HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 02/28/2017 - COMPLETE AGENDACity of Fort Collins Page 1
Wade Troxell, Mayor City Council Chambers
Gerry Horak, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West
Bob Overbeck, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue
Ray Martinez, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado
Gino Campana, District 3
Kristin Stephens, District 4 Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14
Ross Cunniff, District 5 and Channel 881 on the Comcast cable system
Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Wanda Winkelmann
City Attorney City Manager City Clerk
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities
and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (V/TDD: Dial
711 for Relay Colorado) for assistance.
Special Meeting
February 28, 2017
6:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
DISCUSSION
1. Council will consider a motion to adjourn into executive session to discuss legal matters.
ADJOURNMENT
City of Fort Collins Page 1
Wade Troxell, Mayor Council Information Center (CIC)
Gerry Horak, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West
Bob Overbeck, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue
Ray Martinez, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado
Gino Campana, District 3
Kristin Stephens, District 4 Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14
Ross Cunniff, District 5 and Channel 881 on the Comcast cable system
Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Wanda Winkelmann
City Attorney City Manager City Clerk
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities
and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-
6001) for assistance.
City Council Work Session
February 28, 2017
After the Special Council Meeting, which begins at 6:00 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER.
1. Road to 2020 Update. (staff: Lindsay Ex, Jeff Mihelich, Jackie Kozak-Thiel, Amanda King; 15
minute staff presentation; 45 minute discussion)
The purpose of this Work Session is three-fold:
Provide an update on the implementation of the City’s Climate Action goals, including updated
projections from funded initiatives and additional initiatives identified, highlights from funded
initiatives, and future directions for this work;
Focus on the transition from planning to implementation and the associated language, including
branding, the City has developed to increase community engagement to achieve the goals; and
Review the overall next steps, including the process for finalizing the 2020 roadmap and
messaging and engagement strategies around climate action.
2. Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study. (staff: Lance Smith, Randy Reuscher; 15 minute staff
presentation; 45 minute discussion)
The purpose of this item is to present the results of the 12-month residential electric time of use
(TOU) pilot study. The study showed that when compared to the current tiered rate structure both
TOU rate structures reduced energy use by 2.5% and load was shifted from the on peak periods to
the off peak periods, thereby reducing our community’s contribution to the Platte River Power
Authority’s (PRPA) coincident peak. The additional complexity of the tiered TOU rate over the basic
TOU rate did not provide any statistically significant difference from the basic TOU. Based on the
City of Fort Collins Page 2
pilot staff is recommending that Council consider adopting a TOU rate without the tier for all
residential customers.
3. City Foundation Creation. (Nalo Johnson, Mike Beckstead; 10 minute staff presentation; 20 minute
discussion)
The purpose of this item is to provide an update to City Council as to establishing a City of Fort
Collins Foundation (City Fund) through the Community Foundation of Northern Colorado, as advised
by the Council Finance Committee. The update provides an operational recommendation as to how
the City Fund will be implemented and seeks Council input on the planned implementation.
Residents may currently donate directly to the City as well as to city-related non-profits, such as the
Friends of the Gardens on Spring Creek or the Lincoln Center Support League. Creation of the City
Fund offers people another option by which they may donate to the City. The City Fund seeks to
enhance City-related projects and should not be viewed as a replacement for the City budget. The
City Fund will be governed by an Advisory Committee similar to the ways in which Community Fund
Committees are structured at the Community Foundation of Northern Colorado. The City Fund will
be structured as a portfolio of funds to encompass both organic funding needs (project ideas
generated by the Advisory Committee, Council, City staff and/or community members themselves)
and strategic funding needs (projects that are related to a specific City priority or initiative).
OTHER BUSINESS.
ADJOURNMENT.
DATE:
STAFF:
February 28, 2017
Lindsay Ex, Environmental Program Manager
Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager
Jackie Kozak-Thiel, Chief Sustainability Officer
Amanda King, Communications/Public Involvement
Director
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Road to 2020 Update.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this Work Session is three-fold:
Provide an update on the implementation of the City’s Climate Action goals, including updated projections
from funded initiatives and additional initiatives identified, highlights from funded initiatives, and future
directions for this work;
Focus on the transition from planning to implementation and the associated language, including branding, the
City has developed to increase community engagement to achieve the goals; and
Review the overall next steps, including the process for finalizing the 2020 roadmap and messaging and
engagement strategies around climate action.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Does Council have any feedback on the progress made to date?
2. Does Council have any feedback on the branding process?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Background, Successes to Date, and Transition to Implementation
Background: In 2015, Council unanimously adopted updated community greenhouse gas goals:
20% below 2005 levels by 2020,
80% below 2005 by 2030, and
Carbon neutrality by the year 2050.
Successes to Date: Since this adoption, the community has made significant progress toward achieving the 2020
goals. The 2015 inventory illustrated the City is almost halfway to the goals, and per capita emissions are down
by 25% from 2005. Together with the community, Fort Collins is making great strides across every aspect of the
Climate Action Plan, including the following:
Preliminary results for the City’s 2016 efficiency programs show energy savings equivalent to over 3,200
homes in our community (29,000 megawatt-hours) generating in excess of $25 million in local economic
benefits through reduced utility bills, direct rebates and leveraged investment,
Fort Collins businesses are saving more than $9.5M annually from improved efficiencies,
ClimateWise is Fort Collins’ free, voluntary program that offers simple solutions to help businesses reduce
their impact, save money and gain recognition for their achievements in energy and water conservation,
waste reduction, alternative transportation and social responsibility. In 2015, ClimateWise Partners
realized $1,037,000 in annual cost savings by implementing cost-saving strategies to be more efficient
and reduce operating costs,
Increased locally installed solar capacity by more than 500% from 2014 to 2015 and an additional 20%
from 2015 to 2016,
1
Packet Pg. 3
February 28, 2017 Page 2
Partnered with the other Platte River Power Authority member communities to install a 30-megawatt solar
facility, reducing community-wide emissions by approximately 1% overall,
Diverted about 60% of waste from the landfill while exploring ways to turn waste streams into profit
streams,
Doubled transit ridership in less than 10 years (2016 will see more than 4 million trips for the first time
ever) after significantly increasing investment in transit services, including Bus Rapid Transit and public-
private partnerships to support system efficiency and maximize use of taxpayer dollars,
Incorporated technologies designed to monitor and adjust traffic management in real-time to reduce
congestion and emissions, and increase ease of travel by all modes, and
Recognized as one of six Platinum level Bicycle Friendly Communities.
Transitioning from Aspirational to Operational to Implementation: With these incredible accomplishments under
the community’s belt, the organization has begun a systematic transition since the adoption of the updated
climate action goals in both the operations of the plan as well as how climate action is communicated, see the
table below:
Aspirational (2015) Operational (2016) Implementation (2017+)
Operations Adopted the goals
Began to implement
internal structure\
Continued
implementation of
long-established
programs, e.g., FC
Bikes, Efficiency
Works, etc.
Internal structure
formalized
Community
Advisory
Committee
established
Model and
vetting process
refined
Implementing 2017-2018
BFO offers, adopted
policies
Continuous improvement of
modeling, vetting, and
communications
Identification of ways to
scale up or explore new
initiatives to achieve 2020
goals
Alignment with established
policy targets
Communications Climate Action Plan Road to 2020 Proposed:
Climate Action Plan - goals,
framework, planning,
reports
Fortify - specific messages,
campaigns
Each of these aspects (operations and communications) is further described below.
Implementation of the Climate Action Plan - Overall Analysis, Direct and Enabling Initiatives
Overall Analysis: As discussed in 2016, implementing the Climate Action Plan will be an iterative process of
identifying initiatives, vetting those ideas, determining to move forward (or not), and then repeating that process
as new technologies, innovations, and improvements are identified. At the March 2016 Work Session related to
the Road to 2020 (Attachment 1), staff presented Council with 31 initiatives in five strategy areas that had been
initially modeled to create a preliminary roadmap to the 2020 goals. During the August 2016 Work Session
(Attachment 2), staff shared the overall vetting process for the 31 initiatives identified through the initial
February 28, 2017 Page 3
12 of the 31 initiatives were either partially funded or require further vetting or research to move forward as an
initiative. An example is the Biomass Burner, which is proposed to refocus on wood utilization overall to
address the 70,000 ash trees that could be affected by Emerald Ash Borer and present a significant waste
challenge. As the biomass burner was determined to be infeasible in the municipal setting, staff is proposing
to explore other wood utilization options in 2017.
6 of the 31 initiatives have been put on hold due to feasibility concerns or readiness. Examples include the
Construction and Demolition Sorting Facility or the CSU Combined Heat and Power project.
Thus, 25 of the 31 initiatives (the 13 that were fully funded and the 12 that are either partially funded or are still
being explored) remain, and the impact of these initiatives on the 2020 goals is illustrated in the table below. A full
breakdown of the various costs, benefits, and projected impacts of the various initiatives can be found in
Attachment 4.
Emissions
(Metric Tons
CO2e)
Percent Below
2005 Levels
(baseline)
Notes
2005 Baseline 2,351,329 N/A Actuals
2015 Inventory 2,130,023 9% Actuals
2020 Forecast (Business
as Usual)
2,179,000 7% Projections if actions not taken; Does
not include Council investments in
2016, or the 2017-2018 BFO process
2020 Forecast
(Funded/Adopted Initiatives,
154,000 MT)
2,025,000 14% Projections: Assumes the fully and
partially funded initiatives in 2017-
2018 will also be funded in 2019-
2020, e.g., energy efficiency and
community solar
2020 Forecast (All
Initiatives, Additional 79,000
MT)
1,946,000 17% Projections: Assumes the remaining
initiatives are funded or adopted
between now and 2020
2020 Target 1,880,000 20% Projections
Projected Gap to
Achieving the 2020 Target
66,000 3% See notes below regarding ways to
close the projected gap
Key aspects to filling the 3% projected gap:
The 2016 community carbon inventory will be completed in April 2017, and this information will be used to
refine the projections.
The projections are conservative in nature and some funded initiatives, e.g., energy efficiency, are exceeding
initial estimates. For example, the increased funding in 2016 for energy efficiency was projected to provide an
additional 2,500 to 3,000 metric tons of emissions reductions; current data suggest these reductions will be
closer to 4,500 metric tons.
