HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-06-2021 - Agenda Pkg - CC Special Meeting (Council Retreat)Saturday, November 6, 2021
8:00 AM
City of Hermosa Beach
City Hall
1315 Valley Drive
Hermosa Beach, CA 90254
City Council
Mayor
Justin Massey
Mayor Pro Tem
Michael Detoy
Councilmembers
Stacey Armato
Mary Campbell
Raymond Jackson
Special Meeting Agenda
CITY COUNCIL RETREAT
The Beach House Hotel - Pacific Room, 1300 The Strand
(Face masks required for all in-person attendance)
Duly posted on November 4, 2021 at 6:30 p.m. by A.Y.
Executive Team
Angela Crespi, Deputy City Manager
Viki Copeland, Finance Director
Susan Morrow, Interim City Clerk
Paul LeBaron, Chief of Police
Joe SanClemente, Public Works Director
Ken Robertson, Community Development Director
Vanessa Godinez, Human Resources Manager
Lisa Nichols, Interim Community Resources Manager
City Treasurer
Karen Nowicki
City Attorney
Michael Jenkins
Suja Lowenthal, City Manager
November 6, 2021City Council Special Meeting Agenda
ALL CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC—PLEASE ATTEND.
HYBRID VIRTUAL/IN-PERSON MEETINGS ARE HELD PURSUANT TO AB 361. STATE AND LOCAL
OFFICIALS RECOMMEND MEASURES TO PROMOTE SOCIAL DISTANCING.
LOCATION: The Beach House Hotel - Pacific Room, 1300 The Strand, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254
(Face mask required for all in-person attendance)
BROADCAST: Public meetings are broadcast live on Spectrum Channel 8 and Frontier Channel 31 in
Hermosa Beach. Additional viewing options are provided as a courtesy.
ZOOM: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87467499533?pwd=dmphQWEyM0s1MnRXM0VoWElaQ3FVZz09
PHONE: 888-475-4499 • Meeting ID: 874 6749 9533, then # • Passcode: 093658
CITY YOUTUBE CHANNEL: https://www.youtube.com/c/CityofHermosaBeach90254
CITY WEBSITE: www.hermosabeach.gov and visit the Agendas/Minutes/Videos page
***PLEASE NOTE: IF YOU EXPERIENCE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES WHILE VIEWING THE
MEETING ON ONE OF THESE PLATFORMS, PLEASE TRY ONE OF THE OTHER VIEWING
OPTIONS***
Oral and Written Communication
Written materials pertaining to matters listed on the posted agenda received after the agenda has been
posted will be added as supplemental materials under the relevant agenda item on the City's website at
the same time as they are distributed to the City Council by email. Supplemental materials may be
submitted via eComment (instructions below) or emailed to anny@hermosabeach.gov until 9:00 p.m.
on Friday, November 5, 2021 to ensure Council and staff have the ability to review comments prior to
the meeting.
Submit Supplemental eComments in three easy steps:
Note: Your comments will become part of the official meeting record. You must provide your full name,
but please do not provide any other personal information (i.e. phone numbers, addresses, etc) that you
do not want to be published.
1. Go to the Agendas/Minutes/Video webpage and find the meeting you’d like to submit comments on.
Click on the eComment button for your selected meeting.
2. Find the agenda item for which you would like to provide a comment. You can select a specific
agenda item/project or provide general comments under the Oral/Written Communications item.
3. Sign in to your SpeakUp Hermosa Account or as a guest, enter your comment in the field provided,
provide your name, and if applicable, attach files before submitting your comment.
Page 2 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 11/5/2021
November 6, 2021City Council Special Meeting Agenda
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Mayor of the City of Hermosa Beach has called a Special Meeting of
the City Council to take place at 8:00 a.m. on Saturday, November 6, 2021, to consider and take action
on only those matters set forth on the agenda below.
HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL RETREAT AGENDA
*******************************************************************************************************
Facilitator: Amy Howorth is an independent consultant for local government agencies. She has created
and led governance and strategic planning workshops for the cities of Napa, Foster City, and Larkspur,
as well as two water districts. Amy served the residents in Manhattan Beach for nearly 16 years; two
terms on the Manhattan Beach School Board, and two terms on the City Council. As Mayor and
Councilmember, Amy led efforts on new environmental policies. During her tenure, Manhattan Beach
banned the sale of polystyrene and single use utensils, straws, and bags; banned smoking in all public
places; implemented a city-wide food waste recycling program; and was an early member of the Clean
Power Alliance of Southern California. Amy was awarded the Assembly District 66 Woman of the Year
in 2018 by Assemblymember Al Muratuschi and in 2014, she was recognized as an outstanding leader
by National Women’s Political Caucus of Los Angeles.
*******************************************************************************************************
(7:30 A.M. - 8:00 A.M. Arrival & Breakfast)
I. CALL TO ORDER (8:00 A.M.)
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. ROLL CALL
IV. WELCOME REMARKS (City Manager Suja Lowenthal - 8:05 A.M.)
V. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (8:15 A.M.)
Although the City Council values your comments, the Brown Act generally prohibits
the Council from taking action on any matter not listed on the posted agenda as a
business item.
THE BEACH HOUSE HOTEL, PACIFIC ROOM: 1300 The Strand, Hermosa Beach
(Face mask required for all in-person attendance)
JOIN THE VIRTUAL MEETING AT:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87467499533?
pwd=dmphQWEyM0s1MnRXM0VoWElaQ3FVZz09
OR PARTICIPATE BY PHONE:
• Toll Free: 888-475-4499
• Meeting ID: 874 6749 9533, then #
• Passcode: 093658
ATTENDEES WILL BE MUTED UNTIL THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PERIOD IS
OPENED. If you are joining by phone, press * 9 to raise your virtual hand and * 6 to
unmute your line when asked to do so. Comments from the public are limited to 3
minutes per speaker.
Page 3 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 11/5/2021
November 6, 2021City Council Special Meeting Agenda
VI. PLAN HERMOSA: CARBON REDUCTION GOALS (8:25 A.M.)
REPORT
21-0660
STATUS UPDATE AND DISCUSSION OF CITY’S
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS GOALS
(Environmental Programs Manager Doug Krauss)
Recommendation:Staff recommends City Council discuss the City's emissions reduction goals, review
measures and strategies to achieve these goals, and provide strategic direction regarding
future reduction strategies.
1. Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan
2. Resolution 15-6940
3. Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan
Attachments:
VII. PRESENTATION FROM CLEAN POWER ALLIANCE (Executive Director Ted
Bardacke - 8:35 A.M.)
VIII. CARBON REDUCTION STRATEGIES & PROCESS (9:05 A.M.)
SUPPLEMENTAL Email from David Grethen (submitted 11-5-21 at
11.20am).pdf
Attachments:
IX. QUESTIONS/COMMENTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS (10:30 A.M.)
(11:30 A.M. - 12:00 P.M. Lunch Break)
X. CITY COUNCIL MEETING RULES (City Attorney Mike Jenkins - 12:00 P.M.)
Consider proposed revisions to Council meeting rules to conform them to the new
Council agenda format and to delete “written communications” unrelated to any
agenda item. A redline of the meeting rules with the recommended changes is
attached.
1. Resolution 15-6988 CC Rules of Conduct (REDLINE).pdf
2. Resolution 15-6988 CC Rules of Conduct (CLEAN).pdf
Attachments:
XI. BRIEF OVERVIEW OF HERMOSA BEACH EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND
RESPONSE ROLES OF COUNCIL AND STAFF (1:00 P.M.)
Council quick reference guide_2021.pdfAttachments:
XII. COMMUNITY SURVEY (1:30 P.M.)
Consider engaging a consultant to conduct a community survey to assess residents’
views about key issues facing the City and priorities.
XIII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (1:45 P.M.)
Although the City Council values your comments, the Brown Act generally prohibits
the Council from taking action on any matter not listed on the posted agenda as a
business item. Please see virtual public participation instructions under item V.
Page 4 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 11/5/2021
November 6, 2021City Council Special Meeting Agenda
XIV. CLOSING REMARKS (City Manager Suja Lowenthal - 1:55 P.M.)
XV. ADJOURNMENT (2:00 P.M.)
FUTURE MEETINGS AND CITY HOLIDAYS
CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS:
November 8, 2021 - Monday - 6:00 PM (Mayor Transition)
November 9, 2021 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session,
6:00 PM - City Council Meeting
November 23, 2021 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session,
6:00 PM - City Council Meeting
December 14, 2021 - Tuesday - 5:00 PM - Closed Session,
6:00 PM - City Council Meeting
December 28, 2020 - Tuesday - No Meeting (Dark)
BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS:
November 16, 2021 - Tuesday - 6:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting
November 17, 2021 - Wednesday - 6:00 PM - Public Works Commission Meeting
December 6, 2021 - Monday - 6:00 PM - Economic Development Committee Meeting
December 7, 2021 - Tuesday - 7:00 PM - Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting
December 13, 2021 - Monday - 6:00 PM - Planning Commission Meeting
CITY OFFICES CLOSED FRIDAY-SUNDAY AND ON THE FOLLOWING DAYS:
November 11, 2021 - Thursday - Veteran's Day
November 25, 2021 - Thursday - Thanksgiving Day
Page 5 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 11/5/2021
City of Hermosa Beach
Staff Report
City Hall
1315 Valley Drive
Hermosa Beach, CA 90254
Staff Report
REPORT 21-0660
Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council
Special Meeting of November 6, 2021
STATUS UPDATE AND DISCUSSION OF CITY’S
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS GOALS
(Environmental Programs Manager Doug Krauss)
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends City Council discuss the City’s emissions reduction goals,review measures and
strategies to achieve these goals,and provide strategic direction regarding future reduction
strategies.
