Codron, Michael Cc:Hermann, Greg;Jon Griesser;'Chris Read' Subject:Re: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Sounds like Chris and Jon are up for joining us. Let us know when and where works best.    Best,  Jen  From: Cregar, Jennifer  Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:10 AM  To: Codron, Michael  Cc: Hermann, Greg  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Sure, let’s do it. I’m working from the County offices with Jon & Chris, so I can let them know. Any  recommendations for where we should meet?  Sent from my iPhone    On Dec 12, 2017, at 9:02 AM, Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org> wrote:  We can invite Chris and Jon from the County, too. -mc    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:54 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     I’m happy to join as well if that works.  Greg    From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:14 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Hi Jen, sorry to hear you are displaced! Hopefully you are enjoying SLO and able to relax and breathe a little easier. Are you free for lunch today? My schedule is jam packed otherwise. - Michael    From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 9:14 AM  90 To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Glad it's useful. FYI, I am in SLO now due to voluntary evacuation from Santa Barbara. Please let  me know if you'd like to touch base before tomorrow afternoon.     Also, there was a typo in my email over the weekend. The CPUC plans to vote on this proposal  on January 11, 2018 (not January 1).     All the best,  Jen    From: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:40 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; Hermann, Greg  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Thanks, Jen. Super helpful of you to forward this info to us and I will distribute it to our Council and Climate Action Task Force.     From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Michael and Greg,      Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the  statewide CCA lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In  short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process,  most notably requiring at least a full calendar year between implementation plan submission  and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs. You would be affected  whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into 2019  before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on  1/1/18.     Best,  Jen    From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes  to expand CPUC oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions  91 where implementation plans have not been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs  that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017. It also imposes new requirements regarding the  start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process  concerns with this draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no  opportunity for input from the public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be  discussing our response on Monday and potential actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each  Commissioners (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would  be for CCA elected officials (or staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The  template to request these meetings is attached, and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also  attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss  potentially using external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let  me/Hilary know if you want to participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged  to participate in person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how  much their local government has spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution  undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next  week.  Let Hilary know if you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by  Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>;  Cathy DeFalco C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>;  Don Eckert <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale,  Barbara <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine  Windeshausen <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>;  Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset  <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  92 I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this  morning.  This proposed resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would  have impacts on start dates and other key elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision)  to require CCAs to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be  triggered by either the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year  after filing a plan).     This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next  steps. I just wanted to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission  Meeting Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102          MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/    93 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:41 AM To:Tom Habashi Cc:Codron, Michael Subject:Quick Questions Hi Tom, Michael and I are getting some final questions in advance of the presentation tonight and I was hoping you could assist with answering two related to MBCP: 1. What is current split on large vs. small hydro procurement? 2. What are the policy commitments of MBCP vs the discretion of the governing board? How much could the board change with respect to rates equaling PG&E, 100% carbon free, etc. Our City Council wants to know what decision making authority they are giving up by only having a rotating seat and what commitments from MBCP they can count on. Please let us know when you get a chance or perhaps have your representative be able to answer at this afternoon’s hearing. Thanks for all of your help! Greg 94 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:41 AM To:Tom Habashi Cc:Codron, Michael Subject:Quick Questions Hi Tom, Michael and I are getting some final questions in advance of the presentation tonight and I was hoping you could assist with answering two related to MBCP: 1. What is current split on large vs. small hydro procurement? 2. What are the policy commitments of MBCP vs the discretion of the governing board? How much could the board change with respect to rates equaling PG&E, 100% carbon free, etc. Our City Council wants to know what decision making authority they are giving up by only having a rotating seat and what commitments from MBCP they can count on. Please let us know when you get a chance or perhaps have your representative be able to answer at this afternoon’s hearing. Thanks for all of your help! Greg 95 Hicks, Bailey From:Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa-barbara.ca.us> Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:11 AM To:Codron, Michael Cc:Hermann, Greg Subject:Re: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Sure, let’s do it. I’m working from the County offices with Jon & Chris, so I can let them know. Any recommendations for  where we should meet?  Sent from my iPhone    On Dec 12, 2017, at 9:02 AM, Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org> wrote:  We can invite Chris and Jon from the County, too. -mc    From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:54 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     I’m happy to join as well if that works.  Greg    From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:14 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Hi Jen, sorry to hear you are displaced! Hopefully you are enjoying SLO and able to relax and breathe a little easier. Are you free for lunch today? My schedule is jam packed otherwise. - Michael    From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 9:14 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Glad it's useful. FYI, I am in SLO now due to voluntary evacuation from Santa Barbara. Please let  me know if you'd like to touch base before tomorrow afternoon.     Also, there was a typo in my email over the weekend. The CPUC plans to vote on this proposal  on January 11, 2018 (not January 1).  96    All the best,  Jen    From: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:40 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; Hermann, Greg  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Thanks, Jen. Super helpful of you to forward this info to us and I will distribute it to our Council and Climate Action Task Force.     From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Michael and Greg,      Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the  statewide CCA lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In  short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process,  most notably requiring at least a full calendar year between implementation plan submission  and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs. You would be affected  whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into 2019  before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on  1/1/18.     Best,  Jen    From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  97 I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes  to expand CPUC oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions  where implementation plans have not been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs  that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017. It also imposes new requirements regarding the  start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process  concerns with this draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no  opportunity for input from the public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be  discussing our response on Monday and potential actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each  Commissioners (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would  be for CCA elected officials (or staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The  template to request these meetings is attached, and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also  attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss  potentially using external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let  me/Hilary know if you want to participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged  to participate in person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how  much their local government has spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution  undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next  week.  Let Hilary know if you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by  Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>;  Cathy DeFalco C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>;  Don Eckert <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale,  Barbara <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine  Windeshausen <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>;  Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset  <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     98 CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this  morning.  This proposed resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would  have impacts on start dates and other key elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision)  to require CCAs to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be  triggered by either the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year  after filing a plan).     This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next  steps. I just wanted to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission  Meeting Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102          MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/  99   100 Hicks, Bailey From:Codron, Michael Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:02 AM To:Hermann, Greg;Cregar, Jennifer Subject:RE: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 We can invite Chris and Jon from the County, too. -mc From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:54 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    I’m happy to join as well if that works. Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:14 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Hi Jen, sorry to hear you are displaced! Hopefully you are enjoying SLO and able to relax and breathe a little easier. Are you free for lunch today? My schedule is jam packed otherwise. -Michael From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 9:14 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Glad it's useful. FYI, I am in SLO now due to voluntary evacuation from Santa Barbara. Please let me know if  you'd like to touch base before tomorrow afternoon.    Also, there was a typo in my email over the weekend. The CPUC plans to vote on this proposal on January 11,  2018 (not January 1).    All the best,  Jen  From: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:40 AM  101 To: Cregar, Jennifer; Hermann, Greg  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Thanks, Jen. Super helpful of you to forward this info to us and I will distribute it to our Council and Climate Action Task Force.     From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Michael and Greg,      Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.     Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  102 staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.  103    Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102          MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/    104 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:54 AM To:Codron, Michael;Cregar, Jennifer Subject:RE: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 I’m happy to join as well if that works. Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:14 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Hi Jen, sorry to hear you are displaced! Hopefully you are enjoying SLO and able to relax and breathe a little easier. Are you free for lunch today? My schedule is jam packed otherwise. -Michael From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 9:14 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Glad it's useful. FYI, I am in SLO now due to voluntary evacuation from Santa Barbara. Please let me know if  you'd like to touch base before tomorrow afternoon.    Also, there was a typo in my email over the weekend. The CPUC plans to vote on this proposal on January 11,  2018 (not January 1).    All the best,  Jen  From: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:40 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; Hermann, Greg  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Thanks, Jen. Super helpful of you to forward this info to us and I will distribute it to our Council and Climate Action Task Force.     105 From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Michael and Greg,      Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.     Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.  106    January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  107 1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102          MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/    108 Hicks, Bailey From:Codron, Michael Sent:Tuesday, December 12, 2017 8:14 AM To:Cregar, Jennifer;Hermann, Greg Subject:RE: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Hi Jen, sorry to hear you are displaced! Hopefully you are enjoying SLO and able to relax and breathe a little easier. Are you free for lunch today? My schedule is jam packed otherwise. -Michael From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 9:14 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Glad it's useful. FYI, I am in SLO now due to voluntary evacuation from Santa Barbara. Please let me know if  you'd like to touch base before tomorrow afternoon.    Also, there was a typo in my email over the weekend. The CPUC plans to vote on this proposal on January 11,  2018 (not January 1).    All the best,  Jen  From: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:40 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; Hermann, Greg  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Thanks, Jen. Super helpful of you to forward this info to us and I will distribute it to our Council and Climate Action Task Force.     From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Michael and Greg,      109 Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.     Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.  110    Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):  111    Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102          MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/    112 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Monday, December 11, 2017 2:00 PM To:Christian, Kevin Cc:Gallagher, Carrie Subject:FW: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Attachments:Comment Letter Resolution E-4907.pdf; Draft Resolution E-4907.pdf; Talking Points DRAFT.DOCX; Rechtschaffen Meeting Request Form - 12.8.17.doc Hi Kevin, Michael intended this email exchange to become agenda correspondence for item 1. Not sure if that has happened yet, but if not could you please assist? Thanks! Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2017 10:53 AM  To: Department Heads <DepartmentHeads@slocity.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Fowler, Xzandrea <XFowler@slocity.org>; Vereschagin, Cara  <CVereschagin@slocity.org>; Ansolabehere, Jon <JAnsolabehere@slocity.org>; Eric Veium (eric@slocleanenergy.org)  <eric@slocleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Mayor and Council, I’m forwarding the information below and attached that was originally distributed by Dawn Weisz, CEO of Marin Clean Energy and President of the statewide CCA lobbying association CalCCA. This is regarding a major proposal from the CPUC that would apply to new CCA programs. Staff will evaluate this information in more detail and be prepared to respond to questions about how this would apply to, or change the alternatives available to, the City of San Luis Obispo with respect to joining or starting a new program. We’ll turn this into Agenda Correspondence first thing Monday so the new info is available to the public. Thank you, -Michael Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 113 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org Bcc: City Council From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Michael and Greg,     Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.    Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.  