Additional initiatives are continuously being identified and reviewed, including the following:
o Time of Use Rates - considered the same night as this discussion, this pilot conducted by Utilities has
shown a 2.5% reduction in electricity use for residential customers, which conceptually equates to 0.5%
reduction in emissions (or 9,000 metric tons of carbon). Pending Council moving this item forward, staff
will include it in the initiatives analysis toward the 2020 goal.
o Clean Energy - The Energy Policy includes a target for a minimum of 20% of the electricity portfolio be
generated from renewable energy sources by 2020. Currently, the City is on track to achieve 17% of its
energy from clean energy sources, leaving a 3% gap (which equates to approximately (20,000 metric
February 28, 2017 Page 4
In addition to the direct initiatives, Council has also recognized the role of innovation to achieve the City’s
climate goals, and that innovation will take the form of technological, financial, social, and policy-based
solutions. The following innovative initiatives will help the City to achieve the 2020 goals, though the
impact of these efforts cannot be explicitly quantified yet:
o Climate Economy - funded in the 2016 Budget Revision process, the City’s Climate Economy Advisor
is developing the Climate Economy Action Plan (with consultant Natural Capitalism Solutions) to
evaluate financial tools to leverage private and public sector investment in the Road to 2020+.
o Innovative Pilot Projects - recognizing the role of the private sector in achieving the City’s goals, an
offer was funded in the 2017-2018 BFO cycle to develop a reverse RFP that asks the private sector,
for example, how they would reduce 50,000 metric tons from the City’s inventory or engage 10,000
residents to achieve the goals. The RFP is anticipated to launch in April 2017.
o Communications - further described below, the City has contracted with PRR, a national leader in
sustainability messaging and engagement, to develop a strategic plan and communications toolkit to
better engage the community in these efforts.
Progress on Mid-Cycle and Off-Cycle Funding
In addition to the investments of $3.6M in 2017 and $2.6M in 2018 funding through the 2017-2018 BFO process,
Council also funded $5.9M in mid-cycle and off-cycle funding in 2016 to achieve the goals. As reported in detail in
the attached memo (Attachment 3), these projects are on track to accomplish the following:
Projected emissions reductions - On track to reduce approximately 17,600 metric tons of carbon equivalent
(~6% of what is needed to achieve the 2020 goals, which has been incorporated into the 2020 Forecast - with
initiatives funded/adopted to date).
Leveraging of City dollars - While still calculating official numbers, early projections suggest the 2016 City
dollars invested will be leveraged by at least $5.4M of private sector investment.
Community engagement - Over 1,000 residents have been directly engaged through the Road to 2020+
efforts in 2016 and 2017, including through the City’s Open Houses, two All Boards and Commission
meetings, the Community Issues Forum, Earth Day, the Road to 2020+ e-newsletter, etc. In addition, over
350 City employees have been directly engaged through internal efforts as well.
Anticipated reappropriation requests: Staff has submitted a $77K reappropriation request in association with
these projects. As reported in Attachment 3, the funds will be used primarily ($50K) to address how to divert
the 70,000 ash trees in Fort Collins from landfill disposal in the event of an Emerald Ash Borer (EAB)
infestation. The remaining funds will be utilized to complete work associated with four of the other funded
projects.
More specifically, given the $1.46M investment in energy efficiency in 2016, staff can also report the following
statistics on the results of this supplemental investment:’
The Efficiency Works Business and Home programs were available to customers on a continuous basis
through the end of 2016.
Funding was 92% committed to efficiency projects, with 44% spent in 2016. Staff does not anticipate a
shortfall in funding in 2017.
Originally projected to reduce emissions by 2,500 to 3,250 metric tons, projected savings now expected to
reach 4,500 metric tons (~1.5% of remaining reductions needed to achieve overall 2020 goal).
The supplemental funding increased the estimated efficiency portfolio savings to over 2.0% of community
electricity use, helping to exceed the 2016 Energy Policy target of 1.75%.
Businesses and Homes Engaged -
o Over 150 additional business projects were supported through the Efficiency Works Business
supplemental funding.
o Nearly 60 homes were included in the Efficiency Works Neighborhoods pilot as a result of the
supplemental funding. With the success of the pilot, the streamlined approach has been integrated into
the Efficiency Works Home program for 2017.
1
Packet Pg. 6
February 28, 2017 Page 5
Implementation of the Climate Action Plan - Branding and Community Engagement
Background: As the City has developed messaging and engagement strategies to help reach our 2020 goals,
Council asked staff to explore options that would better reach a broader spectrum of the community by connecting
with the specific actions and benefits of the climate action goals, e.g., one person might be interested in low-cost
measures such as energy efficiency, another is interested in environmental impacts, and yet another may be
focused on health-related outcomes such as cleaner air for their family. Others have also said that the words
“climate action” don’t give them instructions about what they should do to reduce their contributions to carbon
emissions.
Proposed Language: Toward that end, staff has worked to find the common value that would appeal to all. That
common value is a healthy and thriving community. That includes environmental, social and economic health. In
2016, staff developed temporary bridging language - Road to 2020: Forging Our Efficient Future - while the
implementation branding was being developed. In January and February 2017, proposed implementation
branding - called Fortify Fort Collins - has been tested in the community in advance of the Work Session
(Attachments 6 and 7).
Fortify means to strengthen and secure; to give physical strength courage or endurance; and to add mental or
moral strength to encourage. Staff is proposing the word because it:
Represents strength
Has the word FORT in it!
Represents action (To Fortify could mean to act as Fort Collins might).
As noted above, Fortify does not replace the Climate Action Plan - the community will always have a Climate
Action Plan framework that gives the community a general roadmap of how we achieve our carbon reduction
goals. While the Climate Action Plan still represents the ‘what’ (goals & framework) and the ‘why’, Fortify has the
potential to represent the how. Here are a few examples of personal messages that could incorporate this unique
definition and call to action:
“I compost so my garden stays healthy, how do you Fortify?”
“I ride my bike to stay in shape and save on gas, what’s your plan to Fortify?”
“I recycle to help the City achieve its zero waste goals, why do you Fortify?”
“Why do I Fortify? Because I love this community and want to do my part to make it better for my
grandchildren.”
“Fortify Fort Collins with a free home efficiency assessment!”
Community Feedback: Staff has tested, or is in the process of testing, branding with the following groups:
December - CSU Professor Martin Carcasson tested with his students
January 24 - League of Women Voter Environmental Action Team
January 26 - Road to 2020 Community Advisory Committee
February 3 - Fort Collins Sustainability Group
February 6 - Boards and Commissions Super Issue meeting (80 people attended)
February 10 - Chamber of Commerce LLAC
February 23 - Energy Board
February 27 - Air Quality Advisory Board
March 1 - Youth Advisory Board
March 22 - Overall update at North Fort Collins Business Association
April 11 - Overall update at South Fort Collins Business Association
So far, community reaction has been mixed (Attachment 7). Some have expressed excitement in a campaign
that gets people to take specific actions and like the name. Some think Fortify is a defensive term or that the
brand “look” is cold and unfeeling. Others have concerns that the community is backing away from its goals. Staff
has explained this campaign does not replace the Climate Action Plan - it merely represents an additional way to
1
Packet Pg. 7
February 28, 2017 Page 6
get people engaged. Still, there are members of the community who are opposed to any name unless it’s paired
with Climate Action Plan or has the word climate in it.
Next Steps
As mentioned above, 2017 will be largely focused on implementation. While a few highlights are provided below,
the overall efforts are being tracked in Attachment 5, which will be updated on a quarterly basis.
Specifically, staff will be working on the following in 2017:
Operations
o Implementation of the 2017-2018 BFO Offers
o 2016 community carbon inventory (completed in April of each year)
o Creation of a synthesis document that outlines and brings together the work toward the 2020 goals (see
draft table of contents in Attachment 8)
o Development of the Climate Economy Action Plan
o Collaboration with Platte River Power Authority on the Customized Resource Planning effort, which is
evaluating the benefits and costs of having separate rate structures for the Platte River Community, and
the energy efficiency program evaluation
o Launching of the Climate Action Plan Dashboard to transparently track performance toward the goals and
assess triple bottom line impacts
o Continuous identification and vetting of additional initiatives to close the 2020 gap
o Development of a municipal roadmap to achieve the municipal organization’s 2020 goals (which mirror
the community goals) using the same modeling and vetting process developed for the community
o Selected by Xcel for their Partners in Energy Program, Fort Collins is the first “gas only” community to be
included. Utilities and Xcel are exploring collaboration regarding data sharing, which could improve our
understanding of natural gas usage and savings opportunities, for joint marketing and outreach to our
common customers and improved alignment of efficiency programs and service.
o Beginning to look toward the 2030 goals by integrating this work with the City Plan, Transportation Master
Plan, and Transit Plan updates
Communications
o Continuation of the Community Advisory Committee
o Development of a communications and engagement strategic plan that includes a communications toolkit
highlighting specific engagement strategies for underserved populations and the business community
o Coordinating with CSU on the deployment of six deliberative engagement events to engage a wider range
of residents in the development of personalized action plans to achieve the 2020 goals
ATTACHMENTS
1. Work Session Summary , March 10, 2016 (PDF)
2. Work Session Summary, August 30, 2016 (PDF)
3. Council Memo-Budget Revisions and Off-Cycle Appropriations, November 22, 2016 (PDF)
4. Detailed Spreadsheet of the Initiatives and the Modeling and Vetting Process (PDF)
5. 2017-2018 Work Plan for the Road to 2020 Direct and Supporting Projects (PDF)
6. Public Engagement Summary (PDF)
7. Summary of Feedback from Stakeholder Meetings on Fortify (PDF)
8. 2020 Synthesis Document - Purpose and Draft Table of Contents (PDF)
9. Powerpoint presentation (PDF)
1
Packet Pg. 8
ATTACHMENT 1
1.1
Packet Pg. 9
Attachment: Work Session Summary , March 10, 2016 (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
1.1
Packet Pg. 10
Attachment: Work Session Summary , March 10, 2016 (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
ATTACHMENT 2
1.2
Packet Pg. 11
Attachment: Work Session Summary, August 30, 2016 (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
ATTACHMENT 3
1.3
Packet Pg. 12
Attachment: Council Memo-Budget Revisions and Off-Cycle Appropriations, November 22, 2016 (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
1.3
Packet Pg. 13
Attachment: Council Memo-Budget Revisions and Off-Cycle Appropriations, November 22, 2016 (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
1.3
Packet Pg. 14
Attachment: Council Memo-Budget Revisions and Off-Cycle Appropriations, November 22, 2016 (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
1.3
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment: Council Memo-Budget Revisions and Off-Cycle Appropriations, November 22, 2016 (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
OverallSummary
Emissions
(MetricTonsCO2e)
PercentBelow2005
Levels(baseline)
2005Baseline 2,351,329 N/A
2015Inventory 2,130,023 9%
2020Forecast(BusinessasUsual) 2,179,000 7%
2020Forecast(Funded/AdoptedInitiatives,154,000MT) 2,025,000 14%
2020Forecast(AllInitiatives,Additional79,000MT) 1,946,000 17%
2020Target 1,880,000 20%
ProjectedGaptoAchieving2020Target 66,000 3%
Thistablerepresentsthe13of31initiativeswerefundedthroughtheBFOprocessin2017Ͳ2018orwereadoptedviapolicydiscussions.ExamplesincludeBusinessandHomeEnergyEfficiencyandtheCommunityRecyclingOrdinance.