Executive Summary:
The City has a long history of addressing greenhouse gas (GHG)emissions reduction,both to
achieve sustainability and to lower the cost of City operations.The City’s 2016 Municipal Carbon
Neutral Plan describes a pathway for achieving carbon neutrality for municipal operations.PLAN
Hermosa identifies goals for community-wide emissions reductions and prescribes regular progress
evaluations.This report,and the corresponding presentations from the City Council Retreat,will help
inform a discussion of potential next steps for the City to achieve these goals.
Background:
In 2006,the City of Hermosa Beach endorsed the U.S.Mayors Climate Protection Agreement (the
“Cool Cities Program”),committing itself to aligning with the greenhouse gas emissions reductions
spelled out in the Kyoto Protocol.This began a series of actions by the City Council to address GHG
emissions reduction.These include:development of a Sustainability Plan in 2011;both a Carbon
Neutral Scoping Plan and a Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan (Attachment 1)in 2016;and 2017’s
PLAN Hermosa that details actions the City can and commits to take to achieve various emission-
reduction goals. PLAN Hermosa additionally serves as the City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP).
In 2013,the City secured a team from the UCLA Institute of the Environment and Sustainability to
assess the City’s ability to achieve carbon neutrality by 2030.This Carbon Neutral Scoping Plan was
accompanied by a separate Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan targeting only municipal operations.
Together,these plans identified a number of strategies for reducing emissions and achieving Carbon
Neutrality at various scales.The Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan was accepted by the City Council in
2015 and identified a goal of achieving carbon neutrality in municipal operations by 2020
City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 11/3/2021Page 1 of 6
powered by Legistar™
Staff Report
REPORT 21-0660
2015 and identified a goal of achieving carbon neutrality in municipal operations by 2020
(Attachment 2).The plan suggested a number of possible strategies to reach carbon neutrality
including:
·On-site electricity generation;
·Utilizing carbon credits/offsets and renewable energy certificates; and
·Community Choice Aggregation.
Since acceptance,the City has implemented many measures recommended in the plan.These
include:
·Installation of additional electric vehicle chargers for both the public and for City fleet.The City
now maintains 34 chargers citywide, 28 of which are for public use;
·Installation of a 99kW solar photovoltaic system on the Community Center.The installation
cost the City approximately $200,000 but has saved the City almost $70,000 in electricity
costs to date while reducing energy use by more than half;
·Retrofitting over 900 streetlights from low-pressure sodium vapor bulbs to LED technology,
reducing energy consumption by approximately 360,000 kWh over the last three years; and
·The City revised its Clean Fleet policy in 2017 to align with the City’s municipal carbon neutral
plan and commit to a progressive transition to zero and low-emissions vehicles and
equipment.
The State set goals for reducing GHG emissions by 2020 and 2050 through AB 32 and Executive
Order (EO)S-3-05,respectively.The State has also provided guidance to local jurisdictions as
“essential partners”in achieving the State’s goals by identifying a 2020 recommended reduction goal.
That goal,stated in the AB 32 Scoping Plan,was for local governments to achieve a 15 percent
reduction below 2005 levels by 2020.The City’s 2017 General Plan,“PLAN Hermosa,”spelled out
the following City goals:
1.A Community emissions reduction target of at least 66 percent reduction below 2005 levels by
2040; and
2.A Municipal emission reduction target that meets or exceeds 80 percent below 2005 levels by
2030.
Municipal emissions result from City-owned facilities and operations while community emissions
result from all the privately-owned facilities and activities in the City,both residential and commercial.
Understandably,the City has greater control over municipal emissions while community emissions
represent a much greater amount of emissions from a more complex mix of sources.PLAN Hermosa
also requires the City evaluate its progress at 5-year intervals and take corrective action as needed
to stay on track to reduce its municipal emissions.Inventories of municipal and community emissions
were performed in 2005 and 2012.These inventories were analyzed as part of the City’s Energy
Efficiency Climate Action Plan,developed by the South Bay Cities Council of Governments in 2015
City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 11/3/2021Page 2 of 6
powered by Legistar™
Staff Report
REPORT 21-0660
Efficiency Climate Action Plan,developed by the South Bay Cities Council of Governments in 2015
(Attachment 3)and show progress towards the City’s goals:
·The community of Hermosa Beach decreased emissions 7.7 percent from 2005 to 2012,from
137,160 MTCO2e to 126,611 MTCO2e;
·Under the Adjusted Business-as-Usual (BAU)forecast,emissions will be 111,690 MTCO2e in
2020 and 94,162 MTCO2e in 2035.These emissions levels are 19 percent lower in 2020 than
2005 and 31 percent lower than 2005 by 2035; and
·Municipal emissions have decreased 9 percent from 2005 to 2012,from 1,501 MTCO2e to
1,372 MTCO2e.
These most recent emissions inventories also indicate that electricity use accounts for approximately
40 percent and 60 percent of the City’s community and municipal emissions,respectively.Though
these inventories demonstrate much progress has been made,the City must do more to achieve the
emissions reduction goals committed to in PLAN Hermosa.Due to the COVID-19 pandemic,City
staff were unable to dedicate the resources necessary to perform the anticipated 2020 assessment of
progress towards municipal carbon neutrality.This Council Retreat serves in part to understand these
goals, assess our progress, and discuss possible next steps.
Past Council Actions
Meeting Date
Description
February 24, 2015
Accepted Carbon Neutral Municipal Plan
August 22, 2017
Adopted Plan Hermosa
Discussion:
As mentioned above,there are a number of possible programs and strategies the City could
implement to further its progress toward carbon neutrality for its municipal and community operations.
Below is a discussion of some of the more impactful options:
Community Choice Aggregation (CCA)
CCA was made possible in California in 2002 with the passage of AB117.CCA provides public
agencies the opportunity to procure their own energy for their customers -the residents and
businesses in their jurisdiction.A CCA is able to purchase power and sell it to its customers,utilizing
the infrastructure (poles and wires)of the existing Investor-Owned Utility (IOU).This results in bills
that are split between the IOU’s delivery costs and the CCA’s energy (“generation”)costs.Typically,
the billing would continue to be done by the IOU with a description of the CCA’s charges included on
bills.
One of the biggest benefits a CCA offers is the ability to control the energy portfolio.This has been
City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 11/3/2021Page 3 of 6
powered by Legistar™
Staff Report
REPORT 21-0660
One of the biggest benefits a CCA offers is the ability to control the energy portfolio.This has been
used most commonly to increase the percentage of renewable energy in the portfolio compared to
that currently offered by the IOUs.Another unique feature of a CCA is that once an agency chooses
to form or join a CCA,every customer is automatically enrolled into the program pursuant to State
law.The agency sets a default initial renewable energy level for both its municipal accounts and all
other community accounts.Customers then have the option of opting out of the CCA and going back
to their original IOU for energy along with the option of changing their individual renewable energy
level,or remaining at the original default level.The jurisdiction also has the option of changing its
default renewable energy level as the program evolves.
Hermosa Beach was one of the first cities in the South Bay to seriously consider a CCA.In its
Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan,the City identified CCA as a viable strategy for reducing the City’s
overall carbon emissions.At the time,the only established CCA in Southern California was Lancaster
Choice Energy,which was also the first to be formed as a standalone CCA.Most CCAs in California
are formed as Joint Powers Authorities (JPA)between multiple public agencies.A number of CCAs
had been operating successfully in Northern California beginning in 2010 including California’s first
CCA, Marin Clean Energy.
After these early considerations of the CCA model,the City hosted three study sessions on the topic
and staff has produced multiple reports concerning the topic of CCA.On November 10,2015,the
City Council gave direction to staff to pursue two avenues for implementing Community Choice
Aggregation:1)as part of the Los Angeles County JPA model (which evolved into the Clean Power
Alliance,or CPA);and 2)as a standalone CCA in partnership with Lancaster Choice Energy.At that
meeting the Council authorized a consulting agreement between Hermosa Beach and the City of
Lancaster for a feasibility study and preparation of an Implementation Plan.
In June 2016,a draft technical feasibility study was completed and presented to City Council at a
special study session.Following a discussion of the results,City Council directed staff to continue
pursuing establishment of a City of Hermosa Beach CCA -Hermosa Beach Choice Energy (HBCE).
City Council also requested information on the timing and costs associated with the Los Angeles
County JPA model (now CPA).
