HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8.3 EnergyMeasuresCITY CLERK FILE # 1020-50
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2001
SUBJECT:
Proposed Energy-Related Projects; Request from State of California
for Additional Conservation Measures
Report Prepared by: Lee S. Thompson, Public }Forks Director
ATTACHMENTS:
1)
2)
3)
Detail Showing Energy Usage in City Facilities
Request from State of California and League of California
Cities, with Pledge Form
Budget Change Form
RECOMMENDATION:
1)
2)
Receive report and provide direction regarding Capital
Improvement Projects for the following:
a) Replacement of emergency generator
b) Lighting retrofit
c) Replacement of Civic Center HVAC (heat, ventilation,
and air conditioning) units
Authorize Mayor to execute pledge form for 15% reduction
Approve budget change form
Provide any other direction as desired.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: Following are the estimated costs of the proposed projects:
INTERNAL
GENERAL SERVICE TOTAL POTENTIAL PAYBACK
PROJECT FUND COST FUND COST REBATE PERIOD
AVAH~ABLE
Emergency Generator $132,950' $68,750 $201,700 N/A N/A
Lighting Retrofit $46,360 N/A $46,360 $12,050 1.36 years
HVAC Renovation $979,000 $121,000 $1~100,000 *$141,568 12-13 years
without rebate
$1,158,310 $189,750 $1,348,060
*Rebate for HVAC renovation is not guaranteed at this time.
$750,000 has been reserved in the 2001-2002 budget to fund potential energy improvement projects. As
noted above, the Internal Service Fund could provide $121,000 for HVAC related replacements and
$68,750 for generator-related replacements; these amounts are not currently budgeted. The specific cost
information for each project is included in the Description below. The emergency generator and lighting
retrofit could be accomplished within the currently budgeted $750,000; an additional appropriation from
g:~agenmisc\powerranger
COPIES TO:
ITEM NO.
General Fund reserves in the amount of $408,310, as well as the $189,750 from the Internal Service Fund
would be needed to go ahead with all three of the projects in 2001-02.
DESCRIPTION: Staff has reviewed two aspects of the power emergency, provision
of backup power and the need for ongoing conservation.
Outages and Emergency Power
City facilkies are currently not exempt from rolling blackouts, as the facilities which had backup power
available were taken off the exempt list. Staff has applied to the California Public Utilities Commission
(CPUC) to have the exemption reinstated but has not received a response to date. Reinstatement of the
exemption may have some bearing on decisions regarding emergency power; however, it is important to
note that several outages have occurred recently that have occurred from PG&E malfunctions and not
'rolling blackouts.
Civic Center Generator
The emergency generator currently installed at the Civic Center was specified with the idea that only
certain building components would operate during a power failure. At the present time, the emergency
generator powers the telephone system, selected circuits for lights and computers, the EOC, and the
lunchroom of the Police Wing. The number of items on the emergency circuits has been increased since
the building was originally constructed, but the existing unit is not capable of powering the entire building
including HVAC systems. The concern is that heat and lack of ventilation during a power outage might
cause working conditions to degrade to the point that the City Offices would need to be closed.
A load study was performed to determine the generator capacity needed to power the entire building. The
demand is currently somewhat over 400 amps. Staff recommends obtaining a generator capable of
providing 800 amps to avoid having to replace it in the future when the building is expanded. These units
have a very long life span, and the generator would be available for years to come as backup power during
any emergency situation involving a power failure.
The estimated costs invOlved in purchase and installation of an 800 amp generator are as follows:
Generator and transfer switch:
Associated improvements including
modification of enclosure, connections to
diesel tank and main electrical panel:
Design, inspection, project administration:
Legal notice and miscellaneous:
Total estimated cost:
$151,200
$ 40,000
$ 10,000
$ 500
$201,700
Staff investigated the possibility of "trading in" the existing generator and was advised that the supplier
does not take trade-ins. The unit could therefore be declared surplus and sold or could be retained with
the idea of using it at another facility; however, there would be some capital cost associated with the
relocation since none of the other facilities have fuel tanks.