114    Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn  115       Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102       MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/  116 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Monday, December 11, 2017 2:00 PM To:Christian, Kevin Cc:Gallagher, Carrie Subject:FW: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Attachments:Comment Letter Resolution E-4907.pdf; Draft Resolution E-4907.pdf; Talking Points DRAFT.DOCX; Rechtschaffen Meeting Request Form - 12.8.17.doc Hi Kevin, Michael intended this email exchange to become agenda correspondence for item 1. Not sure if that has happened yet, but if not could you please assist? Thanks! Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2017 10:53 AM  To: Department Heads <DepartmentHeads@slocity.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Fowler, Xzandrea <XFowler@slocity.org>; Vereschagin, Cara  <CVereschagin@slocity.org>; Ansolabehere, Jon <JAnsolabehere@slocity.org>; Eric Veium (eric@slocleanenergy.org)  <eric@slocleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Mayor and Council, I’m forwarding the information below and attached that was originally distributed by Dawn Weisz, CEO of Marin Clean Energy and President of the statewide CCA lobbying association CalCCA. This is regarding a major proposal from the CPUC that would apply to new CCA programs. Staff will evaluate this information in more detail and be prepared to respond to questions about how this would apply to, or change the alternatives available to, the City of San Luis Obispo with respect to joining or starting a new program. We’ll turn this into Agenda Correspondence first thing Monday so the new info is available to the public. Thank you, -Michael Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 117 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org Bcc: City Council From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Michael and Greg,     Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.    Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.  118    Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn  119       Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102       MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/  120 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Monday, December 11, 2017 10:51 AM To:Codron, Michael Subject:RE: Tuesday's Study Session I wonder if we should ask if it’s even possible to have MBCP file an implementation plan for us Feb. 1, 2018. I think the likely answer is no, but definitely a question we’ll get. Let me know if you want me to reach out. Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 7:29 AM  To: Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Mark Bachman <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>; Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>;  Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: Tuesday's Study Session    Hi Tom, thanks so much. Looking forward to meeting Mr. Bachman and Mr. Adato! Here is a link to the agenda packet for tomorrow night. http://www.slocity.org/Home/ShowDocument?id=15317 The meeting will be held from 4:00 PM to 5:30 in the Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo. All of my contact information is below, and I will plan to arrive at the meeting early to meet you. In the meantime, don’t hesitate to call or write if you have any questions for me. Best regards, Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org From: Tom Habashi [mailto:thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 7:22 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Cc: Mark Bachman <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>; Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: Tuesday's Study Session    121 Hi Michael  Mark Bachman, Key Account Manager and Marc Adato, Community Outreach Coordinator of MBCP staff (both are  copies on this email) are planning to attend the workshop on Tuesday to make remarks during the public comment and  address any question that SLO Council members might have about MBCP and CCA operation in general. Could you reply  to all with information about the workshop (when, where, agenda, etc.), thanks.     From: Codron, Michael [mailto:mcodron@slocity.org]   Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2017 10:13 AM  To: Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Tuesday's Study Session    Hello Tom, The study session on Tuesday will be a 90 minute meeting that will include a fairly brief staff presentation and public comment period. We intend to let the City Council know that there will be many experts in the audience, including County staff, Jen Kregar from Santa Barbara, local representatives of the SLO Clean Energy group, and hopefully you will make the trip down, as well. While we won’t be able to provide an opportunity for you to make a separate presentation, we will look to make that opportunity available in the future. I would expect that the chances are good the City Council will have specific questions for you if you are in attendance and provide testimony, but can’t guarantee that will be the case. If you decide that it is not worth the trip down to SLO, I completely understand. I really appreciate your availability to answer questions and discuss the future of CCE for our community. One question that I have now is, how long do expect MBCP to continue to be open to new partners? Is there a timeframe in mind, or critical mass you are aiming to achieve? I think the City Council may ask us to pursue multiple paths, and it would be helpful to know what the timeframe is for a decision to join MBCP. Thank you! -Michael Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org  122 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Monday, December 11, 2017 10:24 AM To:Chris Read;Codron, Michael Subject:RE: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Thanks Chris! Greg From: Chris Read [mailto:cread@co.slo.ca.us]   Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 9:18 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: FW: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Haven’t had time to dig in to this, but wanted to share with you ASAP… From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 9:55 AM  To: 'Erin Maker' <erinm@ci.carpinteria.ca.us>; Jon Griesser <jgriesser@co.slo.ca.us>; 'Helen Cox' <HCox@toaks.org>;  'Hughes, Susan' <Susan.Hughes@ventura.org>; 'Matt Fore' <mfore@santabarbaraca.gov>; 'Linda Swan'  <LSwan@simivalley.org>; 'Jim Dewey' <jdewey@SantaBarbaraCA.gov>; 'Grahame Watts' <GWatts@toaks.org>; 'Fred  Shaw' <FredShaw@ci.carpinteria.ca.us>; 'Yahner, Joe' <jyahner@ci.ventura.ca.us>; 'Thomas John'  <jthomas@cityofcamarillo.org>; Trevor Keith <tkeith@co.slo.ca.us>; 'Sandifer' 'Jessica' <JSandifer@MoorparkCA.gov>;  'Pamela Antil' <pantil@santabarbaraca.gov>; 'Allen, Heather' <Heather.Allen@ventura.org>; Chris Read  <cread@co.slo.ca.us>; Matt Janssen <mjanssen@co.slo.ca.us>; 'Davenport, Lars' <ldavenport@ci.ventura.ca.us>; Robert  Fitzroy <rfitzroy@co.slo.ca.us>; Bailey, Ryder <rbailey@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>; Chapjian, George <gchapjian@co.santa‐ barbara.ca.us>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Hi AWG,    Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and CalCCA President, regarding a  major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐track changes to the CCA formation and  expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year between implementation plan  submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs. If the resolution is  adopted, for those looking at joining LACCE or MBCP, this means you would not be able to have your  customers served by either CCA until a year after LACCE/MBCP submits a revised implementation plan that  includes your customers. So, you're likely looking at well into 2019. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution  on 1/1/18.    123 It looks like there will be a call to discuss this Thursday. I plan to participate and will keep you updated. If you'd  also like to participate, I imagine CalCCA would be happy to have you; you just need to contact Hilary Staver  at hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org and tell her you're part of Central Coast Power.    Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn  124       Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.  125    Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102       MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/  126 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Monday, December 11, 2017 9:35 AM To:Codron, Michael Subject:RE: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Thanks Michael. How can I help? Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:53 AM  To: Department Heads <DepartmentHeads@slocity.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Fowler, Xzandrea <XFowler@slocity.org>; Vereschagin, Cara  <CVereschagin@slocity.org>; Ansolabehere, Jon <JAnsolabehere@slocity.org>; Eric Veium (eric@slocleanenergy.org)  <eric@slocleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Mayor and Council, I’m forwarding the information below and attached that was originally distributed by Dawn Weisz, CEO of Marin Clean Energy and President of the statewide CCA lobbying association CalCCA. This is regarding a major proposal from the CPUC that would apply to new CCA programs. Staff will evaluate this information in more detail and be prepared to respond to questions about how this would apply to, or change the alternatives available to, the City of San Luis Obispo with respect to joining or starting a new program. We’ll turn this into Agenda Correspondence first thing Monday so the new info is available to the public. Thank you, -Michael Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org Bcc: City Council From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907  127   Michael and Greg,     Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.    Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.  128    Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     129 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102       MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/  130 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Monday, December 11, 2017 9:35 AM To:Codron, Michael Subject:RE: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Thanks Michael. How can I help? Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:53 AM  To: Department Heads <DepartmentHeads@slocity.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Fowler, Xzandrea <XFowler@slocity.org>; Vereschagin, Cara  <CVereschagin@slocity.org>; Ansolabehere, Jon <JAnsolabehere@slocity.org>; Eric Veium (eric@slocleanenergy.org)  <eric@slocleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Mayor and Council, I’m forwarding the information below and attached that was originally distributed by Dawn Weisz, CEO of Marin Clean Energy and President of the statewide CCA lobbying association CalCCA. This is regarding a major proposal from the CPUC that would apply to new CCA programs. Staff will evaluate this information in more detail and be prepared to respond to questions about how this would apply to, or change the alternatives available to, the City of San Luis Obispo with respect to joining or starting a new program. We’ll turn this into Agenda Correspondence first thing Monday so the new info is available to the public. Thank you, -Michael Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org Bcc: City Council From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907  131   Michael and Greg,     Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.    Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.  132    Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     133 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102       MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/  134 Hicks, Bailey From:Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us> Sent:Monday, December 11, 2017 9:18 AM To:Codron, Michael;Hermann, Greg Subject:FW: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Attachments:Comment Letter Resolution E-4907.pdf; Draft Resolution E-4907.pdf Haven’t had time to dig in to this, but wanted to share with you ASAP… From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 9:55 AM  To: 'Erin Maker' <erinm@ci.carpinteria.ca.us>; Jon Griesser <jgriesser@co.slo.ca.us>; 'Helen Cox' <HCox@toaks.org>;  'Hughes, Susan' <Susan.Hughes@ventura.org>; 'Matt Fore' <mfore@santabarbaraca.gov>; 'Linda Swan'  <LSwan@simivalley.org>; 'Jim Dewey' <jdewey@SantaBarbaraCA.gov>; 'Grahame Watts' <GWatts@toaks.org>; 'Fred  Shaw' <FredShaw@ci.carpinteria.ca.us>; 'Yahner, Joe' <jyahner@ci.ventura.ca.us>; 'Thomas John'  <jthomas@cityofcamarillo.org>; Trevor Keith <tkeith@co.slo.ca.us>; 'Sandifer' 'Jessica' <JSandifer@MoorparkCA.gov>;  'Pamela Antil' <pantil@santabarbaraca.gov>; 'Allen, Heather' <Heather.Allen@ventura.org>; Chris Read  <cread@co.slo.ca.us>; Matt Janssen <mjanssen@co.slo.ca.us>; 'Davenport, Lars' <ldavenport@ci.ventura.ca.us>; Robert  Fitzroy <rfitzroy@co.slo.ca.us>; Bailey, Ryder <rbailey@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us>; Chapjian, George <gchapjian@co.santa‐ barbara.ca.us>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Hi AWG,    Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and CalCCA President, regarding a  major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐track changes to the CCA formation and  expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year between implementation plan  submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs. If the resolution is  adopted, for those looking at joining LACCE or MBCP, this means you would not be able to have your  customers served by either CCA until a year after LACCE/MBCP submits a revised implementation plan that  includes your customers. So, you're likely looking at well into 2019. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution  on 1/1/18.    It looks like there will be a call to discuss this Thursday. I plan to participate and will keep you updated. If you'd  also like to participate, I imagine CalCCA would be happy to have you; you just need to contact Hilary Staver  at hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org and tell her you're part of Central Coast Power.    Best,  Jen  135 From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  136 <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102     137   MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/  138 Hicks, Bailey From:Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa-barbara.ca.us> Sent:Monday, December 11, 2017 9:14 AM To:Codron, Michael;Hermann, Greg Subject:Re: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Glad it's useful. FYI, I am in SLO now due to voluntary evacuation from Santa Barbara. Please let me know if  you'd like to touch base before tomorrow afternoon.    Also, there was a typo in my email over the weekend. The CPUC plans to vote on this proposal on January 11,  2018 (not January 1).    All the best,  Jen  From: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:40 AM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; Hermann, Greg  Subject: RE: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Thanks, Jen. Super helpful of you to forward this info to us and I will distribute it to our Council and Climate Action Task Force.     From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Michael and Greg,      Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.     Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907   139    CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     140 CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102          MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/    141 Hicks, Bailey From:Codron, Michael Sent:Monday, December 11, 2017 7:29 AM To:Tom Habashi Cc:Mark Bachman;Marc Adato;Hermann, Greg Subject:RE: Tuesday's Study Session Hi Tom, thanks so much. Looking forward to meeting Mr. Bachman and Mr. Adato! Here is a link to the agenda packet for tomorrow night. http://www.slocity.org/Home/ShowDocument?id=15317 The meeting will be held from 4:00 PM to 5:30 in the Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo. All of my contact information is below, and I will plan to arrive at the meeting early to meet you. In the meantime, don’t hesitate to call or write if you have any questions for me. Best regards, Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org From: Tom Habashi [mailto:thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 7:22 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Cc: Mark Bachman <mbachman@mbcommunitypower.org>; Marc Adato <madato@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: Tuesday's Study Session    Hi Michael  Mark Bachman, Key Account Manager and Marc Adato, Community Outreach Coordinator of MBCP staff (both are  copies on this email) are planning to attend the workshop on Tuesday to make remarks during the public comment and  address any question that SLO Council members might have about MBCP and CCA operation in general. Could you reply  to all with information about the workshop (when, where, agenda, etc.), thanks.     From: Codron, Michael [mailto:mcodron@slocity.org]   Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2017 10:13 AM  To: Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Tuesday's Study Session  142   Hello Tom, The study session on Tuesday will be a 90 minute meeting that will include a fairly brief staff presentation and public comment period. We intend to let the City Council know that there will be many experts in the audience, including County staff, Jen Kregar from Santa Barbara, local representatives of the SLO Clean Energy group, and hopefully you will make the trip down, as well. While we won’t be able to provide an opportunity for you to make a separate presentation, we will look to make that opportunity available in the future. I would expect that the chances are good the City Council will have specific questions for you if you are in attendance and provide testimony, but can’t guarantee that will be the case. If you decide that it is not worth the trip down to SLO, I completely understand. I really appreciate your availability to answer questions and discuss the future of CCE for our community. One question that I have now is, how long do expect MBCP to continue to be open to new partners? Is there a timeframe in mind, or critical mass you are aiming to achieve? I think the City Council may ask us to pursue multiple paths, and it would be helpful to know what the timeframe is for a decision to join MBCP. Thank you! -Michael Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org  143 Hicks, Bailey From:Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Monday, December 11, 2017 7:22 AM To:Codron, Michael Cc:Mark Bachman;Marc Adato Subject:RE: Tuesday's Study Session Hi Michael  Mark Bachman, Key Account Manager and Marc Adato, Community Outreach Coordinator of MBCP staff (both are  copies on this email) are planning to attend the workshop on Tuesday to make remarks during the public comment and  address any question that SLO Council members might have about MBCP and CCA operation in general. Could you reply  to all with information about the workshop (when, where, agenda, etc.), thanks.     