In 2016,Council confirmed their preference that the HBCE procure energy that provides 100 percent
renewable energy for municipal accounts,50 percent renewable energy for all other accounts,with
an option for customers to voluntarily opt up to 100 percent renewable energy with a premium.The
Council also expressed its desire to exclude the use of Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs)from
its energy portfolio.RECs are credits for renewable energy produced elsewhere that can be
purchased to be used towards the purchaser’s renewable energy portfolio.
Much of the discussion at the time was centered on potential risk to the City of forming its own CCA
and associated costs.Amidst this discussion,in September 2016,Council approved an OrdinanceCity of Hermosa Beach Printed on 11/3/2021Page 4 of 6
powered by Legistar™
Staff Report
REPORT 21-0660
and associated costs.Amidst this discussion,in September 2016,Council approved an Ordinance
and associated Implementation Plan and Statement of Intent allowing for the formation of a Hermosa
Beach CCA.Though it was made clear by Council that this was not a commitment to form a CCA,the
Implementation Plan was filed with the California Public Utilities Commission to allow the City the
option to proceed with the process.Ultimately though,the City has yet to create its own CCA or join a
CCA.LA County’s JPA model became the Clean Power Alliance,formed in 2017,which now has 32
member agencies, including neighboring Manhattan Beach and Redondo Beach.
Manhattan Beach and Redondo Beach have set their default clean energy levels at 100 percent and
50 percent,respectively.These defaults apply to all commercial and residential customers in these
agencies and ensures that both are using an energy portfolio that is cleaner than that of Southern
California Edison (SCE),which has a renewable energy level of approximately 33 percent.Currently,
CPA customers pay a premium of approximately 3 percent over their prior SCE bills for the 100
percent renewable rate.These rates should achieve greater parity over time as some of CPA’s cost
factors are reduced or eliminated.One example is the Power Charge Indifference Adjustment (PCIA)
which is an “exit fee”charged to CCA customers to compensate the IOU for energy already
purchased for those customers.
On-Site Generation and Energy Efficiency
On-site generation of electricity is a way for the City to not only reduce its energy consumption and
emissions of energy generated outside of Hermosa Beach,but it can generate more energy than the
City’s operations consume,and consequently offset other emission sources that cannot be easily
made carbon neutral (e.g.,natural gas use,emissions from employee commuting,etc.).Photovoltaic
solar power systems are the most common type of on-site generation.The City installed a 99kW
photovoltaic system on its Community Center in 2017,which has cut offsite electricity consumption
for the facility by over half.Additionally,battery storage of energy from such installations offers a way
to further reduce consumption of offsite energy and develop resiliency among City facilities by
providing a source of backup energy in the event of power outages,such as those expected to occur
following a natural disaster such as an earthquake -when municipal operations will be needed for
emergency services.On-site generation and energy efficiency improvements typically require an
upfront financial commitment that is repaid over the life of the improvement.Grants are also
sometimes available,particularly for multiple benefit projects (such as public safety microgrids)that
extend beyond simply improving City facilities.
Energy efficiency improvements can also be made to existing facilities and equipment.These
include:more efficient HVAC systems,lighting retrofits,and more significant green construction
practices during remodels and new builds of facilities.The City is currently working to incorporate
solar panels in the upcoming upgrades planned for the Clark Building.Another strategy to consider is
revisions to building codes and policies to require more ambitious energy efficiency installations on
public and private projects.For instance,Manhattan Beach recently began developing a plan to
City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 11/3/2021Page 5 of 6
powered by Legistar™
Staff Report
REPORT 21-0660
require solar panel installations on all new public and private commercial buildings.
Next Steps:
Staff continues to explore options for reducing emissions and funding such activities.Specific
strategic direction from Council will allow a better assessment of potential costs and schedules.The
City has separate carbon reduction goals for both municipal and community operations.While a CCA
would achieve significant reductions across both sectors,other strategies can be explored to target
each specifically to achieve the City’s goals.
General Plan Consistency:
This report and associated recommendations have been evaluated for their consistency with the
City’s General Plan. Relevant Policies are listed below:
Sustainability and Conservation Element
Goal 1. Hermosa Beach is a low-carbon municipal organization, reducing greenhouse gases
at a rate that meets or exceeds 80% below 2005 levels by 2030.
Policies:
1.1 Low-carbon municipality.Demonstrate environmental leadership and reduce
greenhouse gas emissions from municipal facilities and operations by at least 80% below
2005 levels by 2030.
Goal 2. Hermosa Beach is a low-carbon community meeting State greenhouse gas reduction
goals by 2040
Policies:
2.1 State targets and goals. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions at a rate that meets long-
term State targets and goals to reduce emissions by at least 66% below 2005 levels by
2040.
Fiscal Impact:
The fiscal impact of achieving these emissions and carbon neutrality goals is unknown at this time
and will be further researched based on Council’s direction.
Attachments:
1.Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan
2.Resolution 15-6940
3.Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan
Respectfully Submitted by: Doug Krauss, Environmental Programs Manager
Approved Suja Lowenthal, City Manager
City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 11/3/2021Page 6 of 6
powered by Legistar™
Hermosa Beach
Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan
Prepared for the City of Hermosa Beach
and the Southern California Association of Governments
January 2015
kaizenergy
Prepared by Juan Matute • em: juan@kaizenergyllc.com • ph: LOCLIMATE-1
(562-546-2831)
Existing Actions: Page 2
Disclaimer
The following disclaimer is provided as a condition of the contract terms under which this plan
was produced:
“This is a project for the City of Hermosa Beach with funding provided by the Southern
California Association of Governments' (SCAG) Sustainability Program Grants. The
Sustainability Program assists Southern California cities and other organizations in evaluating
planning options and stimulating development consistent with the region's Sustainable
Communities Strategy. Sustainability Program Grants support visioning efforts, infill analyses,
economic and policy analyses, and marketing and communication programs.
The preparation of this report has been financed in part through grant(s) from the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FT A) through the U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT) in accordance with the provisions under the Metropolitan
Planning Program as set forth in Section 104(t) of Title 23 of the U.S. Code.
The contents of this report reflect the views of the author who is responsible for the facts and
accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views
or policies of SCAG, DOT or the State of California. This report does not constitute a standard,
specification or regulation. SCAG shall not be responsible for the City's future use or adaptation
of the report.
The contents of this report reflect the views of the author who is responsible for the facts and
accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views
or policies of SCAG or DOT. This report does not constitute a standard, specification or
regulation.”
Existing Actions: Page 3
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Action Baseline ................................................................................... 1
Defining Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment ......................................................................... 6
Electricity ..................................................................................................................................... 29
Municipal Fleet ............................................................................................................................ 45
Employee Commutes .................................................................................................................. 57
Other Emissions .......................................................................................................................... 66
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets ................................................................................................. 69
Performance Monitoring, Costs, Transparency, and Outreach ................................................... 87
Existing Actions: Page 1
Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Action Baseline
Municipal Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory
A recent draft update to Hermosa Beach’s greenhouse emissions inventory for municipal
operations indicates that streetlights and traffic signals, vehicle fleet, and building and other
electricity make up Hermosa Beach’s top three municipal emissions sources. The City’s
municipal operations inventory is being updated as part of the Energy Efficiency Climate Action
Plan process. The 2005 inventory is compared to the draft 2012 inventory below.
Top Municipal Operations Emissions Sources in Hermosa Beach (2005 to 2012)
Emissions Source/Activity (Scope) 2005 MT CO2e
(% of total)
2012 MT CO2e
(% of total)
% Change in MT
CO2e (2007-2012)
Streetlights and Traffic Signal
Electricity (2)
405 (27%) 359 (26.2%) -11.4%
Employee Commute (3) 348 (23.2%) 218 (15.9%) -37.4%
Building & Other Facility Electricity
(2)
301 (20%) 305 (22.2%) 1.3%
Vehicle Fleet (1) 227 (15.1%) 328 (23.9%) 44%
Solid Waste - Contract Services (3) 215 (14.3%) 162 (11.8%) -24.7%
Total 1,501 1,372 -8.6%
Source: EECAP Final Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report. Note: Some 2005 figures in
EECAP Draft inventory are inconsistent with 2005 & 2007 Inventories.
City of Hermosa Beach Actions toward Carbon Neutrality
Like many communities in California, the City of Hermosa Beach has developed a number of
plans and strategies to address climate change and reduce the city’s greenhouse gas
emissions. The latest effort, an Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan (EECAP), has provided
the City of Hermosa Beach with a foundation in development of a comprehensive Climate
Action Plan (CAP) by understanding community and municipal energy use, identifying local level
Existing Actions: Page 2
strategies resulting in long term energy efficiency, developing implementation plans, and
establishing progress reports.
In pursuit of carbon neutrality, the City of Hermosa Beach has taken progressive steps in the
planning, collaborating, and goal-setting for GHG reductions. Since setting the goal of carbon
neutrality, the City Council has developed or is working on community discussions, strategic
plans, and updates to the General Plan in keeping with its new sustainability targets. They have
contracted outside vendors to inventory municipal GHG emissions so City operations and
building may become the beacon of carbon reductions for the entire community. As a result of
this inventory, the City has begun specific financial and technical assessments of its energy
procurement. It has also begun exploring options to reduce energy use, including park and
street lighting, and minimize GHG emissions by City operations. In doing so, the City set green
purchasing and fleet policy goals to allow considerations for their target reductions and initiated
a preliminary review of their employee rideshare program.