The Internal Service Fund could pay $68,750 of the cost of this improvement; the balance of $132,950
would have to be paid by the General Fund.
Page 2
Since the potential for rolling blackouts still exists, and since there are other sources of power failures that
could affect City operations, Staff recommends going ahead with the generator replacement as soon as
possible. Staff would also look into utilizing the existing generator at another facility and advise the City
Council at a later date if this seems feasible or desirable.
Battery Backup for Computers
As part of the effort to remain operational during blackouts, Staff obtained a total of 13 LIPS
(uninterruptible power source) units for computers in 2000-01 and included funds for approximately 20
additional units in the operating budget for 2001-02. The UPS units will provide two to four hours of
backup power for "essential" computers, including the permit system, cash registers, finance and clerical
personnel, and the servers that did not already have backup power.
Energy Conservation
Energy Conservation Pledge
In January of 2001, iche State of California asked California's public agencies for a voluntary 7%
reduction in energy usage. Attachment 1 indicates, as much as possible, a comparison of energy usage
between May of 2000 and May of 2001. New facilities such as Emerald Glen Park, as well as facilities on
a fixed rate such as street lighting, have not been included in the comparison. For the month of May, the
reduction in usage is at about 5%, largely as a result of installing the green LED traffic signal modules.
Attachment 2 is a letter from Governor Gray Davis which thanks the public agencies for efforts to date
and requests that each agency pledge to implement programs which will reduce energy usage by a total of
15%. Based on the May 2000 usage, this would be a total reduction of about 36,500 kilowatt hours per
month (438,000 per year), or about 24,500 per month (294,000 per year) additional over and above what
has already been achieved. While all efforts help, this difference cannot be achieved by turning off lights
and office machines but would require projects to retrofit facilities so that less power is used. Two
projects are recommended in the following section of the report.
The Governor's request also includes public outreach efforts. To date, Staffhas been working with the
Cities of San Ramon, Pleasanton, and Livermore toward distribution of materials from the "Watt's Going
on in California" program (Item 5 of the letter). Police Services has sent requests to 56 local businesses
for compliance with Executive Order D-19-01 (reduction of unnecessary lighting) and received 100%
compliance. The City's video newsletter, which should be released shortly, includes a segment on energy
conservation.
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute the pledge on behalf of the City
and to provide any direction regarding other potential activities as desired.
Cost of Power
The new PG&E surcharge that was instituted as of June l~t is significant. For the Civic Center and other
facilities that operate on a "time of use" (TOU) rate, the surcharge is higher during peak periods than off-
peak periods. The highest charges occur on weekdays from noon to 6 p.m., when the surcharge is slightly
over 10¢ per kilowatt hour. Staffhas not received a bill yet which includes an entire month with the
surcharge, but it may be as much as $9,000 during the summer months when air conditioning use is
highest. The monthly summer bill for the Civic Center would then exceed $20,000. Not only in the
Page 3
interest of conserving energy, but also to reduce the City's energy cost, conservation projects and efforts
should be seriously considered.
Lighting Retrofit:
A study was recently performed on three buildings, the Civic Center, Shannon Community Center, and
Fire Station, to determine the feasibility of retrofitting the lighting systems for energy conservation. The
study considered the cost of the material, available rebates from PG&E, and the length of the payback
period from savings on power bills. The results are as follows:
Civic Center Shannon Center Fire Station Total
Material & Labor Cost $25,500 $11,660 $4,700 $41,860
Project Administration $3,000 $1,000 $500 $4,500
Total: $28,500 $12,600 $5,200 $46,360
Estimated Rebate: ($6,800) ($3,600) ($1,650) ($12,050)
Net Cost: $21, 700 $9000 $3,550 $34,310
Est. Annual Energy Savings $9,100 $6,900 $5,000 $18,150
Est. Annual Maint. Savings $2,570 $800 $900 $4,270
Total Est. Annual Savings: $11,670 $7,700 $5,900 $25,270
Estimated Payback Period 1.86 years 1.17 years 0.6 years (avg.) 1.36 years
The associated annual savings in kilowatt hours is estimated at about 33,000, which would achieve about
a 1% decrease City-wide. Estimated material and labor cost includes recycling and hazardous waste
disposal cost. Calculations are based on typical hours of operation and the electric rates that were in
effect prior to the June 1 increase. Based on the current new surcharge, the payback period may be
shorter. Staff recommends that the lighting retrofit be included as a conservation project; the initial cost is
relatively low and the results are instantaneous.