From: Codron, Michael [mailto:mcodron@slocity.org]   Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2017 10:13 AM  To: Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Tuesday's Study Session    Hello Tom, The study session on Tuesday will be a 90 minute meeting that will include a fairly brief staff presentation and public comment period. We intend to let the City Council know that there will be many experts in the audience, including County staff, Jen Kregar from Santa Barbara, local representatives of the SLO Clean Energy group, and hopefully you will make the trip down, as well. While we won’t be able to provide an opportunity for you to make a separate presentation, we will look to make that opportunity available in the future. I would expect that the chances are good the City Council will have specific questions for you if you are in attendance and provide testimony, but can’t guarantee that will be the case. If you decide that it is not worth the trip down to SLO, I completely understand. I really appreciate your availability to answer questions and discuss the future of CCE for our community. One question that I have now is, how long do expect MBCP to continue to be open to new partners? Is there a timeframe in mind, or critical mass you are aiming to achieve? I think the City Council may ask us to pursue multiple paths, and it would be helpful to know what the timeframe is for a decision to join MBCP. Thank you! -Michael Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 144 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org  145 Hicks, Bailey From:Eric H. Veium <eveium@calpoly.edu> Sent:Saturday, December 9, 2017 12:05 PM To:Harmon, Heidi Subject:Fwd: Re: Fwd: Fw: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 I'm aware. Raising alarms at CSU and other organizations to understand issue and determine response. Get Outlook for Android From: Eric H. Veium  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 11:45:00 AM  To: Eric H. Veium  Subject: Re: Fwd: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      I'm aware. Raising alarms at CSU and other organizations. Get Outlook for Android From: Eric H. Veium  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 11:42:06 AM  To: 'Gregory Klatt'  Subject: Fwd: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Fyi: CCA Emergency Get Outlook for Android From: Eric H. Veium  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 11:41:21 AM  To: Klemm, Aaron; Michael Clemson  Cc: Dennis K. Elliot  Subject: Fwd: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CCA Emergency. See below and attached. Get Outlook for Android From: Codron, Michael Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:52 AM To: Department Heads Cc: Hermann, Greg; Fowler, Xzandrea; Vereschagin, Cara; Ansolabehere, Jon; Eric Veium (eric@slocleanenergy.org) 146 Subject: FW: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Mayor and Council, I’m forwarding the information below and attached that was originally distributed by Dawn Weisz, CEO of Marin Clean Energy and President of the statewide CCA lobbying association CalCCA. This is regarding a major proposal from the CPUC that would apply to new CCA programs. Staff will evaluate this information in more detail and be prepared to respond to questions about how this would apply to, or change the alternatives available to, the City of San Luis Obispo with respect to joining or starting a new program. We’ll turn this into Agenda Correspondence first thing Monday so the new info is available to the public. Thank you, -Michael Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org Bcc: City Council From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa-barbara.ca.us] Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org> Subject: Fw: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Michael and Greg, Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast-track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs. You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into 2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18. Best, Jen From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org> Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org; spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org; hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary Subject: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 CalCCA Affiliate Members, 147 I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017. It also imposes new requirements regarding the start-date of CCA programs which impact economics and other timelines. The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th. There are significant due process concerns with this draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential actions include: Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached, and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached. Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29. The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on. Let me/Hilary know if you want to participate and if you are able to cost-share. January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs. Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week. Let Hilary know if you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing to share the cost of preparing and filing comments. If you have questions, feel free to reach out. Thanks, Dawn Dawn Weisz California Community Choice Association 415-464-6020 www.cal-cca.org From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org] Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico-rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org> Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal-cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org> Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E-4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators) CalCCA Board, I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning. This proposed resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key elements of CCA implementation. 148 Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs to submit to a process that includes: a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans; a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either the CCA or the utility; a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan). This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development. Dawn Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE 1125 Tamalpais Ave. San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org ----------------------------------------------- Subject: Draft Resolution E-4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators) Parties to Draft Resolution E-4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative): Attached is Draft Resolution E-4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting Agenda. Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter. Sincerely, CPUC Maria Salinas Energy Division, Tariff Unit 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/ 149 Hicks, Bailey From:Harmon, Heidi Sent:Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:56 AM To:Eric Veium Subject:Fw: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Attachments:Comment Letter Resolution E-4907.pdf; Draft Resolution E-4907.pdf; Talking Points DRAFT.DOCX; Rechtschaffen Meeting Request Form - 12.8.17.doc ?    From: Codron, Michael  Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:52 AM  To: Department Heads  Cc: Hermann, Greg; Fowler, Xzandrea; Vereschagin, Cara; Ansolabehere, Jon; Eric Veium (eric@slocleanenergy.org)  Subject: FW: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      Mayor and Council,    I’m forwarding the information below and attached that was originally distributed by Dawn Weisz, CEO of Marin Clean Energy and President of the statewide CCA lobbying association CalCCA. This is regarding a major proposal from the CPUC that would apply to new CCA programs.    Staff will evaluate this information in more detail and be prepared to respond to questions about how this would apply to, or change the alternatives available to, the City of San Luis Obispo with respect to joining or starting a new program.     We’ll turn this into Agenda Correspondence first thing Monday so the new info is available to the public.    Thank you, -Michael    Michael Codron Director of Community Development 150 Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org    Bcc: City Council  From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907     Michael and Greg,      Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.     Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  151 I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to  expand CPUC oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where  implementation plans have not been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not  file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017. It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA  programs which impact economics and other timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process  concerns with this draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no  opportunity for input from the public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our  response on Monday and potential actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each  Commissioners (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be  for CCA elected officials (or staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template  to request these meetings is attached, and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially  using external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if  you want to participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to  participate in person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much  their local government has spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines  local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let  Hilary know if you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your  agency would be willing to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn  152       Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy  DeFalco C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew  Marshall <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This  proposed resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start  dates and other key elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to  require CCAs to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered  by either the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after  filing a plan).     This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I  just wanted to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.  153    Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission  Meeting Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102          MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/    154 Hicks, Bailey From:Codron, Michael Sent:Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:53 AM To:Department Heads Cc:Hermann, Greg;Fowler, Xzandrea;Vereschagin, Cara;Ansolabehere, Jon;Eric Veium (eric@slocleanenergy.org) Subject:FW: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Attachments:Comment Letter Resolution E-4907.pdf; Draft Resolution E-4907.pdf; Talking Points DRAFT.DOCX; Rechtschaffen Meeting Request Form - 12.8.17.doc Mayor and Council, I’m forwarding the information below and attached that was originally distributed by Dawn Weisz, CEO of Marin Clean Energy and President of the statewide CCA lobbying association CalCCA. This is regarding a major proposal from the CPUC that would apply to new CCA programs. Staff will evaluate this information in more detail and be prepared to respond to questions about how this would apply to, or change the alternatives available to, the City of San Luis Obispo with respect to joining or starting a new program. We’ll turn this into Agenda Correspondence first thing Monday so the new info is available to the public. Thank you, -Michael Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org Bcc: City Council From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Michael and Greg,     155 Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.    Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.  156    Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):  157    Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102       MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/  158 Hicks, Bailey From:Codron, Michael Sent:Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:41 AM To:Cregar, Jennifer;Hermann, Greg Subject:RE: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Thanks, Jen. Super helpful of you to forward this info to us and I will distribute it to our Council and Climate Action Task Force. From: Cregar, Jennifer [mailto:jcregar@co.santa‐barbara.ca.us]   Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: Fw: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907    Michael and Greg,     Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.    Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     159 The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.     January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;   160  a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102       MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/  161 Hicks, Bailey From:Cregar, Jennifer <jcregar@co.santa-barbara.ca.us> Sent:Saturday, December 9, 2017 10:00 AM To:Hermann, Greg;Codron, Michael Subject:Fw: CCA - New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E-4907 Attachments:Comment Letter Resolution E-4907.pdf; Draft Resolution E-4907.pdf; Talking Points DRAFT.DOCX; Rechtschaffen Meeting Request Form - 12.8.17.doc Michael and Greg,     Please see below and attached for updates from Dawn Weisz, CEO of MCE and President of the statewide CCA  lobbying association CalCCA, regarding a major proposal from the CPUC. In short, the CPUC is trying to fast‐ track changes to the CCA formation and expansion process, most notably requiring at least a full calendar year  between implementation plan submission and service start date for a new CCA or expansions of existing CCAs.  You would be affected whether you start a new CCA or join MBCP. I'd guess you're likely looking at well into  2019 before you could start service in either case. The CPUC plans to vote on the resolution on 1/1/18.    Best,  Jen  From: Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>  Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 6:19 PM  To: Cregar, Jennifer; tom.moody@ci.corona.ca.us; kmorris@hermosabch.org; msears@cityofdavis.org;  spoonhour@wrcog.cog.ca.us; dking@cosb.org; tprill@sanjacintoca.us; kbarrows@cvag.org;  hmartinez@cordobacorp.com; cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org  Cc: Beth Vaughan; Hilary  Subject: CCA ‐ New one year delay proposed by CPUC today via Draft Resolution E‐4907      CalCCA Affiliate Members,  I wanted to make you aware of the resolution (see below and attached) released today, which proposes to expand CPUC  oversight over CCAs and impose a one year delay on new CCAs or CCA expansions where implementation plans have not  been filed as of Dec. 8, 2017, and a two year delay for programs that do not file implementation plans by Dec. 31, 2017.  It also imposes new requirements regarding the start‐date of CCA programs which impact economics and other  timelines.     The draft resolution is set to be voted out by the CPUC on Jan. 11th.  There are significant due process concerns with this  draft resolution as a factual record has not been established and there has been no opportunity for input from the  public or interested parties. The CalCCA regulatory team will be discussing our response on Monday and potential  actions include:     Requesting Ex. Parte meetings: Affiliate and Operational members can request meetings with each Commissioners  (and/or their staff) and request that they be held prior to Jan. 11th. These meeting would be for CCA elected officials (or  staff) to express concerns and request a ‘no’ vote on the resolution. The template to request these meetings is attached,  and draft talking points to use in the meetings are also attached.     Prepare a response: Responses are due by 12/29.  The CalCCA regulatory committee will discuss potentially using  external counsel to draft comments and then all interested parties can sign on.  Let me/Hilary know if you want to  participate and if you are able to cost‐share.  162    January 11th CPUC meeting: CCA elected officials, especially for new CCA efforts, could be encouraged to participate in  person at the CPUC meeting to comment on how this would impact their agency, how much their local government has  spent so far to develop their CCA program, and how this resolution undermines local governance of CCA programs.     Hilary has offered to holding a CalCCA regulatory call for affiliate members on Thursday of next week.  Let Hilary know if  you would be interested in participating. Also, please let Hilary know by Monday at 1pm if your agency would be willing  to share the cost of preparing and filing comments.       If you have questions, feel free to reach out.     Thanks,  Dawn        Dawn Weisz  California Community Choice Association  415‐464‐6020  www.cal‐cca.org     From: Dawn Weisz [mailto:dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org]   Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 10:32 AM  To: Benjamin Cárdenas <bcardenas@pico‐rivera.org>; Bill Carnahan <carnahanconsulting@gmail.com>; Cathy DeFalco  C.P.M. <cdefalco@cityoflancasterca.org>; Dawn Weisz <dweisz@mcecleanenergy.org>; Don Eckert  <Don.Eckert@svcleanenergy.org>; Geof Syphers <gsyphers@sonomacleanpower.org>; Hale, Barbara  <BHale@sfwater.org>; Janis Pepper, P.E. <jpepper@peninsulacleanenergy.com>; Jenine Windeshausen  <JWindesh@placer.ca.gov>; Joseph Moon <JMoon@applevalley.org>; Lori.Mitchell@sanjoseca.gov; Matthew Marshall  <mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org>; Nick Chaset <nchaset@ebce.org>; Tom Habashi  <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; Hilary <hilary.staver@svcleanenergy.org>  Subject: FW: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  163 1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102       MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/  164 Hicks, Bailey From:Monterey Bay Community Power <info@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Friday, December 8, 2017 5:59 PM To:Carloni, Marcus Subject:December 13: Meeting of MBCP's Policy Board     Monterey Bay Community Power News To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Please Join Us! Meeting of Monterey Bay Community Power Policy Board of Directors Wednesday, December 13 9 a.m. View Agenda Here Meeting Location: City of Watsonville  City Council Chambers  275 Main Street, 4th Floor  Watsonville, CA 95076    165 Learn more about Monterey Bay Community Power in this video. To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Monterey Bay Community Power Monterey Bay Community Power To heprivaOfficeautomof thithe In To help prprivacy, Mprevented download from the In MBCommunityPower.org info@MBCommunityPower.org     Monterey Bay Community Power, 701 Ocean Street, 5th Floor, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 SafeUnsubscribe™ mcarloni@slocity.org Forward this email | Update Profile | About our service provider Sent by info@mbcommunitypower.org in collaboration with To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Constant Contact Try it free today     166 Hicks, Bailey From:Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Friday, December 8, 2017 3:46 PM To:Codron, Michael Cc:gine.johnson@santacruzcounty.us Subject:FW: Draft Resolution E-4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators) Attachments:Comment Letter Resolution E-4907.pdf; Draft Resolution E-4907.pdf Hi Michael  attached is a draft resolution that was approved by the CPUC that, if stands unchallenged, will take a toll on your (and  other potential CCA) effort to launch a CCA programs when you deem appropriate.          