HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/09/2025 - ENERGY BOARD - AGENDA - Regular Meeting
ENERGY BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
January 9, 2025 – 5:30 pm
222 Laporte Ave – Colorado Room
Zoom – See Link Below
1. [5:30] CALL MEETING TO ORDER
2. [5:30] PUBLIC COMMENT
3. [5:35] APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 12, 2024 MINUTES
4. [5:45] STAFF REPORTS (15 Min, Discussion)
• Riverside Community Solar Garden Update
Leland Keller, Mechanical Engineer III
5. [6:00] IQAP IMPLEMENTATION SUMMARY (30 Min, Discussion)
Shannon Ash, Affordability Programs Manager
6. [6:30] 2025 PLANNING CALENDAR REVIEW (30 Min, Discussion)
7. [7:00] APPROVE 2024 ANNUAL REPORT (30 Min, Discussion)
8. [7:30] BOARD MEMBER REPORTS (5 min.)
9. [7:35] FUTURE AGENDA REVIEW (5 min.)
10. [7:40] ADJOURNMENT
HOW TO JOIN A TEAMS MEETING WITHOUT A MICROSOFT ACCOUNT:
Participation for this Energy Board Meeting will be in person at 222 Laporte Ave.
You may also join online via Teams, by clicking or copy/pasting this link into your browser:
fcgov.com/energy-board-regular-meeting
Online Public Participation:
The meeting will be available to join beginning at 5:15 pm, January 9, 2025. Participants should try to sign
in prior to the 5:15 pm meeting start time, if possible. For public comments, the Chair will ask participants to
click the “Raise Hand” button to indicate you would like to speak at that time. Staff will moderate the Teams
Meeting to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address the Board or Commission.
To participate:
• Please note: You do not need a Microsoft account or the Teams App to join or participate in the
meeting.
• Use a laptop, computer, or internet-enabled smartphone. (Using earphones with a microphone will
greatly improve your audio).
• You need to have access to the internet.
ENERGY BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
You can join a Teams meeting anytime, from any device, whether or not you have a Teams
account. If you don't have an account, follow these steps to join.
1. Go to the top of the agenda and select: Click here to join the meeting.
2. That'll open a web page, where you'll see two choices: “Continue on this
browser” and “Join on the Teams app”. You do not need to install the Teams app to join
the meeting.
3. If you join the meeting on your browser, Microsoft Edge or Google Chrome will both work.
Your browser may ask if it's okay for Teams to use your mic and camera. When you
select Allow, you should always turn off your mic and/or video once you join the meeting.
4. When you're ready, select Join now.
5. Tip: Join the meeting up to 15 minutes before the meeting start time to test your setup,
troubleshoot, or see how Teams works. Meeting organizers and participants won't be
notified that you've joined the meeting until 15 minutes before the scheduled start time.
ENERGY BOARD
December 12, 2024 – 5:30 pm
222 Laporte Ave – Colorado Room
ROLL CALL
Board Members Present: Thomas Loran, Alan Braslau, Frederick Wegert, Wendell Stainsby, Scott
Canonico, Brian Smith, Jeremy Giovando, Marge Moore
Board Members Absent: OTHERS PRESENT
Staff Members Present: Christie Fredrickson, Brian Tholl, Katherine Bailey, Leland Keller, Michael
Authier, Katie Miller (remote), Yvette Lewis-Molok (remote)
Members of the Public: George Weston, Rick Coen
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
Chairperson Loran called the meeting to order at 5:30 pm.
ANNOUNCEMENTS & AGENDA CHANGES
None.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Rick Coen - RCSG.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
In preparation for the meeting, board members submitted amendments via email for the November 14,
2024, minutes. The minutes were approved as amended.
BUILDING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS COUNCIL WORK SESSION
OVERVIEW
Katherine Bailey, Project Manager, Utilities Customer Connections
Ms. Bailey gave a brief refresher on Building Performance Standards (BPS) for the Board. BPS is a
regulatory efficiency policy that's being proposed to City Council which requires existing commercial and
multifamily buildings to meet energy targets. BPS sets efficiency targets accounting for a building’s
current usage, or energy use intensity (EUI). More efficient buildings may already meet their BPS targets,
and buildings not meeting their target should make behavioral or efficiency changes but can seek
customized solutions for special circumstances.