Civic Center HVAC Retrofit
The HVAC system at the Civic Center was installed when the building was constructed. These units do
not have economizers (which'allow use of outside air for free cooling) and are relatively inefficient. With
the exception of the thermostat for the Council Chambers, the thermostats are not programmable, and the
units run 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Load calculations performed by the City's electrical/mechanical
consultant indicate that a considerable portion of the energy consumption at the Civic Center results from
the HVAC system In addition, in spite of regular preventive maintenance and changing air filters, the
units are 12 years old and are now requiring some expensive repairs such as compressor and control board
replacements, and there is an associated discomfort factor that occurs when the units break down.
The HVAC feasibility study performed by the City's consultant indicates that more efficient units of the
same type are available. It is important to note that using newer units of the same type would achieve
energy savings without requiring modifications to the roof, while units with a different footprint might
require different roof penetrations and mountings, compromising the new foam roof. The recommended
units, with economizers, are anticipated to be about 25 to 30% more efficient than the existing units.
The retrofit discussed in the feasibility study also includes modifications to the ducting system to improve
control of air flow in the building and installation of an Energy Management System (EMS) which would
Page 4
allow computerized control of the system. The most significant benefit of the EMS would be the ability
to shut units down at night and on the weekend; however, the system, would also provide, information on
the status of units and controls, which would be useful for maintenance.
The cost of the complete HVAC retrofit as described above is significant and breaks down as follows:
Replacement of 10 HVAC units:
Ducting modification:
Energy management system:
15% contingency
Construction cost:
Preparation of plans & specifications:
Project administration and inspection
Legal notices and miscellaneous:
$579,000
$109,000
$220,000
$908,000
$136,200
$1,044,200
$ 25,000
$ 25,000
$ 2,000
Total:
$1,096,200, say$1,100,000
It may be possible to obtain a rebate from PG&E through its SPC (Standard Performance Contract)
program. The funds for the program for calendar year 2001 have been exhausted, but it is expected that
there will be a new program beginning in January of 2002. Based on current rebate information, the
rebate for the anticipated energy savings would be $141,568. 'This type of rebate must be approved prior
to beginning any work on the project. The City can apply for the rebate now; if approved, the application
would be put on a waiting list until additional funds become available.
The energy cost savings from the retrofit as described above, including new units, economizer, EMS, and
reducing hours of operation to 12 hours per day, 6 days per week, is estimated to be 77%. Most of the
units could probably operate shorter hours, but at least one or two of the Police Wing units would have to
continue to run 24 hours a day, and the Administrative Wing hours would depend on rental schedules.
The energy cost reduction, which was calculated using PG&E's software, is estimated at $82,000; the
payback would be 12 to 13 years without the rebate or about 11 years with the rebate. With the new
surcharges, the cost reduction may be higher and the payback period shorter. Depending on the actual run
schedule and outside factors such as weather, the associated savings in kilowatt hours would be 500,000
to 700,000 over the course of a year. Even at the Iow end of the savings estimate, this would more than
achieve the 15% reduction as requested by Governor Davis; coupled with the 5% already achieved, the
total anticipated reduction in City-wide usage would be about 22%.
If the retrofit, with EMS, is accomplished, Staff would be.able to re-evaluate the Time Of Use rate and
determine whether a conventional commercial rate would be more appropriate and cost-effective.
It is possible to obtain the EMS separately to install with the existing units; however, there would be an
additional capital cost of about $500,000 to upgrade the existing units to work with the EMS. Since the
existing units would need to be replaced soon anyway, Stafftherefore does not recommend considering
this option.
The Internal Service Fund currently has a balance of $121,000 available for HVAC replacement; the cost
to the General Fund for this renovation would be $979,000. This amount exceeds the funds set aside in
the 2001-02 budget, and an additional appropriation would be needed to proceed with construction of the
project in the current fiscal year. Based on the service calls incurred on the existing units, as well as the
significant reduction in energy usage, Staffwould recommend going ahead with the project.