The keystone of Hermosa Beach’s existing climate action planning activities is the Hermosa
Beach Sustainability Plan prepared by its Green Task Force and accepted by the City Council in
2011. This prior plan is estimated to support a 25% reduction in emissions below 2005 levels
by 2020.
Existing Actions: Page 3
Existing Plans, Measures, and Documents Related to Climate Action
Title Description
Assessing Options to
Deliver Carbon
Neutral Electricity to
the City of Hermosa
Beach
A report assessing options to deliver carbon neutral electricity to
the City. It focuses on Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) and
SCE's version of a Green Tariff Shared Renewables (GTSR)
program as solutions.
Assessment and
Planning Report for
an Energy Efficiency
Climate Action Plan
(Draft)
Describes actions that the City, the SBCCOG, and region have
already taken toward the goals of reduced energy use and GHG
emissions, and outlines the process for planning and
implementing new measures to continue to work toward those
goals. (Prepared by SBCCOG in consultation with city)
Beacon Award
Program
Resolution to participate in recognition program “Beacon Award:
Local Leadership toward Solving Climate Change Leader
Partnership Program” run by the Institute for Local Governments.
Carbon Neutral Issue
Paper: City Council
Staff Report
The document summarizes issues and actions taken toward
carbon reduction for municipal operations. (January 3, 2014)
Carbon Neutral Road
Map for Municipal
Facilities &
Operations
Definitions, actions and target date for carbon neutrality.
Summary of accomplishments, 2005 baseline, Sustainability Plan
Targets. (SCAG Grant).
Carbon Neutral
Scoping Plan
Provides analysis of emissions conditions by sector and identifies
scenarios and options for GHG reduction to achieve carbon
neutrality (GHG emissions model).
City Council Strategic
Plan
The plan sets City Council goals and action plans (5-year/current
year), such as a road map to carbon neutrality.
Clean Fleet Policy
and Action Plan and
Update
City Council adopted the policy, targets, and a plan to green the
City fleet.
Community Dialogue:
Decision-Making
Tool, Quality of Life,
Fiscal/Financial
A summary of the community character and what people value
about the City. Provides a comparison of the City's financial/fiscal
condition as compared to other peer communities. City Council
incorporated Decision Making Tool into its Strategic Plan, 2014.
Existing Actions: Page 4
Title Description
Employee Commute
Survey and
Reduction Strategies
(Draft): 2013
Employee Commute
Survey.
Summary identifies strategies for the Employer Commuter
Program to support the City's carbon neutrality goal.
Enterprise Energy
Management
Information System
A program designed to track electricity, natural gas, and water
data in real time.
Energy Savings at a
Glance Quarterly
Report
Reports created by GSE Solutions for the SBCCOG. The reports
summarize total annual energy use for all municipal facilities and
energy-savings projects completed, in progress, and
planned/identified and quantify opportunities for reducing
operating costs.
Energy Study Report This report, by GSE Solutions, assesses the City’s options for
energy efficiency retrofits and makes recommendations to pursue
the most cost-effective options through on-bill financing.
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Inventory:
Community-wide and
Municipal
Community and municipal GHG inventories per Local
Government Operations Protocol and International Local
Government GHG Emissions Analysis Protocol. The baseline
year is 2005, interim year is 2007, and 1990 is the historic level.
Municipal High-
Efficiency Product
Procurement Policy
Allows energy efficiency to be a consideration in purchasing.
Solar Project
Proposal
Conceptual proposal by PSOMASFMG for 2 solar sites (total
system size of 176 kW-DC) with a net purchase price of $740,843
and annual O&M of $4,893 in year 1. Sites include solar energy
systems mounted on carports at City Hall and Community Center.
Strategy and Steps to
Accelerate Energy
Reduction and Cost
Savings
Report includes recommendations to implement energy reduction
projects for City building, park lighting, and street lighting through
CIP funds and on-bill financing agreement with SCE and adoption
of a Municipal High Efficiency Product Procurement Policy.
Sustainability Plan A plan of actions to reduce GHG emissions City-wide by 15%
from 2005 by 2020.
Existing Actions: Page 5
In-Progress Plans, Measures, and Documents Related to Climate Action
Title Description
Energy Element:
Climate Action Plan
The South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG) is
developing the EECAP, which is the electricity section of the
City’s Climate Action Plan. The Energy Element will provide the
foundation and framework to develop a comprehensive CAP and
put the city on a measurable path toward energy and GHG
emissions reductions. This report will describe actions already
taken towards reducing energy use and GHG emissions. It will
also provide an energy and emissions inventory, forecasts, and
targets, potential measures for energy efficiency and GHG
reduction, and the proposed processes for public participation,
environmental review, and ongoing monitoring processes.
General Plan Update
Integrating the
Coastal Land Use
Plan Focused on
Sustainability and a
Low Carbon Future
A General Plan Update will be focused on sustainability and
carbon reduction targets adopted by the City prior to or through
the process.
Municipal Carbon
Neutral Plan
This plan helps the City navigate its pathway to Carbon Neutrality
and ancillary benefits.
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 6
Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan
Defining Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment
Determining the City’s Municipal Climate Action Goal
The Elements of a Climate Action Goal
Local governments have various options in defining their climate commitment. The time frame,
magnitude, boundary, and control options are detailed in the table below. Goals with larger
magnitude reductions and future years that are nearer are seen as more aggressive. For
instance, an 80% reduction in emissions by 2030 is viewed as far more aggressive than an 80%
reduction in emissions by 2050 or a 50% reduction in emissions by 2030.
Choices for Climate Action Goals
Goal Element Goal Choices
Time Frame Choose both:
● Base Year - typically in the past
● Future Year - the year by which the entity commits to meeting its
climate commitment
Magnitude Choose an absolute or percentage reduction, relative to the base year
Applicable
Boundary
Choose one depending on the type of goal:
● Organizational boundary (for entities)
● Geographic boundaries (for communities)
Control over
Emissions
Determine which emissions are within and outside of control:
● Direct & indirect emissions (scopes 1 through 3, for entities)
● Activities & sources (communities)
Note: Communities and entities will typically use a greenhouse gas accounting protocol to aid in
identifying applicable boundaries and control over emissions.
Most goals follow the following format: an X% reduction in boundary-wide greenhouse gas
emissions versus Base Year levels by the future year. For example, California’s greenhouse
gas reduction goal is to achieve 1990 levels in statewide emissions by 2020. This is a 0%
reduction in all statewide emissions (adjusting for electricity imports) versus 1990 levels by
2020.
The most common local climate commitment is the U.S. Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement.
Mayors from the 1,060 cities that have signed onto the agreement indicated their City’s
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 7
commitment to “strive to meet or exceed Kyoto Protocol targets for reducing global warming
pollution by taking actions in our own operations and communities.” Kyoto targets were 7%
below 1990 levels by 2012. Former Hermosa Beach Mayor Sam Edgerton III signed onto this
agreement.
In commissioning this Carbon Neutral Plan for Municipal Operations, Hermosa Beach wishes to
explore the feasibility of a 100% reduction in net greenhouse gas emissions. While this
determines the magnitude, the City has yet to determine the future year, boundary, and control
over emissions. The base year becomes important if Hermosa Beach seeks to go beyond
carbon neutrality by offsetting additional emissions to become “climate positive” or “carbon
negative”.
Defining the “Carbon Neutral” goal for Municipal Operations
In pursuing carbon neutral municipal operations, Hermosa Beach is striving for a 100%
reduction in emissions from local government operations. The key remaining decisions are:
● Determining the future year by which Hermosa Beach plans to achieve carbon neutrality.
● Deciding which local government emissions are subject to the goal.
● Deciding whether to set a goal for “gross” emissions in addition to net emissions. Gross
emissions are subtotals before any use of offsets.
In determining the future year, Hermosa Beach must balance its desire to be a state, national,
or international climate action leader with a desire to make pursuit of carbon neutrality as cost -
effective as possible.
Prior work on greenhouse gas accounting for local governments and prior actions by the
California Air Resources Board (ARB) have largely determined which emissions should be
subject to Hermosa Beach’s goal. An understanding of these accounting procedures and
consideration of the boundary and control decisions made by other cities are useful in
determining which emissions the City should seek to neutralize.
Accounting Standards for Local Government Operations
The California Air Resources Board recommends that municipalities that seek to inventory their
entity’s emissions use the Local Government Operations Protocol, which it helped develop.
The Local Government Operations Protocol provides specific guidance for accounting and
reporting Greenhouse Gas Emissions throughout North America, with additional guidance for
California. The Local Government Operations Protocol is based on the North America-specific
General Reporting Protocol, published by The Climate Registry. Forty-one US States have
declared The Climate Registry’s General Reporting Protocol as their preferred greenhouse gas
emissions accounting and reporting guidance. The General Reporting Protocol is based on the
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 8
worldwide Corporate Standard, jointly published by the World Business Council on Sustainable
Development and the World Resources Institute.