Initiative Policy
NetCommunityCosts
(Annual)
NetCommunity
Costs
(Thru2020)
NetCityCosts
(Annual)
NetCityCosts
(Thru2020)
AdoptedGHG
Impactto2020
PotentialGHG
Impactto2020
ProjectLifetime
$/GHG*
ProjectLifetime
Benefit/CostRatio
Confidencethrough
2020
BuildingEnergyDisclosureandScoring Energy $ 910,000 $ 3,300,000 $ 50,000 $ 300,000
2,000 2,000 $ 149 0.5 L
BusinessEfficiencyPortfolioBase Energy $ (3,420,000) $ 61,800,000 $ 1,680,000 $ 22,600,000 69,000
69,000 $ 58 1.4 M
BusinessEfficiencyPortfolioExpanded Energy $ (2,600,000) $ 21,000,000 $ 1,360,000 $ 8,600,000
26,000 26,000 $ 58 1.4 M
CoͲGenSetatDrakeWastewaterReclamation Energy $ Ͳ $ Ͳ $ (90,000) $ 3,600,000
3,000 3,000 $ 71 1.6 L
CommunitySharedSolar Energy $ (130,000) $ 2,700,000 $ 30,000 $ 1,100,000 2,000
2,000 $ 74 2.2 H
EnergyCodePerformance Energy $ 830,000 $ 11,700,000 $ 70,000 $ 400,000 5,000
5,000 $ 123 0.5 L
HomeEfficiencyPortfolioBase Energy
HomeEfficiencyPortfolioExpanded Energy
(SP3)SolarPowerPurchaseProgram Energy $ (390,000) $ 4,200,000 $ 280,000 $ 1,200,000
3,000 3,000 $ 65 1.7 H
UtilitiesRooftopSolarIncentives Energy $ Ͳ $ 13,200,000 $ 80,000 $ 2,800,000
7,000 7,000 $ 92 0.8 H
MunicipalCompostingSite Municipal
TransitSystemExpansion Transportation $ (3,730,000) $ Ͳ $ 9,430,000 $ 13,300,000
2,000 2,000 $ 635 0.4 L
CommunityRecyclingOrdinance Waste $ 2,270,000 $ 6,900,000 $ 50,000 $ 600,000 14,000
14,000 $ 183 0.0 L+
Subtotal 133,000 133,000
Thistablerepresents12ofthe31initiativeswereeitherpartiallyfundedorrequirefurthervettingorresearchtomoveforwardasaninitiative.
Initiative Policy
NetCommunityCosts
Thistablerepresents6ofthe31initiativeshavebeenputonholdduetofeasibilityconcernsorreadiness.ExamplesincludetheConstructionandDemolitionSortingFacilityortheCSUCombinedHeatandPowerproject.
Initiative Policy
NetCommunityCosts
(Annual)
NetCommunity
Costs
(Thru2020)
NetCityCosts
(Annual)
NetCityCosts
(Thru2020)
AdoptedGHG
Impactto2020
PotentialGHG
Impactto2020
ProjectLifetime
$/GHG*
ProjectLifetime
Benefit/CostRatio
Confidencethrough
2020
CSUCombinedHeatandPower Energy
PlatteRiverRenewablesPurchase(Tariff7) Energy
WaterTreatmentFacilityHydropower Energy
ConstructionandDemolitionSortingFacility Waste
HoffmanMillCrushingFacility(exp) Waste
NeighborhoodFoodScrapComposting Waste
*GHGImpactcalculatedfromnetpresentvalueofallcostsassociatedwiththeinitiative,dividedbylifetimeGHGbenefits.
BaselineForecast
InitiativeModelingandKeyAssumptions
Toassessinitiativesacrossacommonandtransparentplatform,staffdevelopedatemplatethatallowsteamstoenterspecificprojections.Foreachinitiative,thetemplateincludeddetailsonprojectinformation,costs,andbenefits:
ProjectInformation AnnualCosts(totheAdministrator,e.g.,theCity,andtheParticipants,e.g.,thePrivateSector) AnnualBenefits(totheAdministratorandtheParticipants)
Definition OverheadCosts ReductioninCarbonEmissionsbyResourceType
Objectives IncentiveCosts ResourceCostSavings
Deliverables InstallationCosts SavingsinCarbonEmissionCosts
ValueProposition MaintenanceCosts
AlternativesAnalysis
KeystoSuccess
Pilot/ProofofConcept
MarketandPolicyAnalysis
Forcommonassumptionsthatareusedacrossmanyinitiatives(i.e.forecastedelectricrates,populationgrowth),alistofcorevariableswasincludedandautomaticallypopulated.Thisensuresconsistencyacrosstheinitiativeestimatesandprojections.
InitiativeVetting
ConfidenceGrade
High
Medium
Low
Thisiterativeprocesswillbecontinuedandcompletedasexistinginitiativeschange,duetochangingtechnologyornewinformation,andexpandedasnewinitiativesareidentified.
TheModel
Removed
Howwerethesenumbersarrivedat?ExplanationoftheForecast,InitiativeModelingandVettingProcess,andtheModel
TheforecastedlevelofcommunityCO2emissions,withoutthereductionsfromCAPinitiativestrategies,isprojectedunderourstandardinventoryprotocol.Thisprojectionaggregatesover600variablesfromstandardindicators,thecommunityinventory,andthemunicipal
inventory.Basedonthesedatainputs,theCO2emissionsexpectedforeachresourcewascalculated.Forexample,ourforecastedelectricconsumptionwasdevelopedbyFortCollinsUtilitiesusingatimeseriesmodel.Itwasadjustedforeconomicoutputandpopulationgrowth
overthenext20years.Thisforecastincorporatestherealizedandforecastedbenefitsofexistingenergyefficiencyprograms,butnottheadditionalfundingapprovedin2017/2018BFOprocess.
ThefederalCorporateAverageFuelEconomy(CAFÉ)standardsforvehicleemissionswerealsoincorporatedintothisforecast.CAFÉimpactsareconsideredtobelargelyoutsideoflocalcontrolsoitwasdeterminedtobeappropriatetorecognizetheimpactsoftheseeffortsonour
communityemissionsbeforeevaluatingadditionallocalefforts,suchasourCAPinitiatives.
Aftertemplatesubmission,all31initiativesunderwentvettingbytheFinanceMechanismscommittee.Thisincludedareviewofassumptionsandcalculationsforcompletenessandreasonability.Basedontheirassessment,aconfidencegrade(High/Medium/Low)wasprovided
basedonthefollowingconsiderations:
Followingvetting,theindividualinitiativetemplatesareimportedintotheaggregatemodel.Thisisthesamemodelwhichhousesthebaselineforecast.ByevaluatingpotentialCO2emissionsreductionssidebysidewithexistingforecasts,staffisabletoevaluatetrendsand
analyzescenariostowardsour2020goals.
Themodelretainseachinitiative’sannualcostandbenefitinformation,inadditiontoautomaticallyaggregatingtolifetimecostsandbenefits,discountingtonetpresentvalues,andcalculatingthebenefit/costratioandcostpermetrictonofgreenhousegas(GHG)avoided.
PolicyAreaandInitiative Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Transportation
TransitSystemExpansion Direct
ExpandCongestionManagementSystem Direct Design Design
ImprovePedestrianNetwork Direct Design Design
BicycleNetwork&RidershipImprovements Direct Design Design
EVReadinessRoadmap(associatedwithFuelEfficientandEVStrategy) Supporting/Direct Explore
TransportationMasterPlan/CityPlan/TransitPlan(LandUsePatterns) Supporting/Direct Implement
TravelBehaviorSurvey Supporting Plan/Design
Energy
CommunitySharedSolar Direct Explore
BusinessandHomeEnergyEfficiency(BaseandExpanded) Direct Review/Check
(SP3)SolarPowerPurchaseProgram Direct Explore
UtilitiesRooftopSolarIncentives Direct Review/Check
EnergyCodePerformance Direct Implement Policy/Adopt Implement Review/Check
CoͲgenatDrakeWastewaterReclamationFacility Direct Construction/Impleme
BuildingEnergyDisclosureandScoring Direct Explore Plan
Timeofusepilotexpansion Direct(notvetted) Review/Check Implement
XcelPartnersinEnergyProgram Supporting Explore Plan
CityEnergyProject Supporting Plan Design
ElectricDistributedBatteryPilotProgram Supporting Plan
PlatteRiverCustomizedResourcePlanning Supporting Explore Plan Review/Check Plan Review/Check
Waste
CommunityRecyclingOrdinance Direct
CommunityRecyclingOrdinance(Organics) Direct
WoodUtilizationStudy Supporting
Waterandlanduse
CarbonSequestration Supporting Explore Review/Check Implement
Municipal
MunicipalCompostingSite Direct Review/Check
StreetLightingUpgrades Direct
AlternativeFuelMunicipalLawnandGardenEquipment Direct Explore Plan Review/Check
MunicipalR2020+ Direct Plan/Design Review/Check
MunicipalInnovationFund(Expanded) Direct Plan/Design Review/Check
CNGFuelingSite Supporting Review/Check
MunicipalResiliencyandAdaptationPlanning Supporting
Organizationapproachtoairquality,extremeheat,extremecold Supporting DesignandImplement Implement Review/Check
Metrics
CoͲBenefitsAnalysis Supporting Plan Pilot Design
Dashboard Supporting Explore Design Pilot
NewInventoryProtocol Supporting Review/Check Explore Review/Check
Carbonaccountingandelectricitymarket Supporting
ClimateEconomy
ClimateEconomyStrategicPlan Supporting Explore Review/Check
Adaptation,preparationandresilience
WaterSupplyVulnerabilityAssessment Supporting
Engagement
RegionalAdvocacyandEducation(CC4CA,CCN,CML,WAA) Supporting Review/Check Review/Check
InnovationSummit Supporting Implement Review/Check
MessagingandEngagement(Overall,Deliberation) Supporting Review/Check
Innovation
HomewisePilot(supportsEnergyEfficiencybenefits) Direct
InnovationPilotProjects Supporting Plan Review/Check Plan
Implement
Implement
Plan
Implement
Implement
Implement
Implement
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY
PROJECT TITLE: Fortify Branding Campaign
OVERALL PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT LEVEL:
Involve
BOTTOM LINE QUESTION: Does the community support the draft branding campaign that is intended to
help people take action to help reach our climate action goals for 2020 and beyond?
