1 / 11

Proposition 39

Proposition 39. Susan C. Yeager, Administrator Facilities Planning and Utilization CCC Chancellor’s Office CCFC September 2014. Today’s Agenda. Proposition 39 Year 1 Success and Year 2 Status Project Closeout Requirements Citrus College Prop 39 Highlights San Mateo CCD Prop 39 Highlights

akeem-everett
Download Presentation

Proposition 39

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Proposition 39 Susan C. Yeager, Administrator Facilities Planning and Utilization CCC Chancellor’s Office CCFC September 2014

  2. Today’s Agenda • Proposition 39 • Year 1 Success and Year 2 Status • Project Closeout Requirements • Citrus College Prop 39 Highlights • San Mateo CCD Prop 39 Highlights • CCC/IOU Partnership Support

  3. Proposition 39 Overview • Clean Energy Job Creation Fund • 2013-14 Budget Act • $39,800,000 in funding for projects • Allocated to districts based on FTES • 2014-15 Budget Act • $31,595,000 in funding for energy projects • Allocated to districts based on FTES

  4. Proposition 39 - Year 1 Results • $39.7 million in Prop 39 funding approved • All 72 districts participating • 313 approved projects • $6.8 million in utility incentives • $4.65 million in energy cost savings • 31,786,051 kWh (annual electric savings) • 653,239 therms (annual gas savings)

  5. Proposition 39 Impact

  6. Proposition 39 - Year 2 Overview • $31.6 million available for projects • Projects Approved thru August 2014: • Districts: 55 • Projects: 135 • Utility Incentives: $3.8M • $19.2M or 61% of Prop 39 funds available for projects

  7. Proposition 39 Projects • 90% of projects in Year 1 and submitted for Year 2 follow the state loading order prescribed by the state Public Utilities Commission: • Energy Efficiency projects • Demand Reduction • Energy Generation • This is based on economics as efficiency and demand reduction are more cost effective than generation.

  8. Project Types: Year 1 vs. Year 2

  9. Proposition 39 Project Closeout Per SB73, districts will provide: • Required Data • Final project costs • Verified energy savings for each project • Direct job creation and number of trainees • Required Forms • E: Project completion • F: Project closeout • J: Job creation tracking • Project closeout happens at the same time as the utility project completion inspection

  10. Project Closeout • Chancellor’s Office will: • Aggregate report data • Provide information to the Citizens Oversight Board 12-15 months after project completion • Overall process:

  11. A Look to the Future • Districts should be planning projects for next three years. • Prop 39 is a series of 5 ONE YEAR appropriations • Plans must be flexible because funding level uncertain. • Year 3 call for projects will be in February 2015. • Multi-year projects must be reflected in Form B (over two years requires prior approval on a case-by-case basis) • This will allow districts to complete more complex projects.

More Related