CalCCA Board,  I am passing along a draft resolution that was just released by Energy Division of the CPUC this morning.  This proposed  resolution would impose very concerning requirements on CCAs, and would have impacts on start dates and other key  elements of CCA implementation.       Specifically, the Commission is proposing, VIA RESOLUTION (not via an existing proceeding or decision) to require CCAs  to submit to a process that includes:   a timeline for submission of Implementation Plans;    a requirement to “meet and confer” between the CCA and the incumbent utility that can be triggered by either  the CCA or the utility;    a registration packet including a CCA’s service agreement and bond; and    a Commission authorized date to begin service (i.e. requiring January 1 start date over a year after filing a plan).    This information is being circulated within the Regulatory Committee for analysis and potential next steps. I just wanted  to make sure you were all aware as this is a significant and concerning development.     Dawn        Dawn Weisz Chief Executive Officer, MCE  1125 Tamalpais Ave.  San Rafael, CA 94960 415.464.6020 | dweisz@mceCleanEnergy.org mceCleanEnergy.org     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐       Subject: Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Re: Registration Process for Community Choice Aggregators)     Parties to Draft Resolution E‐4907 (Commission’s Own Initiative):     Attached is Draft Resolution E‐4907, currently scheduled to appear on the January 11, 2018, Commission Meeting  Agenda.     167 Comments may be submitted according to the attached Comment Letter.     Sincerely,     CPUC  Maria Salinas  Energy Division, Tariff Unit  505 Van Ness Avenue  San Francisco, CA 94102       MCE is committed to protecting customer privacy. Learn more at: https://www.mceCleanEnergy.org/privacy/  168 Hicks, Bailey From:Codron, Michael Sent:Thursday, December 7, 2017 11:13 AM To:Hermann, Greg;Johnson, Derek Subject:FW: Tuesday's Study Session fyi From: Tom Habashi [mailto:thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2017 10:47 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: Tuesday's Study Session    Hi Michael  Thanks for the quick reply. It’s likely that I’ll ask one of our new hires to be there to address any questions and perhaps  to make a statement during the public comments period. As for timing to join, you can join when you’re ready. You  should base the timing and the path to CCE on external factors (new legislation, higher bond cost, additional hurdles  that may be imposed by the numerous CPUC proceedings). The size of SLO is large enough to enable you to join solo. For  other smaller cities within the county, it’s likely that we would ask them to join with others to justify the effort taken in  amending the Implementation plan.   Finally, yesterday we had an operation board meeting during which we made a presentation updating the board on our  progress thus far. It took only 15 minutes, so stream it if you like. We plan to make similar presentation to the Policy  Board (our elected officials) on 12/13 which I believe you can stream live. Best of luck next week.  Best     From: Codron, Michael [mailto:mcodron@slocity.org]   Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2017 10:13 AM  To: Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Tuesday's Study Session    Hello Tom, The study session on Tuesday will be a 90 minute meeting that will include a fairly brief staff presentation and public comment period. We intend to let the City Council know that there will be many experts in the audience, including County staff, Jen Kregar from Santa Barbara, local representatives of the SLO Clean Energy group, and hopefully you will make the trip down, as well. While we won’t be able to provide an opportunity for you to make a separate presentation, we will look to make that opportunity available in the future. I would expect that the chances are good the City Council will have specific questions for you if you are in attendance and provide testimony, but can’t guarantee that will be the case. If you decide that it is not worth the trip down to SLO, I completely understand. I really appreciate your availability to answer questions and discuss the future of CCE for our community. One question that I have now is, how long do expect MBCP to continue to be open to new partners? Is there a timeframe in mind, or critical mass you are aiming to achieve? I think the City Council may ask us to pursue multiple paths, and it would be helpful to know what the timeframe is for a decision to join MBCP. 169 Thank you! -Michael Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org  170 Hicks, Bailey From:Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Thursday, December 7, 2017 10:47 AM To:Codron, Michael Subject:RE: Tuesday's Study Session Hi Michael  Thanks for the quick reply. It’s likely that I’ll ask one of our new hires to be there to address any questions and perhaps  to make a statement during the public comments period. As for timing to join, you can join when you’re ready. You  should base the timing and the path to CCE on external factors (new legislation, higher bond cost, additional hurdles  that may be imposed by the numerous CPUC proceedings). The size of SLO is large enough to enable you to join solo. For  other smaller cities within the county, it’s likely that we would ask them to join with others to justify the effort taken in  amending the Implementation plan.   Finally, yesterday we had an operation board meeting during which we made a presentation updating the board on our  progress thus far. It took only 15 minutes, so stream it if you like. We plan to make similar presentation to the Policy  Board (our elected officials) on 12/13 which I believe you can stream live. Best of luck next week.  Best     From: Codron, Michael [mailto:mcodron@slocity.org]   Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2017 10:13 AM  To: Tom Habashi <thabashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Tuesday's Study Session    Hello Tom, The study session on Tuesday will be a 90 minute meeting that will include a fairly brief staff presentation and public comment period. We intend to let the City Council know that there will be many experts in the audience, including County staff, Jen Kregar from Santa Barbara, local representatives of the SLO Clean Energy group, and hopefully you will make the trip down, as well. While we won’t be able to provide an opportunity for you to make a separate presentation, we will look to make that opportunity available in the future. I would expect that the chances are good the City Council will have specific questions for you if you are in attendance and provide testimony, but can’t guarantee that will be the case. If you decide that it is not worth the trip down to SLO, I completely understand. I really appreciate your availability to answer questions and discuss the future of CCE for our community. One question that I have now is, how long do expect MBCP to continue to be open to new partners? Is there a timeframe in mind, or critical mass you are aiming to achieve? I think the City Council may ask us to pursue multiple paths, and it would be helpful to know what the timeframe is for a decision to join MBCP. Thank you! -Michael Michael Codron Director of Community Development 171 Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org  172 Hicks, Bailey From:Codron, Michael Sent:Thursday, December 7, 2017 10:13 AM To:Tom Habashi Cc:Hermann, Greg Subject:Tuesday's Study Session Hello Tom, The study session on Tuesday will be a 90 minute meeting that will include a fairly brief staff presentation and public comment period. We intend to let the City Council know that there will be many experts in the audience, including County staff, Jen Kregar from Santa Barbara, local representatives of the SLO Clean Energy group, and hopefully you will make the trip down, as well. While we won’t be able to provide an opportunity for you to make a separate presentation, we will look to make that opportunity available in the future. I would expect that the chances are good the City Council will have specific questions for you if you are in attendance and provide testimony, but can’t guarantee that will be the case. If you decide that it is not worth the trip down to SLO, I completely understand. I really appreciate your availability to answer questions and discuss the future of CCE for our community. One question that I have now is, how long do expect MBCP to continue to be open to new partners? Is there a timeframe in mind, or critical mass you are aiming to achieve? I think the City Council may ask us to pursue multiple paths, and it would be helpful to know what the timeframe is for a decision to join MBCP. Thank you! -Michael Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org  173 Hicks, Bailey From:Monterey Bay Community Power <info@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Friday, December 1, 2017 5:04 PM To:Carloni, Marcus Subject:December 6: Meeting of MBCP's Operations Board     Monterey Bay Community Power News To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Please Join Us! Meeting of Monterey Bay Community Power Operations Board of Directors Wednesday, December 6 9 a.m. View Agenda Here Meeting Location: City of Watsonville  City Council Chambers  275 Main Street, 4th Floor  Watsonville, CA 95076    174 Learn more about Monterey Bay Community Power in this video. To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Monterey Bay Community Power Monterey Bay Community Power To heprivaOfficeautomof thithe In To help prprivacy, Mprevented download from the In MBCommunityPower.org info@MBCommunityPower.org     Monterey Bay Community Power, 701 Ocean Street, 5th Floor, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 SafeUnsubscribe™ mcarloni@slocity.org Forward this email | Update Profile | About our service provider Sent by info@mbcommunitypower.org in collaboration with To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Constant Contact Try it free today     175 Hicks, Bailey From:Codron, Michael Sent:Thursday, November 30, 2017 10:35 AM To:Tom Habashi Subject:RE: CCA Meeting Follow-Up 9:30 would be perfect. Would you like to call me at my office line below? Otherwise, if you can give me a number to reach you I’m happy to call. Thanks for the quick response! From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 10:29 AM  To: Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up    Hi Mike  Between 9:00 and 11:00 and any time after 1:00     From: Codron, Michael [mailto:mcodron@slocity.org]   Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 10:10 AM  To: tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hello Tom,    Do you have time for a phone call tomorrow? I’d like to introduce myself, provide you with an update on our status, and see if the information you highlighted below (i.e. status of MBCP, process to join, Board policies) might be available to us prior to our meeting on December 12.    Thanks for your consideration. Best regards, -Michael    Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org      From: Carloni, Marcus   Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2017 6:17 PM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: FW: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up  176    Tom Habashi, CEO of MBCP is available next week and willing to talk with you guys if needed….    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 6:06 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     I’m available. If you guys have specific questions, email them and I’ll be glad to email answers back ahead of the call.      From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 5:39 PM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hey Tom,     I hope all is well! Our Community Development Director and Interim Assistant City Manager would like to chat with you further about the specifics of joining MBCP. How is your availability next Tuesday the 28th from 1pm to 2pm?     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:28 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Marcus  One option is to write a report that you can attach to your report explaining   1. MBCP progress thus far  177 2. Describing the process to join  3. Describing the policies that our Boards have approved thus far  And any other information that you believe SLO Council will need to make an informed decision.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:02 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,     Thank you for your email. We will be having a study session with our City Council on December 12th and will have much more detail at that time. I’m hesitant to give a % probability at this time but I’d maybe say 50% at this time; MBCP is definitely one of the options we will be presenting to the City Council in December.     That said, do you have material you can send me that I can discuss in our staff report or provide as an attachment to the report so the City Council can get an understanding of the pros, cons, costs, timing, contract, decision making ability, and etc. of joining MBCP? Let me know and we can talk through it further if needed. Thanks!!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 7:11 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Marcus  Just checking on any updates regarding the city of SLO’s direction. In 10 days, we are making some key decision on long  term PPA for renewable resources at very attractive price. To the extent that SLO decides to join MBCP, the decision is  likely to be different. I know that you can’t make decisions on behalf of SLO, however, an indication of the likelihood of  joining would be helpful ( % probability should do).     Tom Habashi       From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 8:32 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Tom lets go ahead and do today at 2pm. Is there a best number for us to call?     178 Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 7:05 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     9:30 tomorrow morning sounds good if you don’t mind talking to me while I’m driving (I.e. I won’t have my laptop in  front of me). Both other times would work for me as well.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:39 PM  To: tom.habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,    Thanks for the quick reply! I’m hoping to have our Assistant City Manager on the call and am coordinating with his schedule. Thursday is pretty tight except for a 30 minutes block at 3:30pm. There is also availability tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. or 2pm if that works for you. Let me know. Thanks!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: tom.habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:18 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Sure thing. How about Thursday? My schedule is open almost all day           Sent from my T‐Mobile 4G LTE Device  179    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: "Carloni, Marcus" <mcarloni@slocity.org>   Date: 10/17/17 9:05 AM (GMT‐08:00)   To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>   Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up      Hi Tom,     Do you have availability this week to discuss MBCP and the City of San Luis Obispo? We’re scheduled for a study session with our City Council in December. Chris has filled me in on the possibility of joining MBCP and it would be great to talk specifics. Thank you for your time!     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 6:05 AM  To: Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us>  Cc: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Chris and Marcus  I can't emphasize enough the need to expedite your effort. Both bills that we fought at the end of the last legislative  session are coming back early on in 2018 session (I'm told in February) and that will make things harder for new CCA. I'll  be glad to help in anyway to make your case to your decision makers, just ask.  Best        On Oct 10, 2017 10:05 PM, "Chris Read" <cread@co.slo.ca.us> wrote:  180 Hello Tom,     Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.     In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.     Best,     Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us     181 Hicks, Bailey From:Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Thursday, November 30, 2017 10:29 AM To:Codron, Michael Subject:RE: CCA Meeting Follow-Up Hi Mike  Between 9:00 and 11:00 and any time after 1:00     From: Codron, Michael [mailto:mcodron@slocity.org]   Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 10:10 AM  To: tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org  Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hello Tom,    Do you have time for a phone call tomorrow? I’d like to introduce myself, provide you with an update on our status, and see if the information you highlighted below (i.e. status of MBCP, process to join, Board policies) might be available to us prior to our meeting on December 12.    Thanks for your consideration. Best regards, -Michael    Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org      From: Carloni, Marcus   Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2017 6:17 PM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: FW: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Tom Habashi, CEO of MBCP is available next week and willing to talk with you guys if needed….    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator 182 City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 6:06 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     I’m available. If you guys have specific questions, email them and I’ll be glad to email answers back ahead of the call.      