Staff has been able to reference several case studies and use them as tangible examples within the
community of how the targets have been achieved. For example, a city building (281 N. College Ave.)
was not meeting its targets at the time of their case study, but is meeting them now. When staff asked if
the facility manager if they had followed through with the case study recommendations, he said no, but he
did have the HVAC coils cleaned, which reduced building energy usage by 11.5%.
While BPS can provide a number of environmental health benefits in the community (reduced emissions)
and physical health benefits for building occupants (health, safety, comfort), it can also provide a
ENERGY BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
significant number of economic benefits. Several white paper studies have come out of the EPA (and
other trusted sources) that show that more efficient buildings have higher occupancy and tenant
occupancy, tenant retention, and higher resale value, and it is also associated with economic growth and
competitiveness. Some of these benefits can be hard to quantify locally, but anecdotally people do come
to Fort Collins because we have a reputation for taking care of what we're lucky enough to have and there
is value in that.
Ms. Bailey said that when talking about benefits and costs associated with building performance
standards, it's easy to think building owners pay all the costs and building tenants reap all the benefits,
but it is not that cut and dry. She explained it’s good to think about who the owners and occupants are.
Staff has solid data on building owners (a little under 550 in Fort Collins), but occupants are slightly more
opaque and staff has less of a sense of quantity. Office use and multifamily buildings are the two most
common property types that BPS would cover, making up about 17% of our properties, but that equates
to a larger share in square footage (roughly 45%). Multifamily building owners reported 17,000 bedrooms
within the covered properties and office building owners reported 11,500 workers on the main shift (or just
under 12,000 computers in use each day). Ms. Bailey said the reason she brings this point up is because
it’s important to consider the idea of buildings being community assets; they may only be owned by the
same owner for 5-10 years on average, but they will remain in the community beyond that owner. It is a
benefit to the entire community when we think about investing in them.
Ms. Bailey said staff recognizes they are behind schedule from when they thought they’d be adopting and
implementing BPS because they also recognize the community concern around potential negative
repercussions, which fell into three main categories: inequitable impacts (small buildings or affordable
housing), accuracy of projected impact on all properties, and buildings not having sufficient staff to learn
about and implement requirements.
Ms. Bailey reminded the Board that there are specifically designed alternate pathways for smaller
buildings to be able to achieve their BPS targets, as well as a pathway for under-resourced buildings,
which includes affordable housing and potentially all multifamily housing. While Fort Collins has access to
much more robust data than other jurisdictions [implementing BPS] because of our municipal utility, it is of
course difficult to predict the future and those who work in data know that there is no such thing as 100%
perfect data. Ms. Bailey said it is important to think of the proposed BPS as a framework in which different
levers can be adjusted to affect the impact throughout implementation. Finally, staff understands that not
every building has a skilled facility manager who has a lot of free time to look into what is needed to meet
their building’s BPS requirements. Staff has tried to build out significant resources for education, financial,
and technical support to help out building owners. If these resources are not deemed to be enough, there
are a number of ways to change the framework of BPS, including pushing back the timeline, policy
changes, changing the covered building list (by size, property use, etc.), or by altering the requirements of
BPS.
Building Performance Standards is the most powerful direct action that we can take as a city to reduce
emissions by 20-30. Ms. Bailey displayed a graph charting the community BPS emissions reduction; once
all buildings have met their targets (in 2030) the community is expected to see a 65,000 MCCo2e
annually, which is equivalent to the use of almost 10,000 homes. By 2050 the cumulative projected
savings is 1.5 million MTCO2e (over 227,000 homes). This also demonstrates the impact of moving back
the timeline, and it will be very important to clearly demonstrate the potential impacts to Our Climate
Future goals. Building performance standards has more impact than anything else that we do, including
electrification, but it does enable further electrification through efficiency.