TIMELINE:
November-December 2016:
Developed branding campaign for CAP
Enlisted the help of the CAP Messaging and Engagement Team, which includes three citizens, to
evaluate initial branding.
Contacted key stakeholders and scheduled presentations
January-February 2017
Begin vetting campaign internally and externally
Stakeholder groups identified:
o December – CSU Professor Martin Carcasson tested with his students
o January 24 - League of Women Voter communications group
o January 26 – Road to 2020 Community Advisory Committee
o February 3 – Fort Collins Sustainability Group
o February 6 – Boards and Commissions Super Issue meeting (80 people attended)
o February 10 – Chamber of Commerce LLAC
o February 23 – Energy Board
o February 27 – Air Quality Advisory Board
Adapt branding based on feedback from stakeholders
March 2017
March 1 – Youth Advisory Board
March 22 – CAP update at North Fort Collins Business Association
April 11 – CAP update at South Fort Collins Business Association
Key Messages:
The City is implementing the Climate Action Plan – a critical document that addresses how the
community will reduce its greenhouse gas emissions in the next 25 years.
We want people to take action.
We believe this is language that will help people see themselves in the Climate Action Plan and
take action.
We are not replacing the Climate Action Plan with this branding campaign. We will always have
the Climate Action Plan.
We need to give the community choices about what actions they want to take.
We want to identify, connect and inspire with this campaign.
Climate action does not resonate with everyone in the community. It can be polarizing for some
people.
We don’t necessarily need people to know about the Climate Action Plan – we need them to find
simple actions they can fit into their everyday lives that will help us meet our goals.
ATTACHMENT 6
1.6
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: Public Engagement Summary (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
Feedback We Heard:
Pro:
Cute with word “Fort” in it
Fits well with things we already have in the city (ClimateWise)
Coming from positive lens
Not “Road to 2020” (which was not taking us anywhere)
Begins with action
Represents community and how you can impact it and make it better
Like the use of a hexagon
Generally agree branding should communicate economic and health benefits of CAP
Liked “Action” with “Fortify”
Not trying to fortify the people, but fortify the city. Make FC stronger.
Says health/strengthen
Can see climate change denier responding positively to this.
Says magnify, make it better. Fun, unifiying.
Could engage disinterested audiences.
Suggested tagline: For you. For the community. For businesses.
Suggested tagline: Smart. Efficient.
Fortifying is giving respect to the things we’re already doing.
Good messaging but how do you measure impact?
Visuals are great but ROI is dubious.
Con
It’s more divisive than inclusive.
Taglines make me think we’re not any of these right now.
Feels like we’re building up defenses because we’re being attacked and putting a bubble around
us.
Messaging doesn’t mean anything if we don’t have the costs.
Fortified company, Fortitude (run – like Boulder-Boulder)
May have to do a lot of explaining to associate with program
“nebulous on purpose” to stay away from politics of climate (noted as positive and concern)
tagline needs specifics
should there be six pillars to match six sides of hexagon?
Fortify reminds of Wheaties/Vitamins – doesn’t conjure community for all
Little militaristic/defensive.
Not sure what it means/how it’s connected to climate action.
Feels like covering it up.
Dislike the colors.
1.6
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: Public Engagement Summary (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
Audience Support Concerns
League of Women Voters
Communications Committee
Liked the action part
Liked “Action” with “Fortify”
Initially concerned that City was replacing CAP with
Fortify and opposed.
With Fortify: really need to see the connection with
the climate action goals.
Fort Collins Sustainability
Group
Generally agree branding should communicate
economic and health benefits of CAP
Do not support Fortify without also using Climate
Action Plan in branding
Community Advisory
Committee
Cute with word “Fort” in it
Fits well with things we already have in the city
(ClimateWise)
Healthy.Efficient.Resilient or similar words fits
well with other programs
Coming from positive lens
(Look at words from other studies as to what
resonates with public)
Not “Road to 2020” (which was not taking us
anywhere)
Begins with action
Represents community and how you can
impact it and make it better
Like the use of a hexagon
Fortified company, Fortitude (run – like Boulder-
Boulder)
May have to do a lot of explaining to associate with
program
“nebulous on purpose” to stay away from politics of
climate (noted as positive and concern)
tagline needs specifics
should there be six pillars to match six sides of
hexagon?
Fortify reminds of Wheaties/Vitamins – doesn’t
conjure community for all
Martin Carcasson class
(CSU Center for Public
Deliberation)
Not trying to fortify the people, but fortify the
city. Make FC stronger.
Says health/strengthen
Says diet/exercise.
Can see his Dad (climate change denier)
responding positively to this.
Says magnify, make it better. Fun, unifiying.
A goal and call to action.
Could engage disinterested audiences.
Could see on side of a bus and would want to
know more.
Fort works – very strong brand.
Little militaristic/defensive.
Not sure what it means/how it’s connected to
climate action.
CAP Messaging and
Engagement Team
Have a fighting chance
Like it but warmer colors
Like it but needs images
Feels bloodless
Too corporate
Negative association
Reminiscent of vitamins
Keeping people out
Chamber LLAC Cool that “Fort” is in it.
Love the “Fort” aspect.
Suggested tagline: For you. For the
community. For businesses.
Suggested tagline: Smart. Efficient.
Fortifying is giving respect to the things we’re
already doing.
Good messaging but how do you measure
impact?
Visuals are great but ROI is dubious.
It’s more divisive than inclusive.
Taglines make me think we’re not any of these right
now.
Feels like we’re building up defenses because we’re
being attacked and putting a bubble around us.
Messaging doesn’t mean anything if we don’t have
the costs.
If you don’t have the facts and the value, you’re not
going to be able to sell this.
Super Issues
(Boards/Commissions):
How is this implemented in schools?
How to overcome existing branding?
Spanish, Russian, Arabic - will we translate?
Seems like we’re building a wall.
Reminds of vitamins and minerals.
Why not use CAP and 7 sub theme areas?
How does Fortify connect to action? I don't see it.
This brand doesn't help me put teeth in it.
Hexagon feels like a gym ad.
Appreciate the notion of Fortify but don't retreat
from the word climate.
1.7
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: Summary of Feedback from Stakeholder Meetings on Fortify (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
2020 Synthesis Document Purpose & Table of Contents
Document Purpose: To achieve the 2020 goals, staff is developing an implementation plan to prioritize
actions and associated near-term budget requests needed for progress between 2015 and 2020. This
document is a compilation of those strategic objectives, initiatives and projects identified to date. More
specifically, the purpose of the document is as follows:
Illustrate how adopted CAP-related policy targets support progress towards the 2020 GHG goal,
e.g., the energy efficiency and clean energy targets set by the Energy Policy, the waste reduction
and recycling targets set by the Road to Zero Waste, etc.
Outline the iterative process and implementation infrastructure necessary to achieve the goals.
Continue to acknowledge the role of innovation and flexibility that will be needed in order to adapt
to the technological, social, policy, and financial changes that the City will both drive and
experience on its road to carbon neutrality.
Synthesize all of the documentation associated with the 2020 efforts, including both the direct and
supporting initiatives identified to achieve the goals.
Draft Table of Contents
Acknowledgements
Executive Summary
o Vision and Goals
o Why is climate action important?
o How is this document different than the CAP Framework?
o Overview of the goals, policy targets, initiatives, and projects
o The modeling and vetting process
o How to use this document
Direct Initiatives
o Overall summary
o Energy policy targets and associated initiatives
o Transportation policy targets and related initiatives
o Waste policy targets and associated initiatives
o Water policy targets and associated initiatives
Supporting Initiatives
o Infrastructure
o Innovation
o Adaptation/Resiliency
o Community Engagement
o Climate Economy
Implementation and Metrics
o Short-term, mid-term, long-term
o Dashboard
Appendices
o Detailed description of the modeling, vetting, and forecast processes
o Detailed summary of the initiatives
o One-page write-ups of each of the initiatives
o Biannual process for evaluating initiatives, community engagement, and ensuring
alignment with the BFO process
o 2017-2018 Work Plan
o Key Definitions
ATTACHMENT 8
1.8
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: 2020 Synthesis Document - Purpose and Draft Table of Contents (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
1
Road to 2020 – Council Work Session
Jeff Mihelich, Jackie Kozak Thiel, Amanda King, and Lindsay Ex
February 28, 2017
ATTACHMENT 9
1.9
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
1. Does Council have any feedback on
the progress made to date?
2. Does Council have any feedback on
the branding process?
2
Questions for City Council
1.9
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
$5.9
$3.6
$2.6
Good News!