All three documents are used for entity-based greenhouse gas emissions accounting and
reporting. Entity-based accounting differs from geographic-based accounting and reporting,
which is used to account for and report emissions from the community, a state, or a nation. The
U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the
IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories are two commonly-accepted
guidance documents for geographic-based accounting.
Both entity-based and geographic-based accounting and reporting guidance require an
inventory to include gross emissions totals before adjusting for any offsets. Offsets and the
inventory’s gross emissions after adjusting for offsets are included as an informational item.
Looking at requirements for state agencies may shed light on what accounting procedures local
governments would need to use should the state one day mandate greenhouse gas reductions
from local government operations. California Law requires state agencies that are members of
the Climate Action Team to estimate their greenhouse gas emissions from their operations. An
Executive Order (B-18-12) requires all other state agencies to prepare an annual inventory. The
guidance to state agencies dictates that inventories should be conducted using protocols
established by The Climate Registry, which includes the Local Government Operations
Protocol.
The following cities in Los Angeles County are members of The Climate Registry: Lomita, Long
Beach, Santa Monica, and Vernon. Only Vernon has reported a third-party verified GHG
inventory to The Climate Registry. Los Angeles County is also a member of The Climate
Registry. The 2005 and 2007 municipal inventories and current draft of the City of Hermosa
Beach GHG Inventory, Forecasting, Target-Setting Report for an Energy Efficiency Climate
Action Plan also uses the Local Government Operations Protocol.
➤
➣
➢
Because the Local Government Operations Protocol is currently recommended and is
the most likely candidate if municipal accounting and reporting were ever made
compulsory, Hermosa Beach should use this protocol to determine which local
government operations emissions are subject to its carbon neutrality goal.
Defining Organizational Boundaries for the Local Government Organization
Each of the three entity-based reporting standards discussed earlier allows entities the option of
reporting emissions using operational control or financial control.
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 9
● Operational Control: Occurs when an entity wholly owns the operation, facility, or source,
or when it has the full authority to introduce and implement operational and health,
safety, and environmental policies (including both GHG- and non-GHG-related policies).
● Financial Control: Occurs when a local government wholly owns an operation, facility, or
source, or is a majority partner in a joint venture. A local government may own an asset
(e.g. a transit bus), but not maintain operational control (e.g. transit operations and
maintenance are contracted out).
Because of the unique nature of local governments, the Local Government Operations Protocol
“strongly encourages local governments to utilize operational control when defining their
organizational boundary.” In addition, the Local Government Operations Protocol makes
several reporting recommendations for jointly-controlled operations, sources, or facilities.
Organizational Boundaries for Local Governments
Structure Reporting Recommendation in Local Government Operations
Protocol
Joint Powers Authority
(JPA)
A JPA is considered a distinct entity; a local government should not
report emissions from a JPA of which it is a member.
Special Districts Special Districts are considered distinct entities; however, a local
government may optionally report as scope 3 those emissions
which are attributable to the local government (e.g. emissions at a
special district operated landfill attributable to the municipal
government’s waste)
Community Choice
Aggregation
Community Choice Aggregation is a distinct entity when
implemented through a Joint Powers Authority; a local government
should not report emissions from community electricity used
through a CCA. The local government should report emissions
from municipal electricity procured via a CCA.
➤
➣
➢
Hermosa Beach should use operational control to define its organization for purposes of
GHG emissions accounting and reporting. Scope 3 emissions from special districts can
be incorporated on a case-by-case basis, as determined by the relevancy of emissions
to municipal operations.
Determining Appropriate Emissions within the Municipal Operations Boundary
To become carbon neutral, Hermosa Beach would have to reduce or offset emissions from all
sectors, activities, and sources for which it reports emissions. The Local Government
Operations Protocol suggests that municipalities report scope 1 and 2 emissions over which
they have operational control from the following 11 sectors:
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 10
Local Government Operations Protocol Sectors and Reporting Recommendations for
Hermosa Beach
Sector Operational Control in Hermosa Beach Recommendation
Buildings and other
facilities
✔ Operational control over City-owned
buildings.
Report these
emissions.
Streetlights and
traffic signals
✔ Operational control over City-owned
streetlights.
✘ Limited or no operational control of
streetlights provided by Southern
California Edison.
Report these
emissions, including
emissions from
SCE-owned street
lighting.
Water delivery
facilities
✘ No operational control:
○ Water is imported, recycled, treated,
and supplied by West Basin
Municipal Water District.
○ Water is delivered by California Water
Service Company (Rancho
Dominguez/Hermosa-Redondo).
Consider reporting
emissions from
water distribution.
Port facilities ✘ No port facilities. Do not report.
Airport facilities ✘ No airport facilities. Do not report.
Vehicle fleet ✔ Owned municipal vehicle fleet Report these
emissions
Transit fleet ✘ No operational control.
Hermosa Beach is served by Beach Cities
Transit (controlled by Redondo Beach,
operated by Transportation Concepts), the
Los Angeles County Metropolitan
Transportation Authority Lines 130 & 232,
(operated by MV Transportation), Los
Angeles Department of Transportation
Commuter Express Route 438 (operated
by MV Transportation).
Consider these
emissions as an
informational item.
Power generation
facilities
✘ Service provided by Southern California
Edison.
Emissions reported
in other sectors as
scope 2.
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 11
Sector Operational Control in Hermosa Beach Recommendation
Solid waste facilities ✔ Operational control via contracting.
Athens Services provides haulage and
sorting, landfills are owned by a third
party.
Report community-
wide collection and
haulage emissions.
Report landfill
emissions from
waste generated by
municipal
operations.
Wastewater facilities ✘ Services provided by the Southern
California Sanitation Control District /
South Bay Cities District.
Consider these
emissions as an
informational item.
Other process &
fugitive emissions
These are cross-sectoral emissions. Report fugitive
emissions of
common high-GWP
gases (refrigerants
and fire suppression
systems) over which
the City has
operational control
Other special districts of which Hermosa
Beach is a part
These sectors are not included in the Local
Government Operations Protocol
Flood Control Los Angeles Flood Control District Do not report.
Vector Control Los Angeles County West Vector & Vector-
Borne Control District
Do not report.
Community Health
District
Beach Cities Health District - preventative
healthcare for the residents of Hermosa,
Manhattan, and Redondo Beach.
Do not report.
Emissions from transit and wastewater are not currently included in Hermosa Beach’s
greenhouse gas inventory. We recommend they are included as an informational item because
these services are provided in Hermosa Beach, but by other local government entities.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Scopes & Biogenic Emissions
Entity-based accounting guidance also classifies emissions into three scopes depending on the
operational control possessed over the emissions. Hermosa Beach should report and
neutralize all scope 1 and scope 2 emissions, and certain scope 3 emissions.
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 12
Emissions Scopes and Local Government Protocol Reporting Requirements
Emissions Scope Reporting Recommendation for Selected Sectors
1 - Direct Emissions Include per Local Government Operations Protocol
2 - Indirect Emissions from
Imported Energy, Steam, &
Cooling
Include per Local Government Operations Protocol
3 - Other Indirect Emissions Optional per Local Government Operations Protocol
Hermosa Beach should include emissions from:
● waste generated by government operations, but
disposed of outside its organizational boundary;
● emissions from employee commuting; and
● emissions from employee business travel (not
currently included in the City’s municipal
inventories).
Hermosa Beach should consider including:
● upstream life-cycle emissions from goods and
services consumed by Hermosa’s municipal
government.
Anthropogenic versus Biogenic Emissions
Anthropogenic sources represent new greenhouse gas emissions, above and beyond the
atmospheric carbon balance that existed before industrialization and use of fossil fuels. Much of
the carbon emitted is new atmospheric carbon, formerly trapped underground.
Biogenic or non-anthropogenic sources are considered part of the carbon cycle or result from
emissions not caused by humans. Because of this difference, greenhouse gas reporting
guidelines differentiate between biogenic and anthropogenic sources of greenhouse gas
emissions, reducing gross or net inventory figures by biogenic emissions totals. Biogenic CO2
emissions from the combustion of biomass should be quantified and reported as an
informational item rather than as part of scope 1 emissions.
Climate Action Goals by Other Cities
This section examines the context for Hermosa Beach’s climate commitment by looking at
aggressive local government goals for both the community and municipal operations. In
general, cities have set and pursued aggressive climate action goals because of internal
pressure to take action to mitigate climate change and provide an example to others rather than
to capitalize on any economic benefits that may accrue to climate action leaders.
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 13
Hermosa Beach seeks a reputation as a prominent local climate action leader. While the City’s
position in California gives it clear guidance on choosing the minimum set of emissions which it
should neutralize, Hermosa Beach should look to other cities’ goals and use of offsets in order
to position itself as a climate action leader. When Hermosa Beach adopts and publicizes a
goal, it will be compared first and foremost to current and future goals by other cities in
California, followed by cities elsewhere in the U.S. Less weight will likely be placed on
comparing goals set by Hermosa with those of major world cities.