ENERGY BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
Another big concern about BPS is that it's got a big upfront cost associated with it, and then it takes a little
bit longer to see the ROI in terms of energy savings. The total program costs $270 million, including $44
million of administrative costs, which is inclusive a lot of things that are happening already and will
happen whether or not there's a BPS, such as staff salaries, and some efficiency works rebates and
incentives. The projected community cost for the upgrades is $226 million, which is a conservative and
high-end estimate that doesn’t factor in any rebates, incentives, or tax deductions. Taking all that into
consideration, staff is projecting BPS would pay for itself (in terms of the energy costs avoided) by 2038.
By 2050, the community (meaning those buildings who’ve made upgrades) would see $630 million in
energy savings by 2050, equating to a benefit of $2.80 for every $1.00 spent. Ms. Bailey said if the
community feels like the spike is too big and that ROI is too long, does the City need to consider if it is
their responsibility to put more rate payer dollars towards levelling out that initial cost.
Board members wondered if the investment costs are normalized for today’s dollars or the value at the
time of ROI. Mr. Authier said these numbers are not net present value, and he agreed that would be a
valuable point to add.
Ms. Bailey noted that efficiency is actually cheaper than electric rates. Administratively, BPS is a lower
administrative cost than our average cost of conserved energy. The average cost of conserved energy is
$28 per mWh saved, which is 26.7% less than wholesale energy costs; however, BPS costs $12 per
mWh saved. In the community, the BPS cost is $105 per mWh avoided, and the 2024 community electric
rate are $118 per mWh. Additionally, efficiency reduces load in dark calm periods and is cheaper than
new generation; lowering consumption means there is less need for new renewables in the future to meet
and maintain renewable energy goals.
Ms. Bailey added that she would be remiss if she didn't end with a reminder that at the end of the day,
BPS is a climate change mitigation effort. Climate change is exorbitantly expensive, and we know it’s
going to require a global investment to start tackling these issues. Many Americans don’t believe in
climate change, but insurance companies do. The US has spent trillions of dollars on climate disasters,
and we are already seeing huge increases nationwide in insurance costs with more increases projected in
the future. Ms. Bailey displayed a graph of local weather data from the CSU weather station, dated back
to 1900. The plot shows a steady increase in the number of days over 90 degrees by year, which is
Larimer County’s threshold for extreme heat. Extreme heat is associated with more fires and higher
ozone levels which are linked to increased respiratory morbidity. It’s also linked to a significant price tag,
as insurance premiums in Larimer County have increased 37%. Ms. Bailey said there are many ways you
could look at those numbers to evaluate the economic impact on the community, but end story is we're
already paying for this, and it is unlikely to get better.
Board member Canonico asked if there are off-ramps if a building can demonstrate that BPS is not
feasible for them. Ms. Bailey said some of it is more cut and dry, such as the opportunity to add
renewables for EUI credit. There are also wavers, timeline adjustments, or target adjustments. Mr.
Canonico said these options are an area to emphasize if a building owner is putting forth an honest effort.
Board member Smith asked what happens if a building owner doesn’t meet their target. Ms. Bailey said
there has to be a penalty associated with regulatory policy; the general rule of thumb is the penalty has to
be higher than the projected cost of compliance. BPS is not a revenue generating program so the City
does not want to make money off it. Penalties will be assessed in the form of a recurring fine and
enforced through the municipal court system. Recurring fines are attention grabbing, but it also allows for
a cure period. As long as the building owner can show they have a pathway forward, fines will desist, and
owners can submit for a timeline adjustment based on what has been shown so far.
ENERGY BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
Staff will bring BPS back in front of City Council for their final considerations at their January 14 Work
Session. Ms. Bailey encouraged the Board to reach out with any additional feedback or questions for staff
before that date so they can address them or work it into their presentation.
RESIDENTIAL BATTERY STORAGE
Leland Keller, Mechanical Engineer III
Mr. Keller explained how residential battery storage fits within the Our Climate Future plan, which is under
Big Move 12 (100% renewable electricity). Under Big Move 12, everyone in the community receives
affordable and reliable 100% renewable electricity, including from (at least 5%) local sources. Flexible
loads like battery storage, electric vehicles, smart appliances, etc. will help the community hit that 5%
goal.
