So, commercial customers pay only what commercial customers should be paying and residential customers pay only what residential customers should be paying because of the costs are divvied up. This model assumes that all the cost savings are socialized and that those cost savings which are predominantly generated by commercial customers are shared with residential customers. So, its not a good or bad policy, but its just a very different policy than what we get than in the past. So, one of the questions that we have posed to the contractors and also to others who have been involved in the Stakeholder Group is its a very large assumption to assume that private property commercial owners would be willing to or would want to share their savings with residential customers because they could do many of the good things that are being proposed for Energy Efficiency and capture 100 of the savings for themselves or for their tenants. So, absent that, the model is hard to make the numbers work.
That those cost savings which are predominantly generated by commercial customers are shared with residential customers. So, its not a good or bad policy, but its just a very different policy than what we get than in the past. So, one of the questions that we have posed to the contractors and also to others who have been involved in the Stakeholder Group is its a very large assumption to assume that private property commercial owners would be willing to or would want to share their savings with residential customers because they could do many of the good things that are being proposed for Energy Efficiency and capture 100 of the savings for themselves or for their tenants. So, absent that, the model is hard to make the numbers work. And, so, one other assumption, too, i thought i saw in there was the exhetch hetchy power would be used. Are we able to do that . I thought that would be able to be used for residential. At the appropriate time, yes, please answer the question. So, we have
Stakeholder group is its a very large assumption to assume that private property commercial owners would be willing to or would want to share their savings with residential customers because they could do many of the good things that are being proposed for Energy Efficiency and capture 100 of the savings for themselves or for their tenants. So, absent that, the model is hard to make the numbers work. And, so, one other assumption, too, i thought i saw in there was the exhetch hetchy power would be used. Are we able to do that . I thought that would be able to be used for residential. At the appropriate time, yes, please answer the question. So, we have provided a tenyear history of where we have had surplus capacity for hetchy power to the consultants. To the degree there is reliable surplus, we would look at an ability to try to make use of that. The concern is that we have noted and what i believe now a number of the participant, both the participants and stakeholders have, even thou
Lot. The scare you part is that commissioner arce, youre absolutely right. They could set the not to exceed rate next week. They could move forward with a Shell Program and no other program, which as i said is only less than 4 of what we envision. So, but with that said, the reason that advocates have recently voted and said to the sfpuc and to lafco we would like them to proceed with these not to exceed rates is because they are now competitive with pg e. Especially if you compare it to a pg e green rate. And what ms. Malcolm proposed to us tonight are rates that will probably be even more competitive, even competitive with pg es brown power rate. The issue with the shell contract is that whether we like it or not, the local buildout that we all want is no longer tied to the small phase 1 part of the program. Its no longer tied to the shell contract. So, the reality is now that the shell contract is going to have competitive rates if the sfpuc sets competitive rates next week, now tha
Kaiserious concerns. Those are concerns that have nothing to do with the not to exceed rate. They have other program designs and we can continue to have this discussion. You doughthv need a resolution to have that continued discussion. Simply ask the puc staff, i am 100 willing to bet with anyone that ken malcolm and anyone else with the puc would be willing to come back and have those discussions with you here or if you want to have more sitdown meetings one on one with any of you that have questions, we can do all of this. I think what youre about to do is going to seriously harm this program and i would encourage you to volt no on that resolution at this time. Thank you. ~ vote thank you. Next speaker. Well, what a night. Derek burks, San Francisco green party, local Grassroots Organization in our city. So, i want to scare you a little bit and reassure you a lot. The scare you part is that commissioner arce, youre absolutely right. They could set the not to exceed rate next week. Th