Cities in California
Davis: Carbon Neutral Community by 2050
In 2008, the City of Davis adopted, by resolution, GHG targets for community and municipal
operations that put the City on a path toward carbon neutrality by 2050, with average reductions
of 2.6% per year between 2015 and 2040. Davis plans to use offsets to neutralize emissions it
cannot reduce on its own.
Davis uses the Local Government Operations Protocol to account and report municipal
emissions and the U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions for community emissions. Within its inventory, Davis includes its vehicle fleet,
special equipment, refrigerant leakage, natural gas and facility emissions, electricity (buildings,
streetlights, traffic lights, and water & wastewater conveyance), as well as direct emissions from
treating and processing water and wastewater. In 2010, Davis adopted its Climate Action and
Adaptation Plan, which details the City’s past and future climate actions.
The City of Davis reported verified emissions to The Climate Registry for calend ar years 2009
and 2010.
Berkeley: Reductions by Popular Demand
In 2006, the voters of the City of Berkeley adopted a GHG reduction target of 80% below 2000
levels by 2050. 82.3% of voters favored Measure G. The Office of Energy and Sustainable
Development within the Department of Planning & Development regularly tracks community and
municipal progress. Berkeley does not have a carbon neutrality goal.
Palo Alto: Carbon Neutral Electricity
The City of Palo Alto Utilities Electricity Supply Portfolio Carbon Neutral Plan outlines a strategy
to secure long-term contracts for renewable energy, with use of RPS-eligible unbundled RECs
and greenhouse gas offsets in the interim (2013-2016). In 2007, the Palo Alto City Council
adopted a goal to reduce municipal and community GHG emissions 15% below 2005 levels by
2020.
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 14
Lancaster: “Solar Capital of the World”
The City of Lancaster’s goal is to become the Solar Capital of the World. In 2011, the City
formed the Lancaster Power Authority to install solar photovoltaic arrays at local schools and to
partner with private clean energy companies. On March 26, 2013, the City adopted an
ordinance that required new single family homes to provide solar-generated power. In 2014, the
City started Lancaster Choice Energy, a pending community choice aggregator.
The City does not have a climate action plan. In 2010, it passed a resolution asking the state to
suspend AB 32.
San Francisco: A Cautionary Tale on Ephemeral Climate Goals
In his January 2008 inaugural address, Mayor Gavin Newsom pledged to make the City
completely carbon neutral by 2020:
“The most important step we can take is make this city completely carbon neutral, and
that is exactly what we’re going to do.... Today I want to pledge to make this City -- and
this, by the way this is not one of those fanciful pledges that never gets done, you can't
measure, and nothing ever happens, and we come and go, and no one holds us to
account. Let us pledge today -- with a specific plan that will follow -- to make San
Francisco and City government carbon neutral by 2020. I think that's a fair, reasonable,
as well as an audacious goal.”
The resulting plan, released later that year, contained a goal to reduce community emissions to
20 percent below 1990 levels by 2012 through implementation of reduction strategies and the
use of offsets. The plan mentioned neutrality, but did not express a future year to make the goal
concrete. In 2008, the City adopted an ordinance to reduce community-wide emissions 25%
below 1990 levels by 2017 and 80% below 1990 levels by 2050.
San Francisco failed to meet its 2012 goal for reductions in municipal greenhouse gas
emissions.
Sacramento: Acting Through the General Plan
Sacramento incorporated its 2012 Climate Action Plan into its 2035 General Plan Update in
2014. The City did this to strengthen the plan’s objectives by including them as general plan
policies and implementation measures. The 2014 Draft includes a general plan policy to reduce
community-wide emissions 83% below 2005 levels by 2050.
The Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD), which provides electric service to the City
and surrounding areas, maintains an offset program and offers opt-in 50% and 100% renewable
options through its Greenergy product.
Neither the City nor the utility have a carbon neutral goal.
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 15
Santa Barbara: Concerned about the Cost of Carbon Neutrality
Santa Barbara considered a municipal carbon neutral goal in 2008 through 2009, but ultimately
decided against setting aggressive greenhouse gas reduction targets. According to an agenda
from their March 10, 2009 meeting, “The [Finance] Committee is in favor of having City goals in
this regard, but has requested additional financial information. Once the Committee receives
the additional information, the Committee will review the options and return to the full Council in
the near future.” No evidence in the council record suggests that the council ever reconsidered
a carbon neutral goal. In Santa Barbara’s 2012 Climate Action Plan, the City adopted the
standard AB 32 target of reducing community emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.
Cities Elsewhere in the United States
Seattle, Washington: A Gross Emissions Reduction Goal
In 2005, municipal utility Seattle City Light became the first carbon neutral electric utility, aided
by the fact that 90% of the utility’s portfolio comes from hydroelectric resources. Seattle City
Light offsets the balance of emissions using offsets registered with the Climate Action Reserve
and other third-party organizations.
In May 2011, the City released Getting to Zero: A Pathway to Carbon Neutral Seattle. In
October 2011, the City Council adopted a resolution to set a goal of 87% gross reduction in
community emissions by 2050, with the balance neutralized by offsets. The City does not have
a separate target for municipal operations. In 2013, the City adopted the Seattle Climate Action
Plan, which relies on a combination of pricing, transportation electrification, and integrated
transportation and land use planning to move the city towards its long-term goal.
Seattle’s approach to climate action and long-term goal highlight both the urgency of the effort,
but also the deliberate process in deciding to decarbonize a local economy. The City made its
carbon neutral community commitment 10 years after its first notable climate action, a LEED
building incentive program, and five years after its first Climate Action Plan. Control over the
electric utility -- and the revenues it provides -- will undoubtedly aid the City in its pursuit.
Austin, Texas: Carbon Neutral Community by 2050; Municipality by 2020
In 2007, Austin adopted, by resolution, a goal of carbon neutral municipal operations by 2020.
The resolution included an interim goal to power all City facilities with renewable energy by 2012
(achieved), implement an ordinance to mandate zero net-energy capable1 new homes by 2015,
and create an interdepartmental climate action team to address emissions from the community,
and a unified approach to obtain offsets for municipal and community emissions.
1 Austin defines a net-zero energy capable” homes as a home that is energy efficient enough would
produce as much energy as it uses if it were to have a reasonably-sized solar system on the roof
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 16
In 2014, Austin adopted a resolution to pursue community carbon neutrality by 2050, which
reiterated the City’s 2020 goal for a carbon neutral municipality.
Austin’s City Council has control over its electric utility, Austin Energy, which gives the City
substantial leeway to fund and implement climate action programs. The City has its own offsets
program, which prioritizes local sources of offsets. Offsets are funded by voluntary contributions
from various large events in Austin, including Austin City Limits.
Boulder County and City, Colorado
Boulder County has a goal of carbon neutral municipal operations by 2020. The County plans
to use offsets to achieve this goal. The County’s stated goal in its 2012 Environmental
Sustainability Plan is to “Achieve carbon neutrality and become more resilient to the potential
effects of climate change.” The County adopted this goal before the County and other parts of
Colorado experienced a once-in-a-century flood in September 2013, which were seen as a
potential symptom of climate change.
The City of Boulder’s years of consideration provide an example of a thoughtful, deliberative
approach to making long-term climate commitments. The City discussed three climate
commitment goals in a council study session on July 30, 2013, following four shorter study
sessions in 2013. They are summarized below:
● Realizing that aggressive climate action efforts must span City departments, Boulder has
an integrated approach at the top level of administration and policy-making (city
manager and general plan level). Boulder also found it important to develop a short-term
goal in addition to its long term goal, as this would solidify early actions rather than
approaching “analysis paralysis” in determining the ordering of actions towards the long-
term goal. As a key part of its efforts to build climate change information into decision -
making, Boulder strives to create a more robust and dynamic data management and
performance system for monitoring progress.
● Key points of the climate commitment are:
○ Seven Core Principles: be strategic, yet opportunistic; take calculated risks; avoid
analysis paralysis; partner with other agencies, nonprofits, and businesses;
demonstrate ethical leadership; focus on system change; and harness the
economic benefits of climate leadership.
○ Six Pillars of Action: “ramp up renewables”, “better buildings” (efficiency and
resilience), “travel wise” (sustainable transportation), “waste not” (materials &
resource recovery), and “every drop” (conserve water)
○ Five Elements: goal setting, defining targets, strategy development, monitoring
and reporting, and community & partner engagement.
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 17
Three Goals
The City of Boulder explored 3 community-wide goals for carbon neutrality, from least to most
aggressive:
1. An 80% reduction in emissions by 2050 (ultimately selected)
2. Carbon neutral by 2050
3. Carbon neutral by 2030 (determined to be too aggressive)
Staff ultimately decided to recommend the Council consider the first two goals, as the third
option would require immediate, drastic reductions (25% per year). The Council ultimately
decided on Option 1: an 80% reduction in community-wide emissions by 2020.
While some council members sought the stronger goal, the Council ultimately decided that they
would revisit the goal in a few years. A comment from Councilmember Macon Cowles captured
the sentiment of the majority: “I don’t look at this as an endpoint but as an aggressive goal...that
we can revisit again in a couple of years... With this goal (option one), I think that we can do
this. But the times are uncertain....Let’s make sure we can do this and that we do this.” (3:42:03
in video).