Page 5
Other Conservation Activities
As noted above, Staffhas already taken steps to reduce the use of lighting, computers, and other business
machines as much as possible without affecting the operation of the City offices. The shades on the
courtyard windows are closed on hot days to reduce heat transfer from outside. The new foam roof which
was installed over the past two years has increased the R value (insulation) for the roof and provides some
reduction in energy use. Because of other changes which have occurred in the building during the same
time period and changes in climatic conditions between 2000 and 2001, it is difficult to determine
whether any reductions in energy usage have occurred as a result of these actions. Without undertaking
some of the improvements described above, the savings will not be significant.
Staff has also considered the potential savings of closing the City offices every other Friday, similar to
action taken by DSRSD and some other jurisdictions. Until the HVAC renovation is accomplished so that
the HVAC systems can be shut down, very little savings would be achieved by closing the building.
Once the project has been completed, and conservativelY assuming that the daily operating usage drops
from about 3,600 kilowatt hours to 1,400 (60% reduction) the savings achieved by closing 26 Fridays per
year would be about 36,400 kilowatt hours. Staffwould recommend deferring any decisions on closing
the City offices until after the HVAC renovation has been completed.
Staff recommends that the City Council review the proposed projects and determine which, if any, to
undertake in 2001-02. Staff would recommend approval of all three proposed projects. An additional
appropriation is required if the City Council wishes to proceed with the HVAC renovation. Staff
additionally recommends that the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign the conservation pledge on
behalf of the City.
Page 6
CITY FACILITIES ENERGY USAGE COMPARISON MAY 2000 VS. MAY 2001
(Usage is based on the most recent bill available for the facility)
FACIUTy KWH USAGE IN MAY 2000 KWH USAGE IN MAY 2001 COMMENTS
BUILDINGS
Civic Center 104,640 108,960
Shannon Center 11,320 8,480
Fire Station (Donohue Drive) 6,320 5,280
Corporation Yard 378 395
Hedtage Center 355 518
Swim Center N/A N/A Not included - was closed in 2000 due to renovation
Senior Center N/A N/A Not included - billing is through School Distdct
0.5% increase overall. Civic increase may be dueto
Total Buildings: 123,013 123,633 e~pansion project, additional staff.
PARKS
Alamo Creek Park 1,964 2,587
Stagecoach Park 130 130 Unmetered service
Kolb Park 448 873 Includes lighting
Dublin Sports Grounds #1 116 87
Dublin Sports Grounds #2 4,480 4,800 Includes stadium lighting
Dolan Park 384 1,010
Mape Park 355 321
Emerald Gle~ Park N/A N/A Not included - was not in service in 2000
25% increase; may be due to warmer weather and
Total Parks 7,877 9,808 increased usage by public
STREET IRRIGATION 2,000 2,000 Unmetered, fixed usege.
STREET LIGHTING 81,688 81,688 Unmetered, fixed usage.
TRAFFIC SIGNALS
Village Parkway/Amador Viy 898 ' 688
Amador Valley/Regional 720 477
Amador Valley/Donohue 718 463
Amador Valley/Amador Plaza 538 235
Dublin Blvd./Village Pkwy. 1,903 757
Village Parkway/Lewis Ave. 575 264
Amador Valley/Stagecoach 590 265
Dublin Blvd./San Ramon Rd. 1,530 1,047
Amador Valley/San Ramon Rd. 615 258
Dublin Blvd./Ragional 1,160 558
San Ramon Rd./Shannon Ave. 614 281
San Ramon Rd.A/omac Road 614 247
Dublin Blvd./Dublin Ct. 660 255
Dublin Blvd./DeMarcus Blvd. 1,111 424
Dublin Blvd./Iron Horse Pkwy. 954 458
Dublin Blvd./Dougherty Road 1,764 1,133
Dougherty Road/Sierra Lane 1,183 355
Dublin Blvd./Sierra Court 854 296
Amador Valley BI./DougherbjRd. 797 334
Dublin Blvd./Hibernia Dr. 1,157 624
Hacienda BI./Hacienda Cross. 1,156 893
Hacienda Bl./Central Pkwy. 917 352
Dublin Blvd./Myrtle Drive 1,158 626
Dublin Blvd./Hacienda Drive 1,085 596
Dougherty Road/Scarlett Ddve 811 221
Dublin BIvdJClark Ave. 706 279
Dublin Blvd./Amador Plaza 1,210 632
Dublin Blvd./Golden Gate Dr. 1,113 473
San Ramon Rd./Silvergate 477 155
Dublin Blvd./Tassajara Road 998 297
51% decrease for intersections that were existing one year
ago. There are 11 intersections with less than one year of
history; all of them have achieved similar savings from the
Total Signals: 28,586 13,943 LED retrofit. ·
5% decrease overall, not considering the addition of new
TOTAL CITY: 243,164 231,072 facilities.