Mr. Keller displayed a pyramid graphic about strategies for DER management, noting that maximum DER
benefits come from a suite of solutions. He said the research study staff is conducting is exploring how
much participation and how much more of that flexible load could we have access to if we recruited those
customers into a control program that's at the top of the pyramid, which has a higher price associated with
that level of control over the load, but there is more certainty in performance.
There are many battery benefits to residential customers, including carbon footprint reduction, minimizing
on peak purchases, the ability to arbitrage time-of-day rates, the ability to back up essential loads in case
of an outage, future proofing a solar investment, and the energy delivered and received is netted at 15-
minute intervals. Fort Collins Utilities allows charging and discharging to the grid.
Staff conducted a customer survey with the objective to better understand the purchasing decisions and
barriers that customers face when considering battery storage. Staff also wanted to understand more
about how customers operate their equipment, what their satisfaction levels are with the choices they've
made, and how aware are they of the rates and the factors lead to their bills at the end of each month.
Additionally, staff wanted to understand from both battery storage customers as well as solar only
customers, their willingness to participate in a future control program that might provide signals to for
them to respond to with their batteries or take discrete control over their storage assets and discharge
them according to the utilities control.
The study compared two groups of participants, those with solar only and those with both solar and
storage. The study found that when it comes to purchasing decisions, environmental concerns and
reducing energy costs were more important for solar-only customers. Mr. Keller noted that staff was
somewhat surprised to learn that having backup power for outages was the lowest purchase motivator;
some customers observed that outages happen so infrequently in Fort Collins that this benefit has little
value to them. Solar only customers said the primary barrier to adopting batteries is the upfront cost as
well as the associated benefit with the cost in mind. Mr. Keller added that this aligns with what staff has
heard anecdotally and helps to form how staff can think about how this program presents to customers
and how to try and improve participation rates.
When talking to customers who have already invested in battery storage, the study found that most of
them are programming the batteries to minimize their costs. The battery storage incentive program
requires them to program it to operate according to time-of-day rates, or a solar storage mode (as
compared to a back up only mode). With solar storage mode, customers are storing surplus solar to
operate their house through the night, so it would respond to follow the house load after dark in the
minimize costs. In this case, most customers are programming it to the time-of-day rate structure and
ENERGY BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
avoiding purchases during on peak hours. Mr. Tholl added this is an important distinction because these
are all net-metered installations, so staff has little visibility into the battery operation itself. Mr. Keller said
when the survey asked customers about their understanding of our net metering policy, as well as the
rates that govern their bills both for energy they purchase from the grid and energy they return to the grid,
solar and storage customers understood it more frequently than solar only. Less than 50% of customers,
and an average much lower than that, really understand time-of-day rates and what they're being charged
for kilowatt hours they buy and what they're being compensated for and the energy that they return. This
has helped staff see there is an opportunity for education in that area.
Staff also asked these customers about their concerns about Utilities controlling a battery system, asking
solar only customers as a benchmark group to pretend that they had a battery. Solar and storage
customers were a little bit more concerned about not having enough power saved in case of an outage,
but less concerned about the environmental stuff. Customers also expressed concern about higher
energy costs without having visibility or control into when the Utility wants to operate the battery. The
survey also asked if customers would be interested in a program where the Utility would pay you to allow
control the storage system, and many said they would be very interested, noting that existing storage
customers expected a lower annual incentive compared to solar only customers. Some customers don’t
want anyone to control their batteries, mentioning concerns about safety, battery degradation, insufficient
backups, etc.
Next steps for this program are continuing to build battery program participation, research battery
customer load profiles, and evaluate battery capacity for offline control. Staff also plans to do additional
education about rates, policies, and performance, work to ease adoption barriers, and understand
behavioral influence on battery programing (inform, enable, encourage).
Chairperson Loran asked if it is the Utility’s objective to make batteries dispatchable power sources. Mr.