3
2018
2017
2016
1.5%
~17,600 METRIC
TONS OF
ADDITIONAL
REDUCTIONS
TOWARD 2020
GOAL
ENERGY
EFFICIENCY
SAVINGS ALONE
~ 500 HOMES
500
LEVERAGED 2016
INVESTMENTS BY
AT LEAST $5.4M
$12.1M TOTAL
NEW
INVESTMENTS
IMPACTS FROM ADDITIONAL 2016 INVESTMENTS
1.9
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
OPERATIONAL
2016
OPERATIONAL
2016
Overview
4
GOALS & FRAMEWORK
ASPIRATIONAL
2015
IMPLEMENTATION
2017
1.9
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
5
20% Reduction
80% Reduction
Carbon
Neutral
Inventory Results
Forecast
2015 Inventory: Emissions Goal
9% below 2005
CO2
Tons
Aspirational
1.9
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
6
80% Reduction
Carbon
Neutral
Inventory Results
Forecast
2015 Inventory: Emissions Goal
9% below 2005
CO2
Tons
2020 Goal
20% Reduction
1.9
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
2015 – 2020
OVERALL
7
1.9
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
8
Iterative Process
13
12
6
1.9
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
3:1 Leverage
Exceeded
projections
by 50%
CITY PRIVATE
9
Energy Efficiency
ENERGY SAVINGS
1 Gigawatt Hours (GWh) = 1M Kilowatt Hours
26
GWh
29
GWh
TARGETED PROJECTED
IMPACTS – FINANCIAL & CARBON
$1 $3
3,000
(1%)
1,500
(0.5%)
TARGETED PROJECTED
1.9
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
10
Regional Collaboration
RAWHIDE FLATS SOLAR
• 30 megawatt solar project
• Energy output equivalent to
~3,500 households with clean
energy
• Shared project by Platte River
Power Authority serving all four
member cities
2% 1%
CLEAN
ENERGY
CARBON
EMISSIONS
1.9
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
11
TECHNOLOGY
FINANCIAL
SOCIAL
POLICY/
GOVERNANCE
Innovation
1.9
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
12
TECHNOLOGY
FINANCIAL
SOCIAL
POLICY/
GOVERNANCE
Innovation - Affordability
1.9
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
13
TECHNOLOGY
FINANCIAL
SOCIAL
POLICY/
GOVERNANCE
Innovation – Climate Economy
1.9
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
14
TECHNOLOGY
FINANCIAL
SOCIAL
POLICY/
GOVERNANCE
Innovation – Dashboard
1.9
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
15
TECHNOLOGY
FINANCIAL
SOCIAL
POLICY/
GOVERNANCE
Innovation - Engagement
started with
transitional bridge language
1.9
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
Call to Action
16
CITIZENS & BUSINESSES SHOULD:
• Understand the why & how
• Be inspired to act
• Understand their actions
make a difference
• See themselves in this plan
Triple Bottom Line
1.9
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
Name for Consideration
17
FORTIFY
1. Represents Strength, Endurance, Change, Resiliency
2. Has the word FORT in it!
3. Fortify is an ACTION word that can be used in marketing
FORT COLLINS
1.9
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
Name for Consideration
18
verb
a: to act as Fort Collins might
b: to aim for a more healthy, efficient, and resilient community
like Fort Collins
c: to strengthen and enrich a community to a Fort Collins level
TO FORTIFY
1.9
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
Tagline
19
HEALTHY. EFFICIENT. RESILIENT.
HEALTHY. VIBRANT. RESILIENT.
STRONGER. CLEANER. TOGETHER.
STRONGER. HEALTHIER. TOGETHER.
FORTIFY
FORT COLLINS
1.9
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
Style & Messaging Concepts
20
1.9
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
CAP and Fortify
21
• Framework
• Goals
• Reports/Documents
• Dashboard/Metrics
Messaging Specific Actions
• Identifying
• Connecting
• Inspiring
1.9
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
How will we measure success?
How will this be implemented?
Feels like we are
retreating as a
community from our
climate commitment.
Love Fortify as an
action word; fits
well with programs
we already have
(ClimateWise)
Feels like we’re
building a wall around
our community or that
we aren’t strong
already
Feedback we’ve heard from you
22
Concern…………………………………………………………….Support
Represents community
and how you can
impact/make it better.
Data behind the words are more
important.
I don’t really care about branding unless I
know the cost of implementing these
actions.
1.9
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
Implementation Next Steps
23
• Inventory Complete in April
• Implement 2017-2018 Work Plan
• Direct Initiatives
• Supporting Initiatives
• Working with PRR to develop
marketing and engagement strategy
• Innovative Pilot Projects
• Platte River Customized Resource
Planning Effort
1.9
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
1. Does Council have any feedback on
the progress made to date?
2. Does Council have any feedback on
the branding process?
24
Questions for City Council
1.9
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
25
Road to 2020 – Council Work Sessions
Names TBD
February 28, 2017
1.9
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
DATE:
STAFF:
February 28, 2017
Lance Smith, Utilities Strategic Finance Director
Randy Reuscher, Utility Rate Analyst
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to present the results of the 12-month residential electric time of use (TOU) pilot study.
The study showed that when compared to the current tiered rate structure both TOU rate structures reduced
energy use by 2.5% and load was shifted from the on peak periods to the off peak periods, thereby reducing our
community’s contribution to the Platte River Power Authority’s (PRPA) coincident peak. The additional complexity
of the tiered TOU rate over the basic TOU rate did not provide any statistically significant difference from the basic
TOU. Based on the pilot staff is recommending that Council consider adopting a TOU rate without the tier for all
residential customers.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Does Council support a time of use rate structure implementation plan?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
City Council passed Ordinance No. 078, 2015 in July 2015 to pursue a 12 month residential time of use pilot
study. Customer outreach began and an open house was held in August and September of 2015. The official
pilot study kicked off in November of 2015 and concluded in October of 2016. At that time a survey was sent to
all participants and the best bill guarantee analysis and customer notification was completed ahead of any credits
being applied to the customer’s bill in December 2016. Results from the pilot study were presented to the Council
Finance Committee on January 23, 2017 (attached).
The purpose of the pilot study as outlined in Ordinance No. 078, 2015 was to assess if a TOU rate structure could
better achieve each of the following objectives than the current tiered rate structure:
Objective 1 - Determine energy conservation impacts
Objective 2 - Measure potential demand reductions
Objective 3 - Gauge customer preference for different rate structures
Objective 4 - Ensure revenue requirements are met
Two time-of-use rate structures were considered during the pilot study. The first TOU was a time of use rate
structure with an on-peak window when electricity costs more and a much wider off-peak window when electricity
costs substantially less than the current tiered rate. In this TOU rate structure all of the expenses associated with
energy efficiency programs and PRPA’s demand charges were included in the on-peak window. The second rate
structure, labeled below as TOU w/Energy Efficiency (TOU_EE), was very similar, with the same on-peak and off-
peak hours, but rather than including the costs associated with the energy efficiency programs in the on-peak
charge, these costs were collected through an additional tiered component.
2
Packet Pg. 49
February 28, 2017 Page 2
For the pilot study, 1,200 customers were randomly selected to be on each rate. Roughly 10% of the customers
opted out at the beginning of the pilot study. After removing any customers that moved households during the 12
month study period, approximately 850 customers remained throughout in each study group.
Objective 1 - Energy Conservation
Based on the rigorous statistical analysis, both TOU rate structures effectively encouraged energy conservation
better than the current tiered rate structure.
The TOU rate realized a 2.5% reduction in energy consumption.
The TOU_EE rate structure did not provide any additional energy conservation over the TOU rate without a
tier.
Objective 2 - Potential Demand Reductions
The statistical analysis also showed both TOU rate structures reduced the probability that a residential customer’s
daily peak occurred in the “on peak” window.
The TOU rate structure without a tier showed an 8.5% reduction in the probability that a customer’s daily peak
occurred in the “on peak” window.
The TOU_EE rate structure showed a 2.8% reduction in the probability that a customer’s daily peak occurred
in the “on peak” window.
This shift of the customer’s daily peak reduced the contribution from the residential rate class as a whole to the
system coincident peak hour used in the assessment of PRPA’s wholesale demand charges each month.
Specifically, looking at the single coincident peak hour during the summer months,
The TOU rate showed a 7.5% reduction in the contribution to the system coincident peak.
The TOU_EE did not show any additional reduction.
Objective 3 - Gauge Customer Preference
A survey was sent to all participants at the end of the pilot study. In total, 1,450 customer surveys were received
out of 7,000 sent (20% return rate). Below is a summary of the responses from each of the four survey questions.
Attached is another document which captures the additional comments provided by customers.
2
Packet Pg. 50
February 28, 2017 Page 3
Question 1 - Select the description which you think best explains the price you pay for electricity.
From the results of Question 1, where customers were asked to identify their rate structure, it is clear that most
customers do not understand how they are being charged for electric use. As such, an extensive public outreach
effort is recommended before any rate structure changes are made.
Question 2 - Select the description which best describes how frequently you seek out information about your
energy consumption
2
Packet Pg. 51
February 28, 2017 Page 4
Question 3 - In your view, what should be the primary objective of electricity rates (please choose one)
Question 4 - During the last 18 months, did you respond to your electricity bill by (choose all that apply)
Objective 4 - Revenue Adequacy
Both TOU rate structures, like the tiered rate structure, were designed to pass through the full wholesale
generation and transmission charges and to collect adequate revenue to maintain the distribution system. Both
TOU rate structures resulted in less revenue than the current tiered rate structure. However, because 30% of
wholesale energy charges are determined by Fort Collins Utility’s contribution to the system coincident peak and
that contribution was reduced, adequate revenues were still generated to meet the cost of service for the
residential rate class. Below is a table summarizing the revenue impacts separating out the impact to those
residential customers who either have all electric heat and are on the Residential Demand (RD) rate or have
rooftop solar installed (Net Metering customers):
Original Rate Pilot Study Rate Count % Difference on TOU
Rate
Avg $ Change per
Month
Tiered Rate TOU 880 1.6% less ($1.14)
TOU w/ EE 851 1.9% less ($1.38)
All Electric Homes TOU 18 1.8% more $2.44
TOU w/ EE 16 7.9% more $10.27
Net Metering TOU 5 12.4% more $2.82
TOU w/ EE 9 0% $0.07
2
Packet Pg. 52
February 28, 2017 Page 5
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
Rate Structure Impacts (utility perspective) (check mark shows more favorable option)
Rate Structure
Tiered TOU TOU w/tier
Revenue Requirements Met
Promotes Energy Conservation No 2.5% 2.5%
Promotes Load Shifting No 8% 3%
Considered Equitable (cost-basis) No
Benefits Low Income Households
Net Metering None
Electric Heat No No
Addresses Electric Vehicle Charging No
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff proposes implementing the standard TOU rate as a default rate to all residential customers, including current
tiered rates customers, demand rate customers, and net metering customers.