From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 5:39 PM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hey Tom,     I hope all is well! Our Community Development Director and Interim Assistant City Manager would like to chat with you further about the specifics of joining MBCP. How is your availability next Tuesday the 28th from 1pm to 2pm?     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:28 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Marcus  One option is to write a report that you can attach to your report explaining   1. MBCP progress thus far  2. Describing the process to join  3. Describing the policies that our Boards have approved thus far  And any other information that you believe SLO Council will need to make an informed decision.     183 From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:02 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,     Thank you for your email. We will be having a study session with our City Council on December 12th and will have much more detail at that time. I’m hesitant to give a % probability at this time but I’d maybe say 50% at this time; MBCP is definitely one of the options we will be presenting to the City Council in December.     That said, do you have material you can send me that I can discuss in our staff report or provide as an attachment to the report so the City Council can get an understanding of the pros, cons, costs, timing, contract, decision making ability, and etc. of joining MBCP? Let me know and we can talk through it further if needed. Thanks!!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 7:11 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Marcus  Just checking on any updates regarding the city of SLO’s direction. In 10 days, we are making some key decision on long  term PPA for renewable resources at very attractive price. To the extent that SLO decides to join MBCP, the decision is  likely to be different. I know that you can’t make decisions on behalf of SLO, however, an indication of the likelihood of  joining would be helpful ( % probability should do).     Tom Habashi       From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 8:32 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Tom lets go ahead and do today at 2pm. Is there a best number for us to call?     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator 184 City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 7:05 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     9:30 tomorrow morning sounds good if you don’t mind talking to me while I’m driving (I.e. I won’t have my laptop in  front of me). Both other times would work for me as well.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:39 PM  To: tom.habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,    Thanks for the quick reply! I’m hoping to have our Assistant City Manager on the call and am coordinating with his schedule. Thursday is pretty tight except for a 30 minutes block at 3:30pm. There is also availability tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. or 2pm if that works for you. Let me know. Thanks!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: tom.habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:18 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Sure thing. How about Thursday? My schedule is open almost all day           Sent from my T‐Mobile 4G LTE Device     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  185 From: "Carloni, Marcus" <mcarloni@slocity.org>   Date: 10/17/17 9:05 AM (GMT‐08:00)   To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>   Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up      Hi Tom,     Do you have availability this week to discuss MBCP and the City of San Luis Obispo? We’re scheduled for a study session with our City Council in December. Chris has filled me in on the possibility of joining MBCP and it would be great to talk specifics. Thank you for your time!     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 6:05 AM  To: Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us>  Cc: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Chris and Marcus  I can't emphasize enough the need to expedite your effort. Both bills that we fought at the end of the last legislative  session are coming back early on in 2018 session (I'm told in February) and that will make things harder for new CCA. I'll  be glad to help in anyway to make your case to your decision makers, just ask.  Best        On Oct 10, 2017 10:05 PM, "Chris Read" <cread@co.slo.ca.us> wrote:  Hello Tom,  186    Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.     In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.     Best,     Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us     187 Hicks, Bailey From:Codron, Michael Sent:Thursday, November 30, 2017 10:10 AM To:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org Cc:Hermann, Greg Subject:RE: CCA Meeting Follow-Up Hello Tom, Do you have time for a phone call tomorrow? I’d like to introduce myself, provide you with an update on our status, and see if the information you highlighted below (i.e. status of MBCP, process to join, Board policies) might be available to us prior to our meeting on December 12. Thanks for your consideration. Best regards, -Michael Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org From: Carloni, Marcus   Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2017 6:17 PM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: FW: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up    Tom Habashi, CEO of MBCP is available next week and willing to talk with you guys if needed…. Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 6:06 PM  188 To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up    I’m available. If you guys have specific questions, email them and I’ll be glad to email answers back ahead of the call.      From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 5:39 PM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hey Tom,     I hope all is well! Our Community Development Director and Interim Assistant City Manager would like to chat with you further about the specifics of joining MBCP. How is your availability next Tuesday the 28th from 1pm to 2pm?     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:28 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Marcus  One option is to write a report that you can attach to your report explaining   1. MBCP progress thus far  2. Describing the process to join  3. Describing the policies that our Boards have approved thus far  And any other information that you believe SLO Council will need to make an informed decision.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:02 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,     Thank you for your email. We will be having a study session with our City Council on December 12th and will have much more detail at that time. I’m hesitant to give a % probability at this time but I’d maybe say 50% at this time; MBCP is definitely one of the options we will be presenting to the City Council in December.     That said, do you have material you can send me that I can discuss in our staff report or provide as an attachment to the report so the City Council can get an understanding of the pros, cons, costs, timing, contract, 189 decision making ability, and etc. of joining MBCP? Let me know and we can talk through it further if needed. Thanks!!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 7:11 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Marcus  Just checking on any updates regarding the city of SLO’s direction. In 10 days, we are making some key decision on long  term PPA for renewable resources at very attractive price. To the extent that SLO decides to join MBCP, the decision is  likely to be different. I know that you can’t make decisions on behalf of SLO, however, an indication of the likelihood of  joining would be helpful ( % probability should do).     Tom Habashi       From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 8:32 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Tom lets go ahead and do today at 2pm. Is there a best number for us to call?     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 7:05 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     190 9:30 tomorrow morning sounds good if you don’t mind talking to me while I’m driving (I.e. I won’t have my laptop in  front of me). Both other times would work for me as well.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:39 PM  To: tom.habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,    Thanks for the quick reply! I’m hoping to have our Assistant City Manager on the call and am coordinating with his schedule. Thursday is pretty tight except for a 30 minutes block at 3:30pm. There is also availability tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. or 2pm if that works for you. Let me know. Thanks!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: tom.habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:18 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Sure thing. How about Thursday? My schedule is open almost all day           Sent from my T‐Mobile 4G LTE Device     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: "Carloni, Marcus" <mcarloni@slocity.org>   Date: 10/17/17 9:05 AM (GMT‐08:00)   To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>   Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up      Hi Tom,     Do you have availability this week to discuss MBCP and the City of San Luis Obispo? We’re scheduled for a study session with our City Council in December. Chris has filled me in on the possibility of joining MBCP and it would be great to talk specifics. Thank you for your time!     191 Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 6:05 AM  To: Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us>  Cc: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Chris and Marcus  I can't emphasize enough the need to expedite your effort. Both bills that we fought at the end of the last legislative  session are coming back early on in 2018 session (I'm told in February) and that will make things harder for new CCA. I'll  be glad to help in anyway to make your case to your decision makers, just ask.  Best        On Oct 10, 2017 10:05 PM, "Chris Read" <cread@co.slo.ca.us> wrote:  Hello Tom,     Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.     In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.     192 Best,     Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us     193 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Thursday, November 30, 2017 10:10 AM To:Codron, Michael;Carloni, Marcus Subject:RE: CCA Meeting Follow-Up I don’t think Tom’s email was actual on this string. I ended up speaking with him earlier this week. Discuss at 11? Greg From: Codron, Michael   Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 10:08 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up    Hello Tom, Do you have time for a phone call tomorrow? I’d like to introduce myself, provide you with an update on our status, and see if the information you highlighted below (i.e. status of MBCP, process to join, Board policies) might be available to us prior to our meeting on December 12. Thanks for your consideration. Best regards, -Michael Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org From: Carloni, Marcus   Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2017 6:17 PM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: FW: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up    Tom Habashi, CEO of MBCP is available next week and willing to talk with you guys if needed…. Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator 194 City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 6:06 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up    I’m available. If you guys have specific questions, email them and I’ll be glad to email answers back ahead of the call.      From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 5:39 PM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hey Tom,     I hope all is well! Our Community Development Director and Interim Assistant City Manager would like to chat with you further about the specifics of joining MBCP. How is your availability next Tuesday the 28th from 1pm to 2pm?     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:28 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Marcus  One option is to write a report that you can attach to your report explaining   1. MBCP progress thus far  2. Describing the process to join  3. Describing the policies that our Boards have approved thus far  And any other information that you believe SLO Council will need to make an informed decision.     195 From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:02 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,     Thank you for your email. We will be having a study session with our City Council on December 12th and will have much more detail at that time. I’m hesitant to give a % probability at this time but I’d maybe say 50% at this time; MBCP is definitely one of the options we will be presenting to the City Council in December.     That said, do you have material you can send me that I can discuss in our staff report or provide as an attachment to the report so the City Council can get an understanding of the pros, cons, costs, timing, contract, decision making ability, and etc. of joining MBCP? Let me know and we can talk through it further if needed. Thanks!!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 7:11 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Marcus  Just checking on any updates regarding the city of SLO’s direction. In 10 days, we are making some key decision on long  term PPA for renewable resources at very attractive price. To the extent that SLO decides to join MBCP, the decision is  likely to be different. I know that you can’t make decisions on behalf of SLO, however, an indication of the likelihood of  joining would be helpful ( % probability should do).     Tom Habashi       From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 8:32 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Tom lets go ahead and do today at 2pm. Is there a best number for us to call?     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator 196 City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 7:05 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     9:30 tomorrow morning sounds good if you don’t mind talking to me while I’m driving (I.e. I won’t have my laptop in  front of me). Both other times would work for me as well.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:39 PM  To: tom.habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,    Thanks for the quick reply! I’m hoping to have our Assistant City Manager on the call and am coordinating with his schedule. Thursday is pretty tight except for a 30 minutes block at 3:30pm. There is also availability tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. or 2pm if that works for you. Let me know. Thanks!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: tom.habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:18 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Sure thing. How about Thursday? My schedule is open almost all day           Sent from my T‐Mobile 4G LTE Device     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  197 From: "Carloni, Marcus" <mcarloni@slocity.org>   Date: 10/17/17 9:05 AM (GMT‐08:00)   To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>   Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up      Hi Tom,     Do you have availability this week to discuss MBCP and the City of San Luis Obispo? We’re scheduled for a study session with our City Council in December. Chris has filled me in on the possibility of joining MBCP and it would be great to talk specifics. Thank you for your time!     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 6:05 AM  To: Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us>  Cc: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Chris and Marcus  I can't emphasize enough the need to expedite your effort. Both bills that we fought at the end of the last legislative  session are coming back early on in 2018 session (I'm told in February) and that will make things harder for new CCA. I'll  be glad to help in anyway to make your case to your decision makers, just ask.  Best        On Oct 10, 2017 10:05 PM, "Chris Read" <cread@co.slo.ca.us> wrote:  Hello Tom,  198    Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.     In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.     Best,     Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us     199 Hicks, Bailey From:Codron, Michael Sent:Thursday, November 30, 2017 10:08 AM To:Carloni, Marcus;Hermann, Greg Subject:RE: CCA Meeting Follow-Up Hello Tom, Do you have time for a phone call tomorrow? I’d like to introduce myself, provide you with an update on our status, and see if the information you highlighted below (i.e. status of MBCP, process to join, Board policies) might be available to us prior to our meeting on December 12. Thanks for your consideration. Best regards, -Michael Michael Codron Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E mcodron@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 C 805.540.0767 slocity.org From: Carloni, Marcus   Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2017 6:17 PM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Codron, Michael <mcodron@slocity.org>  Subject: FW: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up    Tom Habashi, CEO of MBCP is available next week and willing to talk with you guys if needed…. Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 6:06 PM  200 To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up    I’m available. If you guys have specific questions, email them and I’ll be glad to email answers back ahead of the call.      From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 5:39 PM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hey Tom,     I hope all is well! Our Community Development Director and Interim Assistant City Manager would like to chat with you further about the specifics of joining MBCP. How is your availability next Tuesday the 28th from 1pm to 2pm?     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:28 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Marcus  One option is to write a report that you can attach to your report explaining   1. MBCP progress thus far  2. Describing the process to join  3. Describing the policies that our Boards have approved thus far  And any other information that you believe SLO Council will need to make an informed decision.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:02 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,     Thank you for your email. We will be having a study session with our City Council on December 12th and will have much more detail at that time. I’m hesitant to give a % probability at this time but I’d maybe say 50% at this time; MBCP is definitely one of the options we will be presenting to the City Council in December.     