Keller said that is one likely outcome, to recruit battery customers into the City’s pool of flexible resources
in the virtual power plant. They will need to evaluate how much value is received in exchange for all the
dollars paid to be able to push a button and get those stored kilowatt hours. Mr. Loran said he thought,
based on a previous presentation, there was not a cost-effective protocol to make these batteries
dispatchable. Mr. Keller said staff is assuming that challenge will be minimized in the future, and they are
working with Platte River Power Authority as they work to get a DERMs system in place (distributed
energy resource management system), that would both interface with the wholesale market as well as
interface with distributed resources.
Board member Smith commented that the motivation behind individuals installing solar and battery is
economic because they're trying to avoid the time of use pricing, so a control program seems in direct
conflict knowing that the Utility would be dispatching resources and draw down batteries when the rates
are highest. Mr. Keller said it will depend on how the customer sets up their control program, the battery
might only be following the load in their house. Board members wondered if there were other ways to
motivate customers to install, also discussing the possibility of changing the rate structure in the future.
Board member Braslau noticed there are zero customers who are battery only (no solar). He said it is
much more efficient for Utilities to do utility-scale projects when it comes to solar and battery storage, but
it seems the objective of this project is to leverage private capital. He wondered why not have a targeted
program for getting customers to install battery storage that is designed to be controlled, as opposed to
private customer installations where there is no control. He is unsurprised that customers are unwilling to
install and/or participate in a utility-controlled storage system, and believes the Utility is missing the mark.
Mr. Leland said this is an idea that is on the table for Utilities, and one that could hold some appeal in the
ENERGY BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
residential sector as well as in the commercial and industrial sector where customers’ bills are much more
correlated to their peak demand. He added there is an opportunity for Utilities to reach out to C&I
customers and offer to facilitate (not own) onsite storage.
Board member Wegert wondered what, if any, feedback staff has received regarding safety concerns. Mr.
Keller said they have received very little feedback from customers. Mr. Wegert has two brothers who are
firefighters, and he said having a lithium battery in his home is his primary safety concern because of the
fire risk. Mr. Keller agreed and said it is remarkable there isn’t more concern from the market, but then
again there aren’t many widely reported fire incidents being reported.
ENERGY BOARD OFFICERS
Board members discussed leadership roles until the 2025 Officer Election in April. Current Vice
Chairperson Moore said she would be happy to continue serving as Vice Chair or as Chair for the Board,
whatever works best for the Board. Board members discussed who they may like to nominate and what
roles they may like to serve in.
Chairperson Loran nominated Board member Smith to serve as Chairperson of the Energy Board.
Board member Smith accepted the nomination.
Chairperson Loran moved to elect Board member Smith as the next Chairperson of the Energy
Board.
Vice Chairperson Moore seconded the motion.
Discussion:
There is no need to have a second election since Vice Chairperson Moore’s role is not changing.
Vote on the motion: It passed unanimously: 8-0
DRAFT 2024 ANNUAL REPORT
The board reviewed their 2023 annual report so it can serve as an example for the 2024 report. Ms.
Fredrickson will continue adding content to the report up and through tonight’s meeting, and the Board
can edit it up until approval at their January 9 meeting.
BOARD MEMBER REPORTS
Ms. Fredrickson advised Boards and Commission recruitment is open. The Clerk’s office will be
recreating for a of five seats on the Energy Board; however, Chairperson Smith and Vice Chairperson
Moore make up two of those vacancies and need to reapply by (if they wish) by January 10.
Board member Braslau said there are continuing questions and concern coming from the community
about Platte River’s plans to build a natural gas turbine and the financial investment that comes with it.
FUTURE AGENDA REVIEW
In January, the Board will hear an update from Staff about the Riverside Community Solar Garden
repowering project, as well as a presentation on the implementation of the Utility’s Income Qualified
ENERGY BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
Assistance Plan. The Board will also review their planning calendar for 2025 and approve their 2024
Work Plan.
ADJOURNMENT
The Energy Board adjourned at 7:44 pm.