June 22, 2001
TO: Mayors and City Managers
Chairs, County Boards of Supervisors and County Administrative Officers
F~residents and'General Managers, Special Districts
RE: Energy Conservation Pledge
The State of California, the League of California Cities, the California State Association of
Counties (CSAC), and the California Special Districts Association (CSDA) are writing to all
California cities, counties and special districts to thank you for your previous energy
conservation efforts and to ask for your continued cooperation in implementing energy
conservation and efficiency measures in your government facilities and in your communities.
First, we wish to thank all local governments that have already taken actions to reduce
energy use, especially those who responded to the call this January to cut use by 7%. Your
efforts resulted in substantial reductions in electricity use and assisted the State in making it
through the difficult winter and spring months. We applaud your efforts.
In response to the severe energy shortage facing California in the coming months, we are
now encouraging all local governments to take the next steps and increase energy .
conservation efforts. Therefore, we encourage each jurisdiction to pledge to implement
programs in local government buildings and facilities, the goal of which is to achieve
up to a 15% reduction in electricity use over last year.
In making this request, we recognize that because of the unique nature of the services
provided by cities, counties and special districts, such as 24/7 public safety operations, water
and wastewater systems and recreational opportunities for their citizens, it may not be
possible for all jurisdictions to reach the 15% goal. Nevertheless, we ask all cities, counties
and special districts to do their best. California as a whole is currently conserving energy by
10% over last year (adjusted for weather and population), and the State government has
already cut energy use by 25% in its major office buildings. Additionally, businesses and non-
profits throughout California are signing a Declaration of Action to conserve energy by 20%.
We ask that each jurisdiction sign and return the attached pledge to implement programs to
further reduce energy consumption. We recognize that in the last few years, cities, counties
and special districts have already retrofitted government buildings with energy efficient
equipment, or built new, energy efficient facilities. For local government buildings, the new
energy reduction goal would take such past actions into consideration, as discussed in (2)
below. In addition, we recognize that many local gOvernments this year have already
changed operating hours, dimmed or removed interior lights, shut off computers and
changed outdoor lighting systems in order to achieve the previously requested 7%. Any
further reduction would include these actions and not be in addition to them.
By signing the attached pledge, cities, counties and special districts would agree to
implement programs to reduce electricity use in local major government buildings and
facilities by up to 15% over last year, and to cooperate with the State by taking the following
actions.
'Appoint an energy coordinator to communicate with the State and to
coordinate energy efficiency and conservation actions in your facilities. If. you
have not already done so, we ask each local government to immediately appoint an
energy coordinator to serve as the primary point person for communication with the
State, the League, CSAC, and the CSDA on energy matters and to coordinate energy
saving actions within the local government and in the community. The attached
Energy Coordinator form includes details on how to register the coordinator via email
or fax so that they can receive further information. This will include details on how to
use the ENERGY STAR® tools and resources for buildings described below, how to
obtain historic consumption data from investor owned utilities, a template of energy
efficiency and conservation programs, and policy options that may be implemented at
the local level.