City of Boulder’s financial resources for climate action
In 2006, Boulder’s voters passed a Climate Action Plan tax as a surcharge on electric utility
bills. Voters extended the measure in 2012. Boulder is served by an investor-owned utility,
Xcel Energy. The tax, similar to California’s Utility Users Tax, provides the City with an
opportunity to collect revenues based on electricity usage. Per-kWh rates are $0.0049 for
residential, $0.0009 for commercial, and $0.0003 for industrial customers. The tax generates
around $1.8 million per year and funds personnel, energy audits, rebates and incentives, and
public education programs.
Next Steps
The July 30th council discussion provided direction for staff, but did not formalize the City’s
climate commitment. As of September 2014, Boulder has not yet adopted a target via
resolution or ordinance.
The City of Boulder and Hermosa Beach are both working with the Brendle Group on climate
action strategy. The Brendle Group conducted much of the background research for the City’s
climate commitment study.
South Miami, Florida
In 2009, the City adopted a resolution and work plan committing to carbon neutrality by 2030.
The resolution applies only to municipal operations.
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 18
Cambridge, Maryland
Cambridge has a “getting to zero” task force scoping options to become a “net zero community.”
This term is not defined, but the task force is focused on reducing carbon emissions from
building operations.
Cities Outside of the United States
British Columbia, Canada
British Columbia is globally unique due to its low-per capita emissions, pervasive local
government climate commitments, and high price of carbon. The province has high utilization of
emissions-free energy, since BC Hydro gets more than 90% of its power from hydroelectricity
and other clean energy sources. Many British Columbia Municipalities have signed on to the
British Columbia Climate Action Charter and have made a commitment to carbon neutral
operations by 2012. British Columbia’s revenue-neutral carbon tax reached its full phase-in
value of $30 per metric ton during 2012.
In measuring municipal carbon neutrality goals, British Columbia considers core services,
whether provided directly or contracted. It also considers fuel and energy used for vehicles,
facilities, machinery, and equipment (whether or not they are owned or leased). Excluded are
non-core services such as airports, janitorial services, staff commuting and travel, and
construction emissions. Offsets are used to neutralize gross greenhouse gas emissions. Their
use - and controversy - are covered in the discussion of offsets later in this chapter.
Aarhus, Denmark
Aarhus is the central city of a region of about 1,250,000 people. In 2008, the City Council
adopted a goal for the community to be CO2-neutral by 2030. The implementation plan does
not include a discussion of offsets.
Copenhagen, Denmark
Copenhagen has a comprehensive plan to achieve community carbon neutrality by 2025. The
City plans to implement aggressive energy efficiency measures, and will offset any remaining
emissions via surplus renewable energy generation.
Malmö, Sweden
Across the Sound from Copenhagen, Malmö is a city with a population of about 300,000. In
2009, the City set a community-wide goal to be “climate neutral” by 2020 (by using offsets) and
run on 100% renewable energy by 2030. The City plans to reduce gross emissions 40% below
1990 levels by 2020.
Melbourne, Australia
In 2002, the City adopted a goal of carbon neutral municipal operations by 2020. In 2013,
Melbourne verified its carbon neutral municipal operations status through an independent audit.
The City used offsets to achieve this goal: investments in an Indonesian clean energy plant.
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 19
The City hopes that its central business district and surrounding areas will be carbon neutral by
2020.
Climate Commitments by Entities Other Than Local
Governments
As carbon neutral commitments are relatively uncommon among local governments, climate
commitments from other entities -- specifically universities, but also corporations -- are relevant
to Hermosa Beach’s decision-making. More similarities exist between local government and
universities than with corporations. Similarities between local governments and higher
educational institutions include: close ties between an individual’s identity and the institution and
place, 24-hour communities with residential life, and the role of competing missions and
priorities in considering climate commitments and action.
Colleges and Universities
The American College and University President’s Climate Commitment (ACUPCC) is a national
climate commitment registry and information-sharing network designed to enhance the
credibility and success of college and university climate goals. As many colleges and
universities are on the leading edge of climate action, the ACUPCC effort is the most mature
climate commitment effort in the U.S. The effort’s commitment requirements and support
structure can provide an example for municipalities.
Signatories agree to: (1) complete an emissions inventory; (2) set a target date and interim
milestones to become climate neutral; (3) immediately implement short-term actions to reduce
GHGs; (4) integrate sustainability into the curriculum; and (5) submit the action plan, inventory,
and progress reports to the network.
ACUPCC provides membership-based guidance and technical support, much as ICLEI provides
for local governments. Annual dues vary from $750 to $4,000 for a basic membership based on
the institution’s size.
As of September 2014, ACUPCC has 684 signatories, 73 of which are in California.
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 20
Southern California Signatories of the American College and University President’s
Climate Commitment:
Anaheim University
Antioch Los Angeles
CSU Pomona
CSU Fullerton
CSU Long Beach
CSU Northridge
Chaffey College
Claremont McKenna College
East Los Angeles College
Harvey Mudd College
Los Angeles City College
Los Angeles Harbor College
Los Angeles Mission College
Los Angeles Pierce College
Los Angeles Southwest College
Los Angeles Trade-Technical
College
Los Angeles Valley College
Loyola Marymount University
Pasadena City College
Pitzer College
Pomona College
Santa Monica College
UC Irvine
UC Los Angeles
UC Riverside
University of La Verne
University of Redlands
West Los Angeles College
West Valley College
Defining Carbon Neutrality for Colleges and Universities
The ACUPCC defines carbon neutrality as “having no net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, to
be achieved by eliminating net GHG emissions, or by minimizing GHG emissions as much as
possible, and using carbon offsets or other measures to mitigate the remaining emissions.”
At a minimum, institutions must report scope 1 (direct) emissions produced through campus
activities; scope 2 (indirect-energy) emissions from purchased energy; and scope 3 (indirect)
emissions from student, faculty, & staff commuting and institution-funded air travel. ACUPCC
recommends (but does not require) that universities evaluate upstream (scope 3) emissions in
purchased goods and services.
ACUPCC requires use of an accounting method consistent with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol
of the World Business Council on Sustainable Development and World Resources Institute.
Both The Climate Registry’s General Reporting Protocol and its derivative for municipalities, the
Local Government Operation Protocol, are consistent.
The ACUPCC has provided a commonly-accepted standard for college and university climate
commitments. Because carbon neutral commitments are relatively rare for U.S. local
governments, no equivalent commonly-accepted standard exists. This signals a leadership
opportunity for Hermosa Beach and other cities considering carbon neutrality goals in the
coming years.
Future Year for College and University Climate Commitments
The most common horizon year for college and university carbon neutrality goals is 2050. A
few universities have set - and achieved - neutrality goals with horizon years prior to 2014. A
discussion of their efforts and use of offsets follows in this chapter.
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 21
A Closer Look at University of California’s Climate Commitment
The University of California hopes to be the first research university system to achieve carbon
neutrality by 2025. Although the goal has been discussed publicly by the Regents and
President Janet Napolitano, it has not been formally adopted as a UC Policy. Existing climate
goals are measured against emissions scopes 1, 2, and select scope 3 (student, staff, and
faculty commutes and university-funded air travel). In 2011, the Regents discussed a carbon
neutrality commitment, stating that while reductions in gross emissions were preferred, offsets
would be required. In order to keep funds within the UC system, the Regents discussed
developing a UC offset fund.
Corporate Climate Goals
In 2014, Ceres, a non-profit organization dedicated to sustainable investment and business,
released a report of corporate greenhouse gas goals for Fortune 500 companies using
information from the CDP (formerly Carbon Disclosure Project). A total of 53 Fortune 100
companies reported target data to the CDP.
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 22
Notable Climate Goals of Fortune 500 Companies
Fortune 500 Company (rank) Sector Gross Emissions Goal (before offsets)
Walmart Stores (1) Retail 30% reduction in GHG-intensity per square foot
from 2010 levels by 2020.
General Electric (8) Industrials /
Financials
25% reduction in scope 1 & 2 emissions from
2004 levels by 2015.
JP Morgan Chase (18) Financials 40% reduction in scope 1 & 2 emissions from
2005 levels by 2020.
Wells Fargo & Company (25) Financials 35% reduction in scope 1, 2, & 3 emissions from
2008 levels by 2020.
Microsoft (35) Information
Technology
Carbon neutral by 2013. Uses an internal
carbon fee to allocate resources.
Goldman Sachs (68) Financials Carbon neutral for offices and data centers by
2020.
Nike (126) Apparel Carbon neutral facilities by 2015.
Excelon (129) Utility eliminate 17.5 million metric tonnes of
greenhouse gas emissions per year by 2020
Kohls (148) Retail Carbon neutrality goal, 2009 through 2015.
Mattel (395)
based in South Bay
Consumer Reduce emissions per unit of revenue 50% from
2008 levels by 2020.
Many companies have backed off carbon neutrality claims that they made in the mid 2000s.
Yahoo, Nike, Pepsi, and Dell are examples. Dell achieved carbon neutral status in 2008, but
backed off after a Wall Street Journal article criticized their lack of transparency and exception
of supply-chain emissions.