That said, do you have material you can send me that I can discuss in our staff report or provide as an attachment to the report so the City Council can get an understanding of the pros, cons, costs, timing, contract, 201 decision making ability, and etc. of joining MBCP? Let me know and we can talk through it further if needed. Thanks!!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 7:11 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Marcus  Just checking on any updates regarding the city of SLO’s direction. In 10 days, we are making some key decision on long  term PPA for renewable resources at very attractive price. To the extent that SLO decides to join MBCP, the decision is  likely to be different. I know that you can’t make decisions on behalf of SLO, however, an indication of the likelihood of  joining would be helpful ( % probability should do).     Tom Habashi       From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 8:32 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Tom lets go ahead and do today at 2pm. Is there a best number for us to call?     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 7:05 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     202 9:30 tomorrow morning sounds good if you don’t mind talking to me while I’m driving (I.e. I won’t have my laptop in  front of me). Both other times would work for me as well.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:39 PM  To: tom.habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,    Thanks for the quick reply! I’m hoping to have our Assistant City Manager on the call and am coordinating with his schedule. Thursday is pretty tight except for a 30 minutes block at 3:30pm. There is also availability tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. or 2pm if that works for you. Let me know. Thanks!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: tom.habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:18 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Sure thing. How about Thursday? My schedule is open almost all day           Sent from my T‐Mobile 4G LTE Device     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: "Carloni, Marcus" <mcarloni@slocity.org>   Date: 10/17/17 9:05 AM (GMT‐08:00)   To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>   Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up      Hi Tom,     Do you have availability this week to discuss MBCP and the City of San Luis Obispo? We’re scheduled for a study session with our City Council in December. Chris has filled me in on the possibility of joining MBCP and it would be great to talk specifics. Thank you for your time!     203 Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 6:05 AM  To: Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us>  Cc: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Chris and Marcus  I can't emphasize enough the need to expedite your effort. Both bills that we fought at the end of the last legislative  session are coming back early on in 2018 session (I'm told in February) and that will make things harder for new CCA. I'll  be glad to help in anyway to make your case to your decision makers, just ask.  Best        On Oct 10, 2017 10:05 PM, "Chris Read" <cread@co.slo.ca.us> wrote:  Hello Tom,     Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.     In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.     204 Best,     Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us     205 Hicks, Bailey From:Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Tuesday, November 28, 2017 2:27 PM To:Hermann, Greg Subject:RE: Conversation with SLO regarding CCA formation Hi Greg  This is my correct email. I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.     From: Hermann, Greg [mailto:GHermann@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 1:43 PM  To: tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org  Subject: FW: Conversation with SLO regarding CCA formation         From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 1:39 PM  To: 'outlook_B3A79273110DAAB7@outlook.com' <outlook_B3A79273110DAAB7@outlook.com>  Subject: RE: Conversation with SLO regarding CCA formation     Hi Tom,    I’m the one filling in for Marcus now and was on a previous call with you as well. We are still moving forward and are preparing a report for a 12/12 City Council meeting on this topic. I don’t think we need a call at this time, but I do have a quick question. If our Council decides to move forward with an existing CCE program they may wish to issue a request for information from multiple exisiting programs to learn more about what is available. Is that something that MBCP would respond to?    Also, can you please confirm that this is your best email address? It is showing up a little funny on my end.    Thanks, Greg    From: outlook_B3A79273110DAAB7@outlook.com [mailto:outlook_B3A79273110DAAB7@outlook.com]   Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 1:19 PM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Conversation with SLO regarding CCA formation     Hi Greg  Marcus scheduled a phone call between me and SLO assistant City Manager about a month ago. Obviously he forgot to  cancel it before he left the city. Are the one coordinating activities for SLO regarding effort to start a CCA at SLO? If yes,  is the city still considering joining MBCP or has the program been put on ice for now?     Tom Habashi, CEO  MBCP     831‐313‐5557      Sent from Mail for Windows 10  206    207 Hicks, Bailey From:Hermann, Greg Sent:Tuesday, November 28, 2017 1:43 PM To:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org Subject:FW: Conversation with SLO regarding CCA formation From: Hermann, Greg   Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 1:39 PM  To: 'outlook_B3A79273110DAAB7@outlook.com' <outlook_B3A79273110DAAB7@outlook.com>  Subject: RE: Conversation with SLO regarding CCA formation    Hi Tom, I’m the one filling in for Marcus now and was on a previous call with you as well. We are still moving forward and are preparing a report for a 12/12 City Council meeting on this topic. I don’t think we need a call at this time, but I do have a quick question. If our Council decides to move forward with an existing CCE program they may wish to issue a request for information from multiple exisiting programs to learn more about what is available. Is that something that MBCP would respond to? Also, can you please confirm that this is your best email address? It is showing up a little funny on my end. Thanks, Greg From: outlook_B3A79273110DAAB7@outlook.com [mailto:outlook_B3A79273110DAAB7@outlook.com]   Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2017 1:19 PM  To: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: Conversation with SLO regarding CCA formation    Hi Greg  Marcus scheduled a phone call between me and SLO assistant City Manager about a month ago. Obviously he forgot to  cancel it before he left the city. Are the one coordinating activities for SLO regarding effort to start a CCA at SLO? If yes,  is the city still considering joining MBCP or has the program been put on ice for now?    Tom Habashi, CEO  MBCP     831‐313‐5557     Sent from Mail for Windows 10    208 Hicks, Bailey From:Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Tuesday, November 28, 2017 1:12 PM To:Carloni, Marcus Subject:Conversation with SLO assistant City Manager Hi Marcus  I was expecting a call from SLO assistant city Manager at 1:00 today. I’m assuming that the call was canceled or  postponed, is that correct?      Tom Habashi  Tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org  831‐313‐5557     209 Hicks, Bailey From:Carloni, Marcus Sent:Wednesday, November 22, 2017 6:44 PM To:Codron, Michael;Hermann, Greg Subject:RE: CCE Report and PowerPoint Forgot to mention. The tri-county report is attached to the CAR as a reading file. The full report is here with all the appendices it is very long. I’m not sure of the best way to get this in the reading file but I ran out of time on it. http://www.centralcoastpower.org/resources.nrg Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org From: Carloni, Marcus   Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2017 6:20 PM  To: Codron, Michael (mcodron@slocity.org) <mcodron@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>  Subject: CCE Report and PowerPoint    Guys, The CCE report is fully updated in MinuteTrac per our discussions. I met with Eric V today and he was happy with the layout, report contents, and the general approach. Also the powerpoint presentation is complete (be aware that report changes may require adjustments to PowerPoint contents) and linked below. Happy Thanksgiving! T:\Special Projects Manager\Climate Action MCG\Community Choice Energy\City Council_December 12\Outline.docx Key Contacts: 1. Chris Read and Jon Griesser 2. Jen Cregar, County of Santa Barbara 3. Eric V 4. Denis Vermette, Pilot Power Group (wrote the intra-county report) a. dvermette@pilotpowergroup.com Phone: 858.678.0118 ext. 101 Mobile: 281.825.2890 5. Tom Habashi CEO of MBCP tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org 831.313.5557 6. Matthew Marshall with RCEA mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org 7. Santa Barbara Community Environmental Council (Sigrid Wright). They will help with support if needed. Seems they could help us get Santa Maria to join up. 210 Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  211 Hicks, Bailey From:Carloni, Marcus Sent:Wednesday, November 22, 2017 6:20 PM To:Codron, Michael;Hermann, Greg Subject:CCE Report and PowerPoint Guys, The CCE report is fully updated in MinuteTrac per our discussions. I met with Eric V today and he was happy with the layout, report contents, and the general approach. Also the powerpoint presentation is complete (be aware that report changes may require adjustments to PowerPoint contents) and linked below. Happy Thanksgiving! T:\Special Projects Manager\Climate Action MCG\Community Choice Energy\City Council_December 12\Outline.docx Key Contacts: 1. Chris Read and Jon Griesser 2. Jen Cregar, County of Santa Barbara 3. Eric V 4. Denis Vermette, Pilot Power Group (wrote the intra-county report) a. dvermette@pilotpowergroup.com Phone: 858.678.0118 ext. 101 Mobile: 281.825.2890 5. Tom Habashi CEO of MBCP tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org 831.313.5557 6. Matthew Marshall with RCEA mmarshall@redwoodenergy.org 7. Santa Barbara Community Environmental Council (Sigrid Wright). They will help with support if needed. Seems they could help us get Santa Maria to join up. Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  212 Hicks, Bailey From:Carloni, Marcus Sent:Wednesday, November 22, 2017 6:17 PM To:Hermann, Greg;Codron, Michael Subject:FW: CCA Meeting Follow-Up Tom Habashi, CEO of MBCP is available next week and willing to talk with you guys if needed…. Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 6:06 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up    I’m available. If you guys have specific questions, email them and I’ll be glad to email answers back ahead of the call.      From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 5:39 PM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hey Tom,     I hope all is well! Our Community Development Director and Interim Assistant City Manager would like to chat with you further about the specifics of joining MBCP. How is your availability next Tuesday the 28th from 1pm to 2pm?     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  213 From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:28 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Marcus  One option is to write a report that you can attach to your report explaining   1. MBCP progress thus far  2. Describing the process to join  3. Describing the policies that our Boards have approved thus far  And any other information that you believe SLO Council will need to make an informed decision.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:02 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,     Thank you for your email. We will be having a study session with our City Council on December 12th and will have much more detail at that time. I’m hesitant to give a % probability at this time but I’d maybe say 50% at this time; MBCP is definitely one of the options we will be presenting to the City Council in December.     That said, do you have material you can send me that I can discuss in our staff report or provide as an attachment to the report so the City Council can get an understanding of the pros, cons, costs, timing, contract, decision making ability, and etc. of joining MBCP? Let me know and we can talk through it further if needed. Thanks!!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 7:11 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Marcus  Just checking on any updates regarding the city of SLO’s direction. In 10 days, we are making some key decision on long  term PPA for renewable resources at very attractive price. To the extent that SLO decides to join MBCP, the decision is  likely to be different. I know that you can’t make decisions on behalf of SLO, however, an indication of the likelihood of  joining would be helpful ( % probability should do).     Tom Habashi       214 From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 8:32 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Tom lets go ahead and do today at 2pm. Is there a best number for us to call?     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 7:05 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     9:30 tomorrow morning sounds good if you don’t mind talking to me while I’m driving (I.e. I won’t have my laptop in  front of me). Both other times would work for me as well.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:39 PM  To: tom.habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,    Thanks for the quick reply! I’m hoping to have our Assistant City Manager on the call and am coordinating with his schedule. Thursday is pretty tight except for a 30 minutes block at 3:30pm. There is also availability tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. or 2pm if that works for you. Let me know. Thanks!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: tom.habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:18 AM  215 To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Sure thing. How about Thursday? My schedule is open almost all day           Sent from my T‐Mobile 4G LTE Device     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: "Carloni, Marcus" <mcarloni@slocity.org>   Date: 10/17/17 9:05 AM (GMT‐08:00)   To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>   Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up      Hi Tom,     Do you have availability this week to discuss MBCP and the City of San Luis Obispo? We’re scheduled for a study session with our City Council in December. Chris has filled me in on the possibility of joining MBCP and it would be great to talk specifics. Thank you for your time!     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 6:05 AM  To: Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us>  Cc: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Chris and Marcus  I can't emphasize enough the need to expedite your effort. Both bills that we fought at the end of the last legislative  session are coming back early on in 2018 session (I'm told in February) and that will make things harder for new CCA. I'll  be glad to help in anyway to make your case to your decision makers, just ask.  216 Best        On Oct 10, 2017 10:05 PM, "Chris Read" <cread@co.slo.ca.us> wrote:  Hello Tom,     Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.     In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.     Best,     Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us     217 Hicks, Bailey From:Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Monday, November 20, 2017 6:06 PM To:Carloni, Marcus Subject:RE: CCA Meeting Follow-Up I’m available. If you guys have specific questions, email them and I’ll be glad to email answers back ahead of the call.      From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 5:39 PM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hey Tom,     I hope all is well! Our Community Development Director and Interim Assistant City Manager would like to chat with you further about the specifics of joining MBCP. How is your availability next Tuesday the 28th from 1pm to 2pm?     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:28 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Marcus  One option is to write a report that you can attach to your report explaining   1. MBCP progress thus far  2. Describing the process to join  3. Describing the policies that our Boards have approved thus far  And any other information that you believe SLO Council will need to make an informed decision.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:02 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,     218 Thank you for your email. We will be having a study session with our City Council on December 12th and will have much more detail at that time. I’m hesitant to give a % probability at this time but I’d maybe say 50% at this time; MBCP is definitely one of the options we will be presenting to the City Council in December.     That said, do you have material you can send me that I can discuss in our staff report or provide as an attachment to the report so the City Council can get an understanding of the pros, cons, costs, timing, contract, decision making ability, and etc. of joining MBCP? Let me know and we can talk through it further if needed. Thanks!!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 7:11 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Marcus  Just checking on any updates regarding the city of SLO’s direction. In 10 days, we are making some key decision on long  term PPA for renewable resources at very attractive price. To the extent that SLO decides to join MBCP, the decision is  likely to be different. I know that you can’t make decisions on behalf of SLO, however, an indication of the likelihood of  joining would be helpful ( % probability should do).     Tom Habashi       From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 8:32 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Tom lets go ahead and do today at 2pm. Is there a best number for us to call?     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  219 From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 7:05 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     9:30 tomorrow morning sounds good if you don’t mind talking to me while I’m driving (I.e. I won’t have my laptop in  front of me). Both other times would work for me as well.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:39 PM  To: tom.habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,    Thanks for the quick reply! I’m hoping to have our Assistant City Manager on the call and am coordinating with his schedule. Thursday is pretty tight except for a 30 minutes block at 3:30pm. There is also availability tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. or 2pm if that works for you. Let me know. Thanks!