There are many considerations in proposing the standard TOU rate, which is ultimately considered a fairer and
equitable rate structure. The pilot study shows this rate provides a reduction in the probability that a customer’s
peak happens during the on peak hours, and also realized energy conservation over the current tiered rate
structure. In general, a TOU rate structure is easy for customers to understand, as well as react to. A TOU rate
also encourages the use of electric vehicles and provides an incentive to charge during off peak hours, which is in
line with the City’s climate goals.
A TOU rate structure would negatively impact those customers who are on the Residential Demand rate
financially ($2.44 / customer / month on average), but it better aligns the costs of generation and this customer
group’s demands for electricity. This rate structure is available only to customers in all electric housing and is
intended to recognize the increased electric demand of such housing. The current demand rate does not
distinguish when that increased demand occurs. A TOU rate structure could encourage energy efficiency
improvements by providing a price signal that recognizes when heating is primarily done.
Both TOU rates better align with the marginal cost of electricity than the current tiered rate structure. Either TOU
rate would reduce the compensation to net-metering customers for energy pushed back onto the distribution
system in the off peak hours of the early afternoon. A TOU rate would encourage configuring solar arrays to
generate more energy when the community needs it the most.
The study shows that adding the energy efficiency tier to the standard TOU rate structure does not statistically
improve the energy conservation and load shifting objectives. Thus, staff is recommending the standard TOU
rate structure without the additional tiered component.
NEXT STEPS
If Council supports implementing a TOU rate, staff would begin developing an implementation plan and a
communication outreach plan for all residential customers. Staff would then return to Council in the fall to discuss
these efforts and to seek further direction on when the rate structure change would be brought forward for Council
consideration. The 2018 rate Ordinances will be considered by Council in November or December of 2017,
allowing this rate structure change to a residential TOU rate to be implemented in early 2018.
Further consideration will be needed to implement TOU to a small group of customers that opted out of the AMI
implementation, referred to as “option 2” customers (those that don’t want the utility to see 15-minute data) and
“option 3” customers (those that don’t want a meter which transmits monthly reads via radio frequency). There
are approximately 426 customers combined in these two groups.
2
Packet Pg. 53
February 28, 2017 Page 6
ATTACHMENTS
1. Finance Committee Agenda Item Summary, January 23, 2017 (PDF)
2. Powerpoint presentation (PDF)
2
Packet Pg. 54
COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Staff: Lance Smith, Utilities Strategic Financial Director
Randy Reuscher, Utilities Rate Analyst
Justin Fields, Utilities Rate Analyst
Date: January 23, 2017
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION – Residential Electric Time of Use (TOU) Pilot Study
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this agenda item is to provide the Council Finance Committee with the results of
the residential electric time of use pilot study. The study showed that when compared to the
current tiered rate structure both TOU rate structures reduced energy use by 2.5% and load was
shifted from the on peak periods to the off peak periods, thereby reducing our community’s
contribution to the Platte River Power Authority’s (PRPA) coincident peak. The additional
complexity of the tiered TOU rate over the basic TOU rate did not provide any statistically
significant difference from the basic TOU.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1) Does the Council Finance Committee support moving to a default residential time of use
rate in the future?
2) What data or background information would be useful for including in the presentation at
the Council work session on February 28th?
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
City Council passed Ordinance No. 078, 2015 in July 2015 to pursue a12 month residential time
of use pilot study. Customer outreach began and an open house was held in August and
September of 2015. The official pilot study kicked off in November of 2015 and concluded in
October of 2016. At that time a survey was sent to all participants and the best bill guarantee
analysis and customer notification was completed ahead of any credits being applied to the
customer’s bill in December 2016.
Two time-of-use rate structures were considered during the pilot study. The first TOU was a
basic time of use rate structure with an on-peak window when electricity costs more and a much
wider off-peak window when electricity costs substantially less. In this TOU rate structure all of
the expenses associated with energy efficiency programs were included in the on-peak window.
The second rate structure, labeled below as TOU_EE, was very similar, with the same on-peak
and off-peak hours, but rather than including the costs associated with the energy efficiency
programs in the on-peak charge these costs were collected through an additional tiered
component.
ATTACHMENT 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: Finance Committee Agenda Item Summary, January 23, 2017 (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
For the pilot 1,200 customers randomly selected to be on each rate. Roughly 10% of the
customers opted out upfront. After removing all additional customers that moved households
during the 12 month study period, approximately 850 customers remained throughout in each
study group.
The purpose of the pilot study as outlined in Ordinance No. 078, 2015 was to assess if a TOU
rate structure could better achieve each of the following objectives than the current tiered rate
structure:
Objective 1 - Determine energy conservation impacts
Objective 2 - Measure potential demand reductions
Objective 3 - Gauge customer preference for different rate structures
Objective 4 - Ensure revenue requirements are met
Objective 1 - Energy Conservation
Both TOU rate structures effectively encouraged energy conservation better than the current
tiered rate structure. The TOU rate realized a 2.5% reduction in energy consumption. The
addition of a tier in the TOU_EE rate structure did not provide any additional energy
conservation over the TOU rate without a tier.
Objective 2 - Potential Demand Reductions
Both TOU rate structures reduced the probability that a residential customer’s daily peak
occurred in the “on peak” window. The TOU rate structure without a tier showed an 8.5%
reduction in the probability that a customer’s daily peak occurred in the “on peak” window. The
TOU_EE rate structure showed a 2.8% reduction in the probability that a customer’s daily peak
occurred in the “on peak” window. This shift of the customer’s daily peak reduces the
contribution from the residential rate class as a whole to the system coincident peak hour used in
the assessment of the wholesale demand charge each month. Specifically, looking at the single
coincident peak hour during the summer months, the TOU rate showed a 7.5% reduction in the
contribution to the system coincident peak.
2.1
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: Finance Committee Agenda Item Summary, January 23, 2017 (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
Objective 3 - Gauge Customer Preference
A survey was sent to all participants at the end of the pilot study. In total, 1,450 customer
surveys were received (roughly 20% returned). Below is a summary of the responses from each
of the four survey questions. Attached is another document which captures the additional
comments provided by customers.
Question 1 - Select the description which you think best explains the price you
pay for electricity.
From the results of Question 1, where customers were asked to identify
their rate structure:
Question 2 - Select the description which best describes how frequently you seek
out information about your energy consumption
2.1
Packet Pg. 57
Attachment: Finance Committee Agenda Item Summary, January 23, 2017 (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
Question 3 - In your view, what should be the primary objective of electricity
rates (please choose one)
Question 4 - During the last 18 months, did you respond to your electricity bill by
(choose all that apply)
Objective 4 – Revenue Adequacy
The TOU rate structures, like the tiered rate structure, were designed to pass through the full
wholesale generation and transmission charges and to collect adequate revenue to maintain the
distribution system. Both TOU rate structures resulted in less revenue than the current tiered rate
structure. However, because 30% of wholesale energy charges are determined by Fort Collins
Utility’s contribution to the system coincident peak and that contribution was reduced, adequate
revenues were still generated to meet the cost of service for the residential rate class. Below is a
table summarizing the revenue impacts separating out the impact to those residential customers
who either have all electric heat and are on the Residential Demand (RD) rate or have rooftop
solar installed (Net Metering customers):
2.1
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: Finance Committee Agenda Item Summary, January 23, 2017 (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff proposes implementing the standard TOU rate as a default rate to all residential customers,
including current tiered rates customers, demand rate customers, and net metering customers,
with an effective date of January 1, 2018.
There are many considerations in proposing the standard TOU rate, which is ultimately
considered a fair and equitable rate structure. The pilot study shows this rate provides a
reduction in the probability that a customer’s peak happens during the on peak hours, and also
realized energy conservation over the current tiered rate structure. In general, a TOU rate
structure is easy for customers to understand, as well as react to. A TOU rate also encourages
2.1
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: Finance Committee Agenda Item Summary, January 23, 2017 (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
the use of electric vehicles and provides an incentive to charge during off peak hours, which is in
line with the City’s climate goals.
A TOU rate structure would negatively impact those customers who are on the Residential
Demand rate. This rate structure is available only to customers in all electric housing and is
intended to recognize the increased electric demand of such housing. It does not distinguish
when that increased demand occurs. A TOU rate structure could encourage energy efficiency
improvements by providing a price signal that recognizes when heating is primarily done.
Both TOU rates better align with the marginal cost of electricity than the current tiered rate
structure. Either TOU rate would reduce the compensation to net-metering customers for energy
pushed back onto the distribution system in the off peak hours of the early afternoon. A TOU
rate would encourage configuring solar arrays to generate more energy when the community
needs it the most.
The study shows that adding the energy efficiency tier to the standard TOU rate structure does
not statistically improve the energy conservation and load shifting objectives. Thus, staff is
recommending the standard TOU rate structure without the additional tiered component.
NEXT STEPS
Staff will be presenting the results of the study at the Council Work Session on February 28
th
.
Discussion from that meeting will determine future rate implementations. If Council supports
implementing a TOU rate, staff would return to Council in March or April to ask for Council
direction and approval (possibly in the form of a Resolution) in order to begin the public
outreach process. The actual rate ordinance would be brought to Council in the fall, along with
all other general rates and fees changes, normally in October or November. Again, staff would
propose that the TOU rates take effect in January 2018 to allow for the proper outreach and
education process to bring all residential customers up to speed on TOU rates ahead of
deployment.