Mechanical Engineer III
Leland Keller
1-9-2025
Energy Board:
Riverside
Community
Solar Repowering
Update
Array and Equipment Orientation
1.Panels absorb sunlight
2. DC electricity
flows through
combiner box
3. DC electricity
converted to AC
at inverter
4. Switchgear /
array disconnect
5. Travels out to
grid through
transformer
Inverter Equipment Failure – 8/20/2023
Utilities staff criteria for repowering
Accelerate timeline for repair to resume owner bill credits
Minimize likelihood of future failure
Minimize financial impact for owners associated with repair
Maximize lifetime of remaining existing equipment
Maximize remaining O&M fund for potential future needs
Repowering Project RFP
6
Phase 1:Design
•New inverter design
•Project management plan
•Design review and acceptance
Phase 2: Procurement & Construction
•Task 1 – Planning/Coordination
•Task 2 –Procurement
•Task 3 –Deconstruction
•Task 4 –Construction
•Task 5 –Commissioning, testing, close out
Phase 1: Proposed Equipment
7
Selected Inverters:
•15-year warranty
•Ginlong-Solis is a BloombergNEF Tier 1 inverter manufacturer and the 3rd largest inverter manufacturer globally
•Model S6-GC50K-US
•10 x 50 kW inverters, paired with each existing DC combiner box
Phase 1: Design
8
•Re-engineered design
minimizes single point of
failure
•Re-establishes
manufacturer warranty
through 2040
•Maximizes production
from existing equipment
Phase 2 Construction Schedule
9
•Still on schedule with Namaste / Utilities collaboration
Current Estimated Schedule
Task Description Sept.October November December January February March
Work Order
1 Planning
2 Procurement
3 Deconstruction
4 Construction
5 Commissioning
Phase 2 Highlights
10
Old Inverter unit removed
Inverter donated to Yampa Valley Electric
Association
"Underground electric" inspection complete
Crews have reclosed all open trenches
Most equipment has been received and
installed, with outstanding equipment on
schedule for January
Phase 2 Highlights
11
Replacing old or damaged unions
Revising DC string combinations for
optimal use of inverter inputs
All inverter stands are installed
All AC disconnects mounted
Inverter mockup shows final configuration
Additional Outcomes in Multiple Dimensions
12
•Operational
•Technical
•Program stability
•Asset risk management, insurance
•City commitment to support
•O&M funding impacts
•Participant Satisfaction – engagement, communication, support
•Riverside Community Solar Owner Advisory Group
•Social / Political / Policy – public perception, OCF
•Regulatory / Financial
Headline Copy Goes HereRiverside Community Solar Owner Advisory Group Issues, Interests
13
Issues
Communication
Project Schedule
Better Risk Management
Benefits & Risk of Array
Array Management
Future Arrays
Interests
Clear, transparent, accurate, timely,widely/
increased visibility
Stays on track, is done right, reenergize
ASAP,aggressively manage schedule
Protected, prepared, this doesn’t happen again
Early adopters, do the right thing, steward public
dollars, contribute to goals, small bill reduction,
outages, cost,effective succession planning and
knowledge mgmt.
Efficient, run like a business, stays energized,
reenergizes quickly if outage,clear R&R,long-term
advisory group presence
Document best practice principles and learnings,
set up next generation,have this be a shining
example of community solar
Next Steps:
14
•Continue with construction and commissioning
•Finalize updates to panel owner Agreement, Program Policies
•Continue engagement with Riverside Community Solar Owner
Advisory Group, all owners generally
Timeline to Repowering Contract
16
Aug.–Sep. 2023
Multiple efforts of discovery
Oct.–Nov. 2023
Repair option evaluation & research
Dec. 2023
Due diligence on purchasing, identifying finance challenges, and potential solutions
Jan.–Feb. 2024
RFP development and funding requests
Mar. 2024
Publish RFP, support funding request in 2050 tax
Apr. 2024
Evaluate proposals, Council Finance Committee, and Council Work Session
May 2024
Vendor selection, interview, contract signing, and Council funding appropriation votes
17
Phase 1 Design - COMPLETED
Utilities staff completed the initial
review of the Phase 1: Design
deliverables from Namaste on
August 23, 2024.
Warranty coverage concerns
resolved Sept. 18.
Utilities issued final approval Sept.
18 closing out Phase 1
Phase 2 Work Order and
Purchase Order completed on
October 9.
Headline Copy Goes HerePhase 2: Construction
•Insurance: complete City umbrella coverage plan, including self-insurance for deductible.
•Cost control measures:
•Light & Power crews to remove the inverter and do the trenching.
•YVEA to take inverter
What we know
•Schedule dependencies on equipment delivery, weather.
•Updating monitoring system requirements.
Emerging Issues
Oct
2024
Nov
2024
Dec
2024
Jan
2025
Feb
2025
Mar
2025
Kickoff
Procure Equipment
Building Permit
Construction Drawings
Planning
Inverter Removal
Open Trenches Install Conduit, Inverter
Mounts
Inspections
Close Trenches
Install Inverters
and AC Combiner
Panels
Commissioning
Testing
Records
Close-out
Headline Copy Goes Here
19
City Project Management
City Leadership:
City Managers Office
Travis Storin
Gretchen Stanford
Brian Tholl
Leland Keller
City Teams:
Purchasing
L&P Engineering
L&P Sitework Mgmt
L&P Trenching
Community Engagement
Communications
Wastewater Site
Legal
Risk Mgmt
IT
Operations Services
Customer Service
Finance
Namaste Solar Electric:
Construction Project
Manager
Engineering
Permitting
Procurement
Construction Management
& Commissioning
Others:
Commissioning Agent
YVEA
Headline Copy Goes Here
Utilities Affordability Programs
Manager
Shannon Ash
Utilities
Affordability
Programs
1-9-25
Headline Copy Goes Here
2
Income Qualified Assistance Program (IQAP)
Fort Collins Utilities partners with
the Colorado Low-income Energy
Assistance Program (LEAP) to provide
income-qualified customers automatic
enrollment into the City’s Income
Qualified Assistance Program (IQAP).
IQAP provides a 25% rate reduction on
electric, water and/or wastewater
utilities.
Customers must apply for LEAP to be
eligible to participate in IQAP, and they
must reapply every year.
The LEAP season is November 1 through
April 30.
Headline Copy Goes Here
3
Income Qualified Assistance Program (IQAP) – alternate entry
•Some customers may not be eligible for LEAP, which means they would not have access
to IQAP
•We have identified two populations of people we are working with to provide alternate
entry into IQAP
Housing choice voucher
holders (heat included in
rent)
Households that may have
non-U.S. citizen members
Work with Housing Catalyst Work with The Family
Center/La Familia
Housing voucher provides
income qualification
Staff verify income based on
self-report
Application submitted to
UAP team
Application submitted to
UAP team
Headline Copy Goes Here
4
IQAP Enrollment
New customers in 2025: 172
Previous customers who have renewed in 2025: 968
Total IQAP25: 1140
Total IQAP customers (including 2024 who have not
renewed yet): 2034
As of November 2024
Headline Copy Goes HerePayment Assistance Fund (PAF)
6
•Residential customers whose electric or
water accounts are past-due may request
assistance from the Payment Assistance
Fund once per 12-month period (Oct. 1 –
Sept. 30).
•Contact a partner agency to apply:
•Goodwill of Colorado
•Catholic Charities
•The Family Center/La Familia
•Neighbor to Neighbor
•CSU (for CSU students and staff only)
•Eligibility Requirements:
•Make 80% or less of Area Median
Income
•Bill is past due
•Eligible to both renters and homeowners
Headline Copy Goes HereUtilities Emergency Fund (UEF)
7
Utilities Emergency Fund (UEF)
New financial assistance program, available as of January 1, 2025!
•Account must be ACTIVE, PAST-DUE RESIDENTIAL account
•No income restrictions –open to anyone with a past-due balance
•Applications can only be completed by Account holder/Co-applicant
•Cannot be a Stormwater or Wastewater only account
•Maximum funding per customer: $500.00
•One-time funding per calendar year
•Can receive PAF funding from partner agencies in same year
Headline Copy Goes HereUtilities Affordability Contact Information
11
If you have any questions about the programs
listed, please reach out!
Shannon Ash
sash@fcgov.com
For general program information:
•https://fcgov.com/uap
•utilitiesaffordability@fcgov.com