The shoeware and apparel company Timberland set a goal in 2005 to be carbo n neutral by
2010. By 2010, they had reduced 38% of emissions and offset the remaining 62%. Timberland
continues to report annual emissions, though it estimates that 96% of life-cycle emissions
associated with its products are outside of corporate control. The company continues to have a
goal of a 50% reduction in 2006 levels by 2015. VF Corporation bought Timberland in 2011.
The change in ownership highlights that decision-maker priorities can change over time.
Defining Climate Goals for Hermosa Beach
The validity of climate action and renewable energy claims is complicated by California’s Cap -
and-Trade and Renewable Portfolio Standard programs. The climate action and renewable
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 23
energy goals presented in this section are not mutually exclusive: the concurrent pursuit of
multiple goals is possible, and some goals are inclusive within others. It’s possible for the City
to pursue multiple goals, and achieve some goals along the way towards others.
Summary of Possible Goals for Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Goal What it means for municipal
operations
What it means for the
community
Zero Emissions Zero gross scope 1, 2, and select
scope 3 emissions attributable to
municipal operations, before
accounting for offsets and RECs.
Zero gross greenhouse gas
emissions from emissions-
generating activities or emissions
sources attributable to the
community, before accounting for
offsets and RECs.
Carbon Neutral A zero balance of net emissions on
a municipal greenhouse gas
inventory after accounting for offsets
and RECs.
A zero balance of net emissions
on a municipal greenhouse gas
inventory after accounting for
offsets and RECs.
Carbon Negative A real, additional, and verifiable
reduction in California (and global)
greenhouse gas emissions
equivalent to some base year
emissions (e.g. Hermosa Beach’s
2005 or 2012 municipal inventory).
A real, additional, and verifiable
reduction in California (and global)
greenhouse gas emissions
equivalent to a community
baseline.
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 24
Possible Goals for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions
Zero Emissions
Zero Emissions means zero gross emissions, even before accounting for adjustments that
appear as informational items on a greenhouse gas inventory, such as use of offsets and
Renewable Energy Certificates. Zero Emissions is the strictest definition of carbon neutrality
and the most difficult to achieve. Because Hermosa Beach is in California (which has a cap-
and-trade program), achieving Zero Emissions would not lead to real, verifiable reductions in
global greenhouse gas emissions (see Carbon Negative section).
Zero Emissions requires 100% participation of:
● Facilities and fleet that exclusively operate on zero-emissions electricity or renewable
biofuels that emit non-anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Zero emissions
renewable electricity could be produced on-site or off-site.
● Employees that either walk, bike, or take electric or biofuel-powered vehicles for
commutes.
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 25
● Contracted service providers that exclusively use electricity or biofuels, either biodiesel
or renewable natural gas.
● Use of landfills and wastewater treatment facilities that employee state-of-the-art
greenhouse gas mitigation techniques.
Carbon Neutral
Carbon Neutral status results when a greenhouse gas inventory has a net zero balance after
subtracting informational items such as offsets and Renewable Energy Certificates from gross
emissions. Carbon Neutral status is possible with less than 100% participation of the activities
outlined under Zero Emissions, plus the retirement of greenhouse gas allowances and, in
certain cases, Renewable Energy Certificates.
Hermosa Beach can achieve Carbon Neutral status by retiring California-eligible greenhouse
gas emissions allowances in an amount equal to its gross emissions inventory. Hermosa Beach
can retire qualified renewable energy used for municipal operations through the California Air
Resources Board’s Voluntary Renewable Energy Program. Hermosa Beach can also purchase
and retire California-eligible offsets through direct participation in California’s carbon market or
through services offered by carbon balancing firms.
Hermosa Beach can also purchase and retire greenhouse gas allowances that are not
California-eligible. While non-California allowance retirement can also lead to a reduction in
global greenhouse gas emissions, it will not reduce emissions in California and therefore would
not meet potential future guidance from the California Air Resources Board. If the City chooses
to pursue this route, Hermosa Beach should seek out high-quality offsets that are measurable,
real, additional, and verifiable: typically those that are admissible to mandatory greenhouse gas
reduction programs with high offset performance standards. In some cases, voluntary
allowances may meet this high performance standard, such as those certified by the Climate
Action Reserve, Gold Standard, and Verified Carbon Standard.
Carbon Negative
A new term to describe municipal climate action goals is needed for cities subject to a cap-and-
trade program. The absolute cap on emissions in such a program means that emissions
reductions attributable to activities in Hermosa Beach would be replaced by equivalent
emissions from other sources outside of Hermosa Beach, but within the jurisdiction of the cap-
and-trade program. Therefore, the overall level of greenhouse gas emissions in California (and
globally) remains the same regardless of Hermosa Beach’s actions. Cap-and-trade programs
allow for guaranteed reductions in program-wide greenhouse gas emissions, but negate
emissions reductions from individual entity or community action.
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 26
Carbon Negative status means that Hermosa Beach achieves a real, additional, and verifiable
reduction (or “dent”) in California and global greenhouse gas emissions. If Hermosa Beach
were not located within a cap-and-trade program, achieving Zero Emissions or Carbon Neutral
status would lead to a real, additional, measurable, and verifiable reduction in global
greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to the City’s business-as-usual baseline.
Hermosa Beach and other entities and communities can achieve Carbon Negative status by
retiring greenhouse gas emissions allowances. The retirement of any amount of allowances
greater than the City’s gross greenhouse gas emissions inventory allows the City to make
Carbon Negative claims. However, as the City’s gross emissions decrease, the “dent” will
decrease over time. Thus, the business-as-usual baseline is recommended for offset purchase
and retirement targets, as this approximates the “dent” Hermosa Beach would make in global
greenhouse gas emissions if it pursued aggressive climate action outside of California’s cap-
and-trade program.
Summary of Possible Goals for Use of Renewable Energy
Goal What it means for municipal
operations
What it means for the
community
Powered by
Renewable
Energy
The municipality can validly claim
that operations are powered by
renewable energy, using Green-e
RECs to support the claim.
The community can validly claim
that it is powered by renewable
energy.
Powered by
California
Renewable
Energy
The municipal can validly claim that
operations are powered by
renewable energy delivered to
California, using direct purchases,
on-site generation, and California-
eligible RECs to support the claim.
The community can validly claim
that operations are powered by
renewable energy delivered to
California, using direct purchases,
on-site generation, and California-
eligible RECs to support the claim.
Powered by Renewable Energy
Using Renewable Energy Certificates certified under the Green-e program, Hermosa Beach can
make claims that municipal operations are powered by renewable energy. Renewable Energy
Certificates represent the environmental attributes of renewable power, and their monetary
value has aided in financing additional renewable energy generation in the United States. While
valid under commonly-accepted energy accounting principles, such claims may be challenged
because there is no credibility that the renewable energy was delivered to California. For
instance, the certificate could represent renewable energy generated at a wind farm in West
Texas or North Dakota with no connection to the Southern California electricity grid.
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 27
Whether Hermosa Beach can take credit for an associated reduction in greenhouse gas
emissions depends on a number of factors.
Under the Local Government Operations Protocol, Hermosa Beach can take emissions credit
(as an informational item) for net greenhouse gas reductions in scope 2 (electricity) emissions
only if the certificates come from electricity generation not delivered to California. This is
somewhat counterintuitive and is due to California’s cap-and-trade program. Full details are
covered in the Section on Electricity. Because California-eligible RECs are desirable for
compliance with California’s mandatory Renewable Portfolio Standard, less-expensive,
voluntary Green-e RECs available for purchase are not California-eligible. Within California,
greenhouse gas claims made from use of non-California RECs may ultimately be seen as weak
and considered the result of an accounting maneuver.
There is not yet a commonly-accepted standard for the adjusting community-wide emissions
inventories for the purchase of Renewable Energy Certificates. This scenario could be
applicable under a Community Choice Aggregation program.
Powered by California Renewable Energy
California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard requires 33% of statewide electricity consumption to
come from qualified renewable energy sources by 2020. Because of this mandate, generation
from qualified sources is at a price premium compared to non-qualified sources. Because of
California’s cap-and-trade program, Hermosa Beach must take the extra step of retiring
allowances through the California Air Resources Board’s Voluntary Renewable Energy Program
in order to claim emissions-related benefits.
Despite being more expensive and requiring an extra step to claim greenhouse gas benefits,
California Renewable Energy is likely to be perceived as the gold standard for renewable
energy claims in California.
Hermosa Beach could purchase California Renewable Energy from Southern California
Edison’s Green Rate Option, from a future Community Choice Aggregation program, possibly
from direct access provider (through a lottery), or from on-site generation.
A Community Choice Aggregation program could offer, and Southern California Edison’s Green
Rate Option will offer, California Renewable Energy.
Recommendation for Hermosa Beach
To be seen as a leader in municipal climate action, Hermosa Beach would need to commit to
neutralizing emissions from municipal operations within the next 10 years. While a goal of 2025
Hermosa Beach’s Climate Commitment: Page 28
would still help Hermosa Beach be seen as a leader, the City should match goals set by the