ATTACHMENTS
PowerPoint Presentation
Backup slides - Powerpoint
2.1
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: Finance Committee Agenda Item Summary, January 23, 2017 (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
1
Council Work Session
February 28, 2017
Residential
Time-of-Use
Pilot Rate Study
ATTACHMENT 2
2.2
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
8.24 8.64
9.52
0
5
10
15
20
0 500 1000
Cents
Monthly kWh Use
Tiered Rate (Non summer)
8.96
10.63
13.98
0
5
10
15
20
0 500 1000
Cents
Monthly kWh Use
Tiered Rate (Summer)
6.91
18.36
0
5
10
15
20
TOU off peak TOU on peak
Cents
Monthly kWh Use
TOU (Non summer)
7.07
22.09
0
5
10
15
20
TOU off peak TOU on peak
Cents
Monthly kWh Use
TOU (Summer)
20
hours
/day
19
hours
/day
4
hours/
day
5
hours/
day
TOU Rates
2.2
Packet Pg. 62
Timeline to Date
3
Ordinance
078, 2015
July
2015
12-month
pilot study
started
Nov
2015
•Pilot study
ended
•Survey
sent
Oct
2016
•Statistical
analysis
performed
•Best bill
credits
applied
Dec
2016
2.2
Packet Pg. 63
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
PILOT Study Objectives
4
1. 1.impacts Determine energy conservation impacts
2. Measure potential demand reductions
3. Gauge customer preference for different rate structures
4. Ensure revenue requirements are met
2.2
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
Study Design
5
Opt-out study with 1,200 customers randomly assigned to each group
~ 850 customers in each group after opt-outs and customer turnover
Study design allows us to measures components of study and rates separately
Controlled
factors in
pilot study
Awareness
of study
Peak
pricing
information
Best bill
guarantee
Weather
Normalize
2.2
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
Objective 1
6
Time-of-Use (TOU) rate showed a 2.5% reduction in energy consumption
Adding a tier to TOU rate had no statistical impact on energy consumption
Since 2012, the current tiered rate has shown no reduction in energy consumption
Energy Conservation
2.2
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
Objective 2
7
Air
conditioning
Heating
Lighting Appliances
Higher
demands
Demand Reductions
2.2
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
Objective 3
8
Sent to all 7,000 participants, roughly 1,450 responded (~20%)
Customer Survey
Energy Consumption Rate Structure Rate Knowledge Conservation
47% infrequently or never
seek out information
51% seek information when
they receive their monthly
bill
42% agree rates
should balance
equitable cost
recovery with
environmental
concerns
25% correctly
identified their rate
structure
38% are conscious of
their energy use
8% use without concern
for cost
31% use energy efficient
bulbs and/or appliances
2.2
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
Objective 4
9
Revenue Requirements
Original Rate Pilot Study Rate Count
%
Difference
on TOU Rate
Avg $ Change
per Month
Tiered Rate
TOU 880 1.6% less ($1.14)
TOU w/ EE 851 1.9% less ($1.38)
All Electric Homes
TOU 18 1.8% more $2.44
TOU w/ EE 16 7.9% more $10.27
Solar
Net Metering
TOU 5 12.4% more $2.82
TOU w/ EE 9 0% $0.07
2.2
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
Staff Recommendations
10
• Standard TOU rate realized a 2.5% reduction in energy consumption, as
compared to the tiered rate
• Better aligns benefits of solar production with costs
• Encourages use of electric vehicles and charging during off-peak hours,
consistent with community climate goals
• Considered a more “fair and equitable” rate structure
Transition to a standard TOU rate for residential customers,
including residential demand and solar net metering customers
2.2
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
Next Steps
11
Mar / Apr
• Council approval requested to begin public outreach
campaign
Mar / Apr
• Council approval requested to begin public outreach
campaign
May - Oct
• 6 month outreach / communication
May - Oct
• 6 month outreach / communication
2018
• Time-of-use deployment to all residential customers
2018
• Time-of-use deployment to all residential customers
2.2
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
Council Direction
12
Does Council support a Time-of-Use
rate structure implementation plan?
2.2
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
13
2.2
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
DATE:
STAFF:
February 28, 2017
Nalo Johnson, Grants Development Specialist
Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
City Foundation Creation.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to provide an update to City Council as to establishing a City of Fort Collins
Foundation (City Fund) through the Community Foundation of Northern Colorado, as advised by the Council
Finance Committee. The update provides an operational recommendation as to how the City Fund will be
implemented and seeks Council input on the planned implementation.
Residents may currently donate directly to the City as well as to city-related non-profits, such as the Friends of the
Gardens on Spring Creek or the Lincoln Center Support League. Creation of the City Fund offers people another
option by which they may donate to the City. The City Fund seeks to enhance City-related projects and should
not be viewed as a replacement for the City budget. The City Fund will be governed by an Advisory Committee
similar to the ways in which Community Fund Committees are structured at the Community Foundation of
Northern Colorado. The City Fund will be structured as a portfolio of funds to encompass both organic funding
needs (project ideas generated by the Advisory Committee, Council, City staff and/or community members
themselves) and strategic funding needs (projects that are related to a specific City priority or initiative).
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. What feedback does Council have as to the City Fund Framework?
2. What feedback does Council have as to the structure of the Advisory Committee?
3. What feedback does Council have as to the role of the staff liaison/Donor Relations role?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
In consideration of innovative strategies to fund City-related initiatives, an investigation into establishing a City
Foundation was undertaken in the past year. The investigation concluded that there are no existing models
where a municipal foundation has been created to explicitly fund City-sanctioned projects. Donor options were
presented to the Council Finance Committee in October 2016, which recommended that the City move forward
with establishing a City Fund at the Community Foundation of Northern Colorado (CFNC) as well as examine the
City’s internal processes to eliminate any barriers to donating directly to the City.
A City Fund operational update was presented to the Council Finance Committee in January 2017 which
recommended establishing the City Fund at the CFNC as a “designated fund” in support of the stated purpose:
“Allow residents an opportunity to support initiatives for the City of Fort Collins to provide world-class services
through operational excellence and a culture of innovation.” The City Fund will encompass both project-specific
funds as well as an “unrestricted funds” bucket to be granted to applying departments at the discretion of the City
Fund Advisory Committee. The Advisory Committee will govern the City Fund and consist solely of community
members. However, City Council and City staff may support the Advisory Committee through offering project
recommendations and supporting fundraising efforts.
3
Packet Pg. 74
February 28, 2017 Page 2
Success for the City Fund may be defined as:
A way in which to enhance City projects
Access to a non-profit arm to receive and administer grant funds
An option for those who do not want to give directly to the City
The City Fund’s measures for success may include:
Donor participation rates
Ability to meet fundraising goals
Alignment between City Fund priorities and the City’s triple bottom line approach
Next steps will include:
On March 21, a resolution will be put forward to establish the City Fund Agreement with the CFNC
Identifying how best to resource a staff liaison/Donor Relations role
Identifying whom to participate on the Advisory Committee Nominating Team
Potentially establish an account balance for the City Fund and/or identify a specific project to initially fundraise
for once the Advisory Committee is in place
Staff seeks Council’s input as to the operational recommendation for the City Fund.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Powerpoint presentation (PDF)
3
Packet Pg. 75
1
Establishing the City Foundation
Dr. Nalo Johnson – February 28, 2017
ATTACHMENT 1
3.1
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5311 : City Foundation Creation)
Background
• Investigation into the creation of a City Foundation (City Fund)
• Perception that it is difficult to leave donations to the City
• Strategic benefits associated with the City’s access to a non-profit arm
• Along with literature review, interviewed local donors and foundation staff as
well as consulted with the CAO
• Investigation concluded:
• No existing models where a municipal foundation is created to explicitly fund
City-sanctioned projects
• Presented three options to Council Finance in October 2016
• Recommended to establish City Fund at CFNC and examine internal processes
• City Fund Operational update provided to Council Finance in January
2
3.1
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5311 : City Foundation Creation)
Why create a City Fund?
What does success look like?
• Way in which to enhance City projects
• Access to a non-profit arm to receive and administer grant funds
• Option for those who do not want to give directly to the City
What are the fund’s measures for success?
• Donor participation rates
• Ability to meet fundraising goals
• Alignment between City Fund priorities and City’s triple bottom line approach
Purpose Statement:
Allow residents an opportunity to support initiatives for the City of Fort Collins to provide
world-class services through operational excellence and a culture of innovation.
3
3.1
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5311 : City Foundation Creation)
City Fund:
Project-Specific or Unrestricted Donations
City Fund (umbrella)
Designated fund in support of the stated fund purpose:
Allow residents an opportunity to support initiatives for the City of Fort Collins to provide world-class services through
operational excellence and a culture of innovation.
Project-Specific Funds
- Project-specific designated funds
- Funding distributed specifically to the
project (no application)
- Under the umbrella City Fund agreement,
separate fund agreements may be created
for each project-specific fund
Unrestricted Donations
- Advisory Committee would award grants to
applying departments
4
3.1
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5311 : City Foundation Creation)
City Fund: Framework
CFNC:
- Advisory Support
- Fiscal Agent
Establish
City Fund
Council:
- Advisory Cmte Selection
- Project Recommendation
- Support Fundraising
City Fund
Advisory Cmte:
- Project Selection
- Fundraising
- Governance
Govern
City Fund
Support
City Fund
City Staff:
- Staff Liaison (Donor Relations)
- Project Recommendation
- Support Fundraising
- CAO Fund Agreement Review
- Financial Acceptance
5
Support
City Fund
3.1
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5311 : City Foundation Creation)
City Fund: Recommendations
to Establish the Advisory Committee
• Step 1: Establish Staff Liaison/Donor Relations role
• Champions the City Fund vision (goals and measures of success)
• Develops list of potential local donors & maintains donor relationships
• Identifies key donors for Advisory Committee consideration
• Step 2: Nominating Team
• Alternative 1 – Consists of Council Members and CFNC staff
• Alternative 2 – Consists of Council Members, City Staff and CFNC staff
• Identify well-connected individuals or people with personal wealth
• Identify individuals that reflect the breadth of the community
• Be clear that committee/fund is more project-focused at this time
• Step 3: Advisory Committee Structure
• 6-8 members; serve up to two three-year terms
• Committee is independent of the City organization
• CFNC staff member advises committee; City staff liaison as POC for committee
6
3.1
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5311 : City Foundation Creation)
City Fund: Policy Guidelines
• Create a Fund Agreement between CFNC & the City to establish a City Fund
• Designated fund in support of the stated fund purpose
• Anticipate a portfolio of funds will fall under the City Fund
• CAO can customize the standard fund agreement language
• Recommendations for Project-Specific fund selection
• Need identified by City Leadership/Council, Advisory Committee or Community members
• Identified area of enhancement to a current budget item or city asset
• Recommendations for awarding projects under the “unrestricted” fund
• Application process established with help of CFNC
• Utilize staff liaison to communicate department interests to the Advisory Committee
7
3.1
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5311 : City Foundation Creation)
City Fund: Key Caveats
• Councilmembers and/or City staff may fundraise on behalf of the fund,
but cannot be on the Advisory Committee
• IRS deems a conflict of interest
• Project-specific funds may be identified by Advisory Committee
• City may independently approach Advisory Committee
• Community members may approach City with specific requests to approach
Advisory Committee
• City Fund is not a replacement for City Budget but a way in which to
enhance what is funded through the budget and tax initiatives process
8
3.1
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5311 : City Foundation Creation)
Next Steps
1) Council/Staff Action
• Resolution to establish umbrella fund agreement
• CAO works with CFNC to finalize fund agreement
• Identify how best to resource Staff liaison/Donor Relations role
• Identify whom to participate on the Advisory Committee Nominating Team
• Establish the Advisory Committee
• CFNC and Staff liaison/Donor Relations role implement committee’s onboarding process
• Potentially establish an account balance for the City Fund and identify a specific project to
initially fundraise for once Committee is in place
2) Messaging and Promotion
• Work with CPIO, CFNC, staff liaison and Advisory Committee to develop and implement
branding and marketing plan
9
3.1
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5311 : City Foundation Creation)
Upcoming Resolution
• Anticipate the City Fund Resolution will include:
• Language identifying the intent and goals for the City Fund
• Council endorsement of the fund agreement
• Direction approving the City Manager to sign the fund agreement
• Language suggesting Council’s interest in supporting City Fund efforts
• Language suggesting Council’s expectations of reporting amounts received and
the use of the donation
10
3.1
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5311 : City Foundation Creation)
Fundraising Examples
• Historical Projects:
• White Water Park
• Additional features at the SE Community Center
• Poudre River Heritage Walk
• Future Potential Projects:
• 9/11 Memorial Garden at Spring Park
• Enhanced design features at Community Parks (i.e. Streets Park)
• Staff training (i.e. culturally appropriate community engagement training)
• Buy-a-Brick for Old Town Parking Structure
11
3.1
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5311 : City Foundation Creation)
Council Direction
Is Council supportive of moving forward with a Resolution to establish the
City Fund as detailed in this presentation?