Evaluate the energy performance of local government office buildings-u~-~g the
ENERGY STAR performance rating system and encourage local businesses to do
the same, ENERGY STAR provides an online rating tool tha~ will calculate energy use
in a building or a group of buildings, providing a baseline against which to measure
the effects of additional energy efficiency improvements. It will enable you to compare
the energy use in local government office buildings and therefore determine which
ones should be targeted for energy efficiency upgrades. The rating will also identify
buildings already performing at a high efficiency level due to recent upgrades or
energy efficient construction. Local governments can then develop an action plan to
implement short- and long-term energy efficiency improvements that can then be
documented with the rating tool. There are significant financial savings and financial
assistance available for government and commercial building energy efficiency
measures. More information on ENERGY STAR tools and resources and instructional
materials on the performance rating system will be sent directly to the local energy
coordinator once he or she is registered.
While the ENERGY STAR rating tool only targets office buildings, we recognize that
many local governments can and have reduced energy use in facilities other than
office buildings, such as street and park lights, traffic signals, and water and
wastewater systems. Obviously, such reductions should be included in calculating
your jurisdiction's progress towards achieving the 15% goal.
Undertake conservation measures in local government buildings and
encourage energy conservation in the commercial sector, The State has
developed an energy conservation package for office buildings which has been
adopted by the Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA) and the janitor
and operating engineer unions that service, with BOMA, over 600,000,000 square
feet of office space. The program outlines energy conservation measures that can be
taken in buildings by changing operations and behavior. To build upon existing
conservation activities in local government buildings, we encourage local
governments to adopt these measures and also ask that you encourage commercial
office buildings in your jurisdictions to do the same. More information on this package
will be sent directly to the local energy coordinator.
4. Support outreach by community-based organizations and non-profit groups.
We ask that local governments work with community-based organizations (CBOs)
that have committed to educate their members and the general public on ways to
conserve energy. CBOs across the state, including the League of Women Voters, the
Council of Churches,.the AARP, and the full range of environmental and community
groups are asking people to pledge to save energy. Many groups are working with
the California and local Conservation Corps, utilities, and others to walk
neighborhoods with home energy conservation materials and free compact
fluorescent light bulbs. Other groups are working with small businesses to assist them
in cutting energy use. Information about these programs will be made available to
energy coordinators.
Conduct a public education campaign by utilizing the "Watt's" Going on
California? Energy Information Toolkit and other materials. We ask that local
governments distribute energy conservation and efficiency messages and information
to government employees and to the public in mailers, newsletters, and other
materials, as appropriate. The "Watt's" Going On California? Toolkit that has been
sent to cities and counties, by the League of Cities, CSAC, the California Park and
Recreation Society and the Local Government Commission contains valuable public
education suggestions. This Toolkit can be downloaded from the both the League of
California Cities and CSAC websites (www. cacities, org and www. counties, org) for
those who wish additional copies.
Develop and implement a community assistance plan. We ask that local
governments work with the State, community-based organizations, and each other to
coordinate their response to the possibility of blackouts this summer. This response
should target the elderly, at-risk residents, and businesses that are adversely affected
by power outages. Information about the State's new blackout notification system and
resources available to develop and implement these plans will be available from the
State.
AttaChed to this letter are: (1) an Energy Conservation Pledge form for your jurisdiction to
complete and return; and (2) an Energy Conservation and Efficiency Coordinator
identification form to complete and return. This letter and forms are. also available on the
League; CSAC and CSDA websites. For more information about the overall program or the
information requested, please contact the Flex Your Power office at.916-651-9121. Other
information may be obtained from the League, CSAC or CSDA staff.
We urge your jurisdiction to complete and return these forms as soon as possible so that we
may all continue our efforts to reduce California's energy consumption. On behalf of the
citizens of California, we thank you for your past efforts and hope that you will join with your
State and local government colleagues and participate in this crucial undertaking.
Sincerely,
Gray Davis, Governor
State of Cal~(pia
Gary F/eeman, Supervisor
Glenn County;
President, California State
Association of Counties
David Fleming, Mayor, Vacaville__ .~
President, League of California Citings
Ch e~~s Bee~y, Ph.D, Contra Costa
Mosquito & Vector Control District;
President, California Special
Districts Association
CityCountySpecDistrictLetter. doc
League of California Cities
California State Association of Counties
California Special Districts Association
ENERGY CONSERVATION PLEDGE
WE, [insert jurisdiction name] in California
CONCERNED about the severe economic and social impacts of rolling blackouts;
AWARE of the need for immediate action by all electricity users to conserve power,
especially during the difficult summer months ahead;
MINDFUL of the role of the local government in demonstrating leadership and coordinating
community involvement;
DO HEREBY COMMIT OURSELVES to the following course of action:
We voluntarily pledge to implement programs in our government buildings and
facilities to reduce our electricity use by up to15% from last year's usage;
We will take action to encourage energy efficiency and conservation throughout
our communities and jurisdictions.
WE ARE CONVINCED that by taking the initiative and working together in this manner, we
can make a significant contribution to helping California during this energy crisis.
On behalf of my local government, I support the Energy Conservation Pledge:
Name
Title
City, County, Special District
Address
Number of Employees Population Served
Telephone Fax
Email
PLEASE COMPLETE AND EMAIL OR FAX TO THE LEAGUE, CSAC OR CSDA, AS
APPROPRIATE:
League: Email: FergusA@cacities.org; Fax: 916-658-8240 (Attn: A. Ferguson)
CSAC: Email: JVoorhis@counties.org; Fax: 916-441-5507 (Attn: J. Voorhis)
CSDA Email: casmith@csda.net; Fax: 916-442-7889 (Attn: C. Smith)
NOTE:
THIS FORM IS AVAILABLE ON THE LEAGUE, CSAC AND CSDA WEBSITES.
. .CITY OF DUBLIN
BUDGET CHANGE FORM
New Appropriations (City Council Approval Required):
X From Unappropriated Reserves
(If Other than General Fund, Fund No -8:32
X From New Revenues
CHANGE FORM #
Budget Transfers: -
From Budgeted Contingent Reserve (1080-799.000)
Within Same Department Activity
Between Departments (City Council Approval Required)
X Other From energy project reserves
; I)I~,~E B~G~T ~CCOUNT ~ AMOUNT INCREASE BUDGET AccOUNT AMOUNT
.Name: Name: Energy Project CIP
Building ISF
Improvements $189,750
Account #: Account #: 832.93935.750.050
Name: Name: Energy Project CIP
GF Improvements
Account #: 001.93935.750.050 $1,106,010
Account #:
Name: Name: Energy Project CIP
GF Contract Services
Account #: 001.93935.740.000 $50,000
Account #:
Name: Name: Energy Project CIP
GF Legal Notices $300
Account #: 001.93935.728.000
Account #:
Name: Name: Energy Project CIP
GF Printing $2,000
Account #: 001.93935.716.000
Account #:
Name: 'Name: REVENUE GF Reimb. Other
$12,050
Account #: 001.570.005
Account #:
City Manager:
ASD/Fin Mgr
Date:
Signature
Signature
REASON FOR BUDGET CHANGE 'ENTRY: Funding for recommended energy projects. Utilizes $750,000
previously set aside for energy projects. Budgeted revenUes have been increased to reflect anticipated rebate
from PG&E for lighting ($12,050) but does not include the potential rebate for HVAC at this time since the
rebate is not Certain:
Mawr:
Date:
Signature
Posted By: Date:
Signature
:KIt polsod
o~nl~u~!s
-~IAI u!~OSV
(po .~nb~kI It~aosddv IpUnOO fa!D) sluomlmdoo
XlB.noV luoummIoo oures u.aIl!A~
(000'66L-080I) OA~OSO'tt lUO~U.tlUOo palo~pn[t mona
$0nlloA0~[ ~0N mo.L~I X
~£8- oM pun,~I 'pun~I rg.~ou~'3 ueql Jaqlo
so~oso~ pole.udoxldeufl mo~ X
# IAlltO~I ~I~)lqVltD
:~ajsu~J& la~pn~l :(po .x~nba~t [e~mddv ~otmoo Al.rD) suo!le.udoJddv
laI~lOd ~IDNVHD
'hllrUtllO AO A.LID