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: tom.habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:18 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Sure thing. How about Thursday? My schedule is open almost all day           Sent from my T‐Mobile 4G LTE Device     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: "Carloni, Marcus" <mcarloni@slocity.org>   Date: 10/17/17 9:05 AM (GMT‐08:00)   To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>   Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up      Hi Tom,     220 Do you have availability this week to discuss MBCP and the City of San Luis Obispo? We’re scheduled for a study session with our City Council in December. Chris has filled me in on the possibility of joining MBCP and it would be great to talk specifics. Thank you for your time!     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 6:05 AM  To: Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us>  Cc: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Chris and Marcus  I can't emphasize enough the need to expedite your effort. Both bills that we fought at the end of the last legislative  session are coming back early on in 2018 session (I'm told in February) and that will make things harder for new CCA. I'll  be glad to help in anyway to make your case to your decision makers, just ask.  Best        On Oct 10, 2017 10:05 PM, "Chris Read" <cread@co.slo.ca.us> wrote:  Hello Tom,     Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.     221 In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.     Best,     Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us     222 Hicks, Bailey From:Carloni, Marcus Sent:Monday, November 20, 2017 5:39 PM To:Tom Habashi Subject:RE: CCA Meeting Follow-Up Hey Tom, I hope all is well! Our Community Development Director and Interim Assistant City Manager would like to chat with you further about the specifics of joining MBCP. How is your availability next Tuesday the 28th from 1pm to 2pm? Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:28 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up    Hi Marcus  One option is to write a report that you can attach to your report explaining   1. MBCP progress thus far  2. Describing the process to join  3. Describing the policies that our Boards have approved thus far  And any other information that you believe SLO Council will need to make an informed decision.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:02 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,     Thank you for your email. We will be having a study session with our City Council on December 12th and will have much more detail at that time. I’m hesitant to give a % probability at this time but I’d maybe say 50% at this time; MBCP is definitely one of the options we will be presenting to the City Council in December.     That said, do you have material you can send me that I can discuss in our staff report or provide as an attachment to the report so the City Council can get an understanding of the pros, cons, costs, timing, contract, 223 decision making ability, and etc. of joining MBCP? Let me know and we can talk through it further if needed. Thanks!!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 7:11 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Marcus  Just checking on any updates regarding the city of SLO’s direction. In 10 days, we are making some key decision on long  term PPA for renewable resources at very attractive price. To the extent that SLO decides to join MBCP, the decision is  likely to be different. I know that you can’t make decisions on behalf of SLO, however, an indication of the likelihood of  joining would be helpful ( % probability should do).     Tom Habashi       From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 8:32 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Tom lets go ahead and do today at 2pm. Is there a best number for us to call?     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 7:05 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     224 9:30 tomorrow morning sounds good if you don’t mind talking to me while I’m driving (I.e. I won’t have my laptop in  front of me). Both other times would work for me as well.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:39 PM  To: tom.habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,    Thanks for the quick reply! I’m hoping to have our Assistant City Manager on the call and am coordinating with his schedule. Thursday is pretty tight except for a 30 minutes block at 3:30pm. There is also availability tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. or 2pm if that works for you. Let me know. Thanks!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: tom.habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:18 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Sure thing. How about Thursday? My schedule is open almost all day           Sent from my T‐Mobile 4G LTE Device     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: "Carloni, Marcus" <mcarloni@slocity.org>   Date: 10/17/17 9:05 AM (GMT‐08:00)   To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>   Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up      Hi Tom,     Do you have availability this week to discuss MBCP and the City of San Luis Obispo? We’re scheduled for a study session with our City Council in December. Chris has filled me in on the possibility of joining MBCP and it would be great to talk specifics. Thank you for your time!     225 Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 6:05 AM  To: Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us>  Cc: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Chris and Marcus  I can't emphasize enough the need to expedite your effort. Both bills that we fought at the end of the last legislative  session are coming back early on in 2018 session (I'm told in February) and that will make things harder for new CCA. I'll  be glad to help in anyway to make your case to your decision makers, just ask.  Best        On Oct 10, 2017 10:05 PM, "Chris Read" <cread@co.slo.ca.us> wrote:  Hello Tom,     Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.     In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.     226 Best,     Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us     227 Hicks, Bailey From:Monterey Bay Community Power <info@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Tuesday, November 14, 2017 2:36 PM To:Carloni, Marcus Subject:November 15: Special Meeting of MBCP's Operations Board     Monterey Bay Community Power News To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Please Join Us! Meeting of Monterey Bay Community Power Operations Board of Directors Wednesday, November 15 9 a.m. View Agenda Here Meeting Location: City of Watsonville  City Council Chambers  275 Main Street, 4th Floor  Watsonville, CA 95076    228 Learn more about Monterey Bay Community Power in this video. To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Monterey Bay Community Power Monterey Bay Community Power To heprivaOfficeautomof thithe In To help prprivacy, Mprevented download from the In MBCommunityPower.org info@MBCommunityPower.org     Monterey Bay Community Power, 701 Ocean Street, 5th Floor, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 SafeUnsubscribe™ mcarloni@slocity.org Forward this email | Update Profile | About our service provider Sent by info@mbcommunitypower.org in collaboration with To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Constant Contact Try it free today     229 Hicks, Bailey From:Scott Mann <scott@studio-2g.com> Sent:Monday, November 13, 2017 11:00 PM To:Harmon, Heidi Subject:Fwd: Community Choice Energy Summit - The Next Generation of CCAs - draft questions for panelists Attachments:Next Generation Panel Outline.docx My goal for this summit will be to network and make a connection with Catherine Blakespear. She is the Mayor of  Encinitas and sounded very focused on creating Community Choice program for her community.      Best Regards,    ‐Scott    Begin forwarded message:  From: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>  Date: November 8, 2017 at 10:33:26 PM PST  To: "Marishai@infocastevents.com" <Marishai@infocastevents.com>, "'Catherine Blakespear'"  <catherine@blakespear4encinitas.com>, "rbobadilla.rb@gmail.com" <rbobadilla.rb@gmail.com>,  "tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org" <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>, "tkirk@cvag.org"  <tkirk@cvag.org>, "'Scott Mann'" <scott@studio‐2g.com>, "Kerrie.Romanow@sanjoseca.gov"  <Kerrie.Romanow@sanjoseca.gov>  Cc: 'Shelley Wecker' <swecker@encinitasca.gov>, 'Zoraida Caltitla' <ZCaltitla@pico‐rivera.org>,  "tomhabashi@gmail.com" <tomhabashi@gmail.com>, "aelliott@leanenergyus.org"  <aelliott@leanenergyus.org>, "'Khatchatourian, Chantel'" <Chantel.Khatchatourian@sanjoseca.gov>  Subject: Community Choice Energy Summit ‐ The Next Generation of CCAs ‐ draft questions for  panelists  Panelists –      Thank you for participating on the prep call on Monday.  Attached is a proposed outline for our 1.5 hour  session, and some draft questions for the group and individuals.  Please review and provide input.  Let  me know if you have specific questions you would like me to ask you.     Thanks for participating,     Beth     Beth Vaughan   Executive Director  California Community Choice Association   925‐408‐5142  beth@cal‐cca.org            230 From: Marisha Imming [mailto:marishai@infocastevents.com]   Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 4:37 PM  To: Beth Vaughan <beth@cal‐cca.org>; 'Catherine Blakespear' <catherine@blakespear4encinitas.com>;  rbobadilla.rb@gmail.com; tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org; tkirk@cvag.org; 'Scott Mann'  <scott@studio‐2g.com>; Kerrie.Romanow@sanjoseca.gov  Cc: 'Shelley Wecker' <swecker@encinitasca.gov>; 'Zoraida Caltitla' <ZCaltitla@pico‐rivera.org>;  tomhabashi@gmail.com; aelliott@leanenergyus.org; 'Khatchatourian, Chantel'  <Chantel.Khatchatourian@sanjoseca.gov>  Subject: Moderator & Panelists Introduction: Community Choice Energy Summit ‐ The Next Generation  of CCAs   Importance: High     Dear Moderator & Panelists,     Thank you again for joining us for the Community Choice Energy Summit.  As we near the event date, I  please ask that the moderator coordinate a pre‐conference call with the panelists to plan and prepare  for what we believe will be a solid and insightful panel.    PANEL: The Next Generation of CCAs  DATE: Wednesday, November 15, 2017  TIME: 8:15am – 9:30am (please review carefully as this time may have changed since your original confirmation)  Event Location: Santa Clara Marriott  ‐ 2700 Mission College Boulevard, Santa Clara, CA 95054  Meeting Room Name: Grand Ballroom – 1st Floor     Format – Facilitating an Infocast Panel  Your Moderator will lead your panel in a discussion.    The vision for this session is that it be a conversation without presentations    Moderator will deliver a 1‐2 minute introduction of the topic    To allow the panel to focus as much time as possible on the topic, we ask that introductions be  by name and title only—no reading of bios.   50‐60 minutes (depending on time) of curated questions from the moderator   10‐15 minutes of audience questions    Ending with a summary of panel and thanks     Moderator Checklist – Please refer to attachment.      Bios & Headshots – If you haven’t submitted your bio or headshot to me, please do so as soon as  possible.      Moderator:  Beth Vaughan, Operations Director, CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY CHOICE ASSOCIATION   Phone Number: 925‐408‐5142                      Email Address: beth@cal‐cca.org                      Panelists:   Catherine Blakespear, Mayor, CITY OF ENCINITAS  Phone Number: 760‐633‐2620                                      Email Address: catherine@blakespear4encinitas.com             Cc Email Address: swecker@encinitasca.gov                René Bobadilla, City Manager, CITY OF PICO RIVERA  Phone Number: 562‐801‐4379                                      231 Email Address: rbobadilla.rb@gmail.com     Cc Email Address: ZCaltitla@pico‐rivera.org                 Tom Habashi, CEO, MONTEREY BAY COMMUNITY POWER AUTHORITY  Phone Number: 408‐721‐5301, x1001                                        Email Address: tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org          Cc Email Address: tomhabashi@gmail.com ; aelliott@leanenergyus.org             Tom Kirk, Executive Director, COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS  Phone Number: (760) 346‐1127                   Email Address: tkirk@cvag.org                          Scott Mann, Planning Commissioner, SLO CLEAN ENERGY  Phone Number: 805‐594‐0771, x115                          Email Address: scott@studio‐2g.com              Kerrie Romanow, Environmental Services Director, CITY OF SAN JOSE  Phone Number: 408‐975‐2515                                      Email Address: Kerrie.Romanow@sanjoseca.gov      Cc Email Address: Chantel.Khatchatourian@sanjoseca.gov                     Attached is the latest program agenda for your reference.  Please note: All times are approximate and all  sessions & speakers are subject to change.      When you arrive to the conference, please see the Infocast team at the registration table by the meeting  room for your name badge. Please arrive at least 1 hour before your scheduled panel start time.   As a speaker, you do not need to worry about registering for the event as I’ve taken care of that for  you already.      If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to ask. Thank you again for your commitment and we  look forward to a great discussion!      Sincerely,        Marisha Imming  Event Contracts Manager / Event Coordinator  |  Information Forecast, Inc.   20931 Burbank Blvd. | Suite B | Woodland Hills | CA | 91367  T: 818‐351‐7724 | F: 818‐888‐4440 | E: marishai@infocastevents.com     232 Hicks, Bailey From:Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:28 AM To:Carloni, Marcus Subject:RE: CCA Meeting Follow-Up Hi Marcus  One option is to write a report that you can attach to your report explaining   1. MBCP progress thus far  2. Describing the process to join  3. Describing the policies that our Boards have approved thus far  And any other information that you believe SLO Council will need to make an informed decision.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:02 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,     Thank you for your email. We will be having a study session with our City Council on December 12th and will have much more detail at that time. I’m hesitant to give a % probability at this time but I’d maybe say 50% at this time; MBCP is definitely one of the options we will be presenting to the City Council in December.     That said, do you have material you can send me that I can discuss in our staff report or provide as an attachment to the report so the City Council can get an understanding of the pros, cons, costs, timing, contract, decision making ability, and etc. of joining MBCP? Let me know and we can talk through it further if needed. Thanks!!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 7:11 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Marcus  Just checking on any updates regarding the city of SLO’s direction. In 10 days, we are making some key decision on long  term PPA for renewable resources at very attractive price. To the extent that SLO decides to join MBCP, the decision is  233 likely to be different. I know that you can’t make decisions on behalf of SLO, however, an indication of the likelihood of  joining would be helpful ( % probability should do).     Tom Habashi       From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 8:32 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Tom lets go ahead and do today at 2pm. Is there a best number for us to call?     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 7:05 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     9:30 tomorrow morning sounds good if you don’t mind talking to me while I’m driving (I.e. I won’t have my laptop in  front of me). Both other times would work for me as well.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:39 PM  To: tom.habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,    Thanks for the quick reply! I’m hoping to have our Assistant City Manager on the call and am coordinating with his schedule. Thursday is pretty tight except for a 30 minutes block at 3:30pm. There is also availability tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. or 2pm if that works for you. Let me know. Thanks!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org 234 T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: tom.habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:18 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Sure thing. How about Thursday? My schedule is open almost all day           Sent from my T‐Mobile 4G LTE Device     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: "Carloni, Marcus" <mcarloni@slocity.org>   Date: 10/17/17 9:05 AM (GMT‐08:00)   To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>   Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up      Hi Tom,     Do you have availability this week to discuss MBCP and the City of San Luis Obispo? We’re scheduled for a study session with our City Council in December. Chris has filled me in on the possibility of joining MBCP and it would be great to talk specifics. Thank you for your time!     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 6:05 AM  To: Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us>  Cc: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Chris and Marcus  235 I can't emphasize enough the need to expedite your effort. Both bills that we fought at the end of the last legislative  session are coming back early on in 2018 session (I'm told in February) and that will make things harder for new CCA. I'll  be glad to help in anyway to make your case to your decision makers, just ask.  Best        On Oct 10, 2017 10:05 PM, "Chris Read" <cread@co.slo.ca.us> wrote:  Hello Tom,     Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.     In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.     Best,     Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us     236 Hicks, Bailey From:Carloni, Marcus Sent:Wednesday, November 8, 2017 10:02 AM To:Tom Habashi Subject:RE: CCA Meeting Follow-Up Hi Tom, Thank you for your email. We will be having a study session with our City Council on December 12th and will have much more detail at that time. I’m hesitant to give a % probability at this time but I’d maybe say 50% at this time; MBCP is definitely one of the options we will be presenting to the City Council in December. That said, do you have material you can send me that I can discuss in our staff report or provide as an attachment to the report so the City Council can get an understanding of the pros, cons, costs, timing, contract, decision making ability, and etc. of joining MBCP? Let me know and we can talk through it further if needed. Thanks!! Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 7:11 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up    Hi Marcus  Just checking on any updates regarding the city of SLO’s direction. In 10 days, we are making some key decision on long  term PPA for renewable resources at very attractive price. To the extent that SLO decides to join MBCP, the decision is  likely to be different. I know that you can’t make decisions on behalf of SLO, however, an indication of the likelihood of  joining would be helpful ( % probability should do).     Tom Habashi       From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 8:32 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Tom lets go ahead and do today at 2pm. Is there a best number for us to call?     237 Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 7:05 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     9:30 tomorrow morning sounds good if you don’t mind talking to me while I’m driving (I.e. I won’t have my laptop in  front of me). Both other times would work for me as well.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:39 PM  To: tom.habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,    Thanks for the quick reply! I’m hoping to have our Assistant City Manager on the call and am coordinating with his schedule. Thursday is pretty tight except for a 30 minutes block at 3:30pm. There is also availability tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. or 2pm if that works for you. Let me know. Thanks!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: tom.habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:18 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Sure thing. How about Thursday? My schedule is open almost all day           Sent from my T‐Mobile 4G LTE Device  238    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: "Carloni, Marcus" <mcarloni@slocity.org>   Date: 10/17/17 9:05 AM (GMT‐08:00)   To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>   Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up      Hi Tom,     Do you have availability this week to discuss MBCP and the City of San Luis Obispo? We’re scheduled for a study session with our City Council in December. Chris has filled me in on the possibility of joining MBCP and it would be great to talk specifics. Thank you for your time!     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 6:05 AM  To: Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us>  Cc: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Chris and Marcus  I can't emphasize enough the need to expedite your effort. Both bills that we fought at the end of the last legislative  session are coming back early on in 2018 session (I'm told in February) and that will make things harder for new CCA. I'll  be glad to help in anyway to make your case to your decision makers, just ask.  Best        On Oct 10, 2017 10:05 PM, "Chris Read" <cread@co.slo.ca.us> wrote:  239 Hello Tom,     Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.     In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.     Best,     Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us     240 Hicks, Bailey From:Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Saturday, November 4, 2017 7:11 PM To:Carloni, Marcus Subject:RE: CCA Meeting Follow-Up Hi Marcus  Just checking on any updates regarding the city of SLO’s direction. In 10 days, we are making some key decision on long  term PPA for renewable resources at very attractive price. To the extent that SLO decides to join MBCP, the decision is  likely to be different. I know that you can’t make decisions on behalf of SLO, however, an indication of the likelihood of  joining would be helpful ( % probability should do).     Tom Habashi       From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 8:32 AM  To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Tom lets go ahead and do today at 2pm. Is there a best number for us to call?     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 7:05 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     9:30 tomorrow morning sounds good if you don’t mind talking to me while I’m driving (I.e. I won’t have my laptop in  front of me). Both other times would work for me as well.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:39 PM  To: tom.habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,    241 Thanks for the quick reply! I’m hoping to have our Assistant City Manager on the call and am coordinating with his schedule. Thursday is pretty tight except for a 30 minutes block at 3:30pm. There is also availability tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. or 2pm if that works for you. Let me know. Thanks!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: tom.habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:18 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Sure thing. How about Thursday? My schedule is open almost all day           Sent from my T‐Mobile 4G LTE Device     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: "Carloni, Marcus" <mcarloni@slocity.org>   Date: 10/17/17 9:05 AM (GMT‐08:00)   To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>   Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up      Hi Tom,     Do you have availability this week to discuss MBCP and the City of San Luis Obispo? We’re scheduled for a study session with our City Council in December. Chris has filled me in on the possibility of joining MBCP and it would be great to talk specifics. Thank you for your time!     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org 242 T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 6:05 AM  To: Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us>  Cc: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Chris and Marcus  I can't emphasize enough the need to expedite your effort. Both bills that we fought at the end of the last legislative  session are coming back early on in 2018 session (I'm told in February) and that will make things harder for new CCA. I'll  be glad to help in anyway to make your case to your decision makers, just ask.  Best        On Oct 10, 2017 10:05 PM, "Chris Read" <cread@co.slo.ca.us> wrote:  Hello Tom,     Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.     In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.     Best,     Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  243 Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us     244 Hicks, Bailey From:Monterey Bay Community Power <info@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Wednesday, October 18, 2017 2:31 PM To:Carloni, Marcus Subject:Welcome to Monterey Bay Community Power To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.     Monterey Bay Community Power     To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.   Thanks for joining us!   Stay tuned for news and updates delivered straight to your inbox.     Monterey Bay Community Power | mbcommunitypower.org         Monterey Bay Community Power | 701 Ocean St 5th Floor, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Unsubscribe mcarloni@slocity.org Update Profile | About our service provider Sent by info@mbcommunitypower.org in collaboration with To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Trusted Email from Constant Contact - Try it FREE today. Try it free today   245 Hicks, Bailey From:Carloni, Marcus Sent:Wednesday, October 18, 2017 8:32 AM To:Tom Habashi Subject:RE: CCA Meeting Follow-Up Tom lets go ahead and do today at 2pm. Is there a best number for us to call? Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 7:05 PM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up    9:30 tomorrow morning sounds good if you don’t mind talking to me while I’m driving (I.e. I won’t have my laptop in  front of me). Both other times would work for me as well.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:39 PM  To: tom.habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,    Thanks for the quick reply! I’m hoping to have our Assistant City Manager on the call and am coordinating with his schedule. Thursday is pretty tight except for a 30 minutes block at 3:30pm. There is also availability tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. or 2pm if that works for you. Let me know. Thanks!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  246 From: tom.habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:18 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Sure thing. How about Thursday? My schedule is open almost all day           Sent from my T‐Mobile 4G LTE Device     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: "Carloni, Marcus" <mcarloni@slocity.org>   Date: 10/17/17 9:05 AM (GMT‐08:00)   To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>   Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up      Hi Tom,     Do you have availability this week to discuss MBCP and the City of San Luis Obispo? We’re scheduled for a study session with our City Council in December. Chris has filled me in on the possibility of joining MBCP and it would be great to talk specifics. Thank you for your time!     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 6:05 AM  To: Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us>  Cc: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Chris and Marcus  247 I can't emphasize enough the need to expedite your effort. Both bills that we fought at the end of the last legislative  session are coming back early on in 2018 session (I'm told in February) and that will make things harder for new CCA. I'll  be glad to help in anyway to make your case to your decision makers, just ask.  Best        On Oct 10, 2017 10:05 PM, "Chris Read" <cread@co.slo.ca.us> wrote:  Hello Tom,     Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.     In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.     Best,     Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us     248 Hicks, Bailey From:Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Tuesday, October 17, 2017 7:05 PM To:Carloni, Marcus Subject:RE: CCA Meeting Follow-Up 9:30 tomorrow morning sounds good if you don’t mind talking to me while I’m driving (I.e. I won’t have my laptop in  front of me). Both other times would work for me as well.     From: Carloni, Marcus [mailto:mcarloni@slocity.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:39 PM  To: tom.habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,    Thanks for the quick reply! I’m hoping to have our Assistant City Manager on the call and am coordinating with his schedule. Thursday is pretty tight except for a 30 minutes block at 3:30pm. There is also availability tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. or 2pm if that works for you. Let me know. Thanks!    Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: tom.habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:18 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Sure thing. How about Thursday? My schedule is open almost all day           Sent from my T‐Mobile 4G LTE Device     ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: "Carloni, Marcus" <mcarloni@slocity.org>   Date: 10/17/17 9:05 AM (GMT‐08:00)   To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>   Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up      249 Hi Tom,     Do you have availability this week to discuss MBCP and the City of San Luis Obispo? We’re scheduled for a study session with our City Council in December. Chris has filled me in on the possibility of joining MBCP and it would be great to talk specifics. Thank you for your time!     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 6:05 AM  To: Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us>  Cc: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Chris and Marcus  I can't emphasize enough the need to expedite your effort. Both bills that we fought at the end of the last legislative  session are coming back early on in 2018 session (I'm told in February) and that will make things harder for new CCA. I'll  be glad to help in anyway to make your case to your decision makers, just ask.  Best        On Oct 10, 2017 10:05 PM, "Chris Read" <cread@co.slo.ca.us> wrote:  Hello Tom,     Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.  250    In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.     Best,     Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us     251 Hicks, Bailey From:Carloni, Marcus Sent:Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:39 PM To:tom.habashi Subject:RE: CCA Meeting Follow-Up Hi Tom, Thanks for the quick reply! I’m hoping to have our Assistant City Manager on the call and am coordinating with his schedule. Thursday is pretty tight except for a 30 minutes block at 3:30pm. There is also availability tomorrow at 9:30 a.m. or 2pm if that works for you. Let me know. Thanks! Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org From: tom.habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:18 AM  To: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up    Sure thing. How about Thursday? My schedule is open almost all day        Sent from my T‐Mobile 4G LTE Device    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: "Carloni, Marcus" <mcarloni@slocity.org>   Date: 10/17/17 9:05 AM (GMT‐08:00)   To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>   Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,     Do you have availability this week to discuss MBCP and the City of San Luis Obispo? We’re scheduled for a study session with our City Council in December. Chris has filled me in on the possibility of joining MBCP and it would be great to talk specifics. Thank you for your time!   252   Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 6:05 AM  To: Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us>  Cc: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Chris and Marcus  I can't emphasize enough the need to expedite your effort. Both bills that we fought at the end of the last legislative  session are coming back early on in 2018 session (I'm told in February) and that will make things harder for new CCA. I'll  be glad to help in anyway to make your case to your decision makers, just ask.  Best        On Oct 10, 2017 10:05 PM, "Chris Read" <cread@co.slo.ca.us> wrote:  Hello Tom,     Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.     In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.     253 Best,     Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us     254 Hicks, Bailey From:tom.habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:18 AM To:Carloni, Marcus Subject:RE: CCA Meeting Follow-Up Sure thing. How about Thursday? My schedule is open almost all day        Sent from my T‐Mobile 4G LTE Device    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: "Carloni, Marcus" <mcarloni@slocity.org>   Date: 10/17/17 9:05 AM (GMT‐08:00)   To: Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org>   Subject: RE: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     Hi Tom,     Do you have availability this week to discuss MBCP and the City of San Luis Obispo? We’re scheduled for a study session with our City Council in December. Chris has filled me in on the possibility of joining MBCP and it would be great to talk specifics. Thank you for your time!     Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org  From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 6:05 AM  To: Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us>  Cc: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up     255 Hi Chris and Marcus  I can't emphasize enough the need to expedite your effort. Both bills that we fought at the end of the last legislative  session are coming back early on in 2018 session (I'm told in February) and that will make things harder for new CCA. I'll  be glad to help in anyway to make your case to your decision makers, just ask.  Best        On Oct 10, 2017 10:05 PM, "Chris Read" <cread@co.slo.ca.us> wrote:  Hello Tom,     Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.     In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.     Best,     Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us     256 Hicks, Bailey From:Carloni, Marcus Sent:Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:06 AM To:Tom Habashi Subject:RE: CCA Meeting Follow-Up Hi Tom, Do you have availability this week to discuss MBCP and the City of San Luis Obispo? We’re scheduled for a study session with our City Council in December. Chris has filled me in on the possibility of joining MBCP and it would be great to talk specifics. Thank you for your time! Marcus Carloni Sustainability Coordinator City Administration 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E mcarloni@slocity.org T 805.781.7151 slocity.org From: Tom Habashi [mailto:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org]   Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 6:05 AM  To: Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us>  Cc: Carloni, Marcus <mcarloni@slocity.org>  Subject: Re: CCA Meeting Follow‐Up    Hi Chris and Marcus  I can't emphasize enough the need to expedite your effort. Both bills that we fought at the end of the last legislative  session are coming back early on in 2018 session (I'm told in February) and that will make things harder for new CCA. I'll  be glad to help in anyway to make your case to your decision makers, just ask.  Best      On Oct 10, 2017 10:05 PM, "Chris Read" <cread@co.slo.ca.us> wrote:  Hello Tom,    Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.    257 In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.    Best,    Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us    258 Hicks, Bailey From:Tom Habashi <tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org> Sent:Wednesday, October 11, 2017 6:05 AM To:Chris Read Cc:Carloni, Marcus Subject:Re: CCA Meeting Follow-Up Hi Chris and Marcus  I can't emphasize enough the need to expedite your effort. Both bills that we fought at the end of the last legislative  session are coming back early on in 2018 session (I'm told in February) and that will make things harder for new CCA. I'll  be glad to help in anyway to make your case to your decision makers, just ask.  Best      On Oct 10, 2017 10:05 PM, "Chris Read" <cread@co.slo.ca.us> wrote:  Hello Tom,    Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.    In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.    Best,    Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us    259 Hicks, Bailey From:Chris Read <cread@co.slo.ca.us> Sent:Tuesday, October 10, 2017 10:05 PM To:tom.habashi@mbcommunitypower.org Cc:Carloni, Marcus Subject:CCA Meeting Follow-Up Hello Tom,    Hope you are well. We are preparing to present the MBCP option to our admin office on October 24. Your  input from our previous calls have been immensely helpful thus far; we will be sure to keep you up to date as  we learn more.    In a related note, Marcus Carloni (City of San Luis Obispo's Sustainability Coordinator) is managing his  jurisdiction's CCA efforts. I shared our notes with him and cc'd him on this email in case he had any additional  questions for you.    Best,    Chris Read  County of San Luis Obispo  Phone: 805.781.1172  Email: cread@co.slo.ca.us