Any additional insight Council may have as to the recommendation to
operationalize the City Fund?
12
3.1
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5311 : City Foundation Creation)
Back-Up Slides
13
Additional Information:
Three Ways to Give to the City
3.1
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5311 : City Foundation Creation)
Donation Flowchart:
Three Ways to Give to the City
14
Donors
City Fund
Unrestricted
Project-Specific
Directly to City
City-related
Non-profits
3.1
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5311 : City Foundation Creation)
Three Ways to Give to the City
1) Establish a City Fund in connection with CFNC
• City Fund will be structured as a portfolio of funds to encompass both organic
and strategic funding needs
2) Give directly to the City
• Section 4.7 of City Administrative Policies allows donations to be accepted by
Council or the City Manager
3) Donate to non-profits related to City entities
• Friends of the Gardens on Spring Creek; Fort Collins Museum of Discovery;
Lincoln Center Support League
15
3.1
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5311 : City Foundation Creation)
Donating directly to the City
• Flexibility is key
• Not all donation situations are alike
• Donors need a “point of contact” to help them through the process
• This can be maintained within each department or through the Donor Relations role
• Relational factor important
• Coordinated internal effort makes a smoother donor experience
• Consider “point” staff member to lead donors through the process
• Staff member responsible for thanking, receipting, recognition
16
3.1
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5311 : City Foundation Creation)
Donating to City-related non-profits
• Communicating City Fund intention/goals
• City Fund is not competition to other fundraising entities
• Friends of the Gardens on Spring Creek; Fort Collins Museum of Discovery; Lincoln
Center Support League
• City Fund may enhance, not replace, current fundraising entities
• Stakeholder awareness
• Engage our non-profit collaborators prior to City Fund kick-off
• Allow them the space to inform how the City Fund may enhance their efforts
• Donor Relations role may maintain contact with non-profit collaborators to
ensure good will
17
3.1
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5311 : City Foundation Creation)
Attachment: Powerpoint presentation (5324 : Residential Electric Time of Use Pilot Study)
Feels like covering it up.
Dislike the colors.
ATTACHMENT 7
1.7
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: Summary of Feedback from Stakeholder Meetings on Fortify (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
Implement
Implement
Implement
Plan
Implement
Implement
Implement
Pilot
Implement
Implement
Implement
Implement
Plan Implement
Implement
Design Operation/Review/Check
Explore
Implement
Implement
Implement
Implement
Implement
Implement
Plan
2017
Plan Implement
Implement
Implement
Implement
Implement
Plan
Explore
Explore Plan
Explore
Plan
2018
Implement
Plan
Implement
Implement/Review
Implement
Design
Implement Design
Implement
Plan Design
Explore Implement
Pilot/Design
Implement
Implement
Plan
Explore Plan
TrackingofRoadto2020RelatedInitiatives
ThistablerepresentsALLinitiativesassociatedwithachievingthe2020goals.UnlikeAttachment4,thisspreadsheetincludesboththoseinitiativesthathavedirectemissionreductions,e.g.,energyefficiencyandcongestionmanagement,aswellasthoseinitiativesthatsupporttheoverallgoals,e.g.,the
TravelBehaviorSurveyandtheElectricDistributedBatteryPilotProgram.AfterQ12017,thisspreadsheetwillbeupdatedonaquarterlybasistotrackprojectstatus.
Directvs.
supporting
Design Implement
Plan Implement
Design
Pilot
Pilot Implement
Implement(onasneededbasis)
Implement
ATTACHMENT 5
1.5
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: 2017-2018 Work Plan for the Road to 2020 Direct and Supporting Projects (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
Standardizingthesemetricsallowsstafftoevaluatethequantitativedifferencesacrossdifferentinitiatives.
GradeDefinition
Substantialvetting;containsdetailedbreakdownofallmajorcostsandbenefits,withclearlinksonwhatdrivesbenefits.Includesconsiderationtosensitivityofkeyvariablesovertime.Canbevalidatedvs.external
benchmarks.
Moderatevetting;containsreasonabledetailonbreakdownofmajorcostsandbenefits.Justifieslinkageandscaleofbenefits.Substantiatedwithinternaldata.
Firstpassvetting;includesrequireddata,butcanbeissuedalowratingduetoinsufficientdetailonthebreakdownofoneormoremajorcostsorbenefits,poorlinkagebetweencostandbenefit,oroversimplified
assumptions(suchasflatcostsinperpetuity).
1.4
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: Detailed Spreadsheet of the Initiatives and the Modeling and Vetting Process (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
(Annual)
NetCommunity
Costs
(Thru2020)
NetCityCosts
(Annual)
NetCityCosts
(Thru2020)
AdoptedGHG
Impactto2020
PotentialGHG
Impactto2020
ProjectLifetime
$/GHG*
ProjectLifetime
Benefit/CostRatio
Confidencethrough
2020
LandUsePatterns LandandWaterUse $ (12,230,000) $ Ͳ $ 160,000 $ 1,300,000 11,000
22,000 $ 3 74.6 L
LandConservation LandandWaterUse $ Ͳ $ Ͳ $ 2,860,000 $ 15,100,000
Ͳ 2,000 $ 307 0.0 L
UrbanForest LandandWaterUse $ (60,000) $ Ͳ $ 750,000 $ 1,900,000
Ͳ 400 $ 627 0.1 L
UtilitiesLandscapeIrrigationIncentives LandandWaterUse $ 140,000 $ 500,000 $ (330,000) $ 100,000
Ͳ 100 $ 2 2.2 L
ExpandCongestionManagementSystem Transportation $ (7,920,000) $ Ͳ $ 1,340,000 $ 8,100,000
9,000 18,000 $ 43 5.9 L
BicycleNetwork&RidershipImprovements Transportation $ (3,580,000) $ Ͳ $ 1,060,000 $ 6,300,000
1,000 4,000 $ 75 3.4 L
ImprovePedestrianNetwork Transportation $ (350,000) $ Ͳ $ 2,540,000 $ 19,000,000
400 1,000 $ 1,863 0.1 L
FuelefficientandEV Transportation $ Ͳ $ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ $
Ͳ 0.0 L
TripReductionProgram Transportation $ (5,150,000) $ Ͳ $ 190,000 $ 800,000
Ͳ 5,000 $ 9 27.7 L
StreetLightingUpgrades Energy $ Ͳ $ Ͳ $ (100,000) $ 1,200,000
Ͳ 1,000 $ 48 4.0 M
CommunityRecyclingOrdinance(Organics) Waste $ 5,600,000 $ 13,200,000 $ 60,000 $ 100,000
47,000 $ 89 0.0 L+
WoodUtilizationStudy(BiomassBurner) Waste
Subtotal 21,400 100,500
GrandTotal 154,400 233,500
Adoptedvs.Potential 79,100
Projectionsifactionsnottaken;DoesnotincludeCouncilinvestmentsin2016,orthe2017Ͳ2018BFOprocess
Projections:Assumesthefullyandpartiallyfundedinitiativesin2017Ͳ2018willalsobefundedin2019Ͳ2020,e.g.,energyefficiencyandcommunitysolar
Projections:Assumestheremainingarefundedoradoptedbetweennowand2020
IncludedinBusinessEfficiencyBase
IncludedinBusinessEfficiencyExpanded
PendingVettingonMunicipalTimeline
PendingStudyCompletion
DetailedSpreadsheetsoftheInitiatives
Thesetablesrepresentthesynthesizeddataforall31initiatives,includingwhichinitiativeshavemovedforward(green),thosewhichareeitherpartiallyfundedorneedmorevetting(yellow),andthosewhichhavebeenpaused/stopped(red).
Notes
Actuals
Actuals
Projections
ATTACHMENT 4
1.4
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: Detailed Spreadsheet of the Initiatives and the Modeling and Vetting Process (5323 : Road to 2020 Update)
tons of carbon). In addition to implementing the 2017-2018 BFO offers around clean energy, staff is also
identifying opportunities to achieve the 20% renewable energy goal.
o City Plan, Transportation Master Plan, and the Transit Plan - these master planning efforts have
significant potential to identify additional opportunities to combine land use and transportation
opportunities to achieve the City’s 2020, 2030, and 2050 climate goals.
1
Packet Pg. 5
implementation work.
Since these discussions with Council, all 31 initiatives underwent a thorough modeling and vetting process by the
end of 2016 to inform decision-making, prioritization and financing options for specific projects and programs.
From this vetting process, staff learned the following:
13 of 31 initiatives were funded through the BFO process in 2017-2018 or were adopted via policy
discussions. Examples include Business and Home Energy Efficiency and the Community Recycling
Ordinance.
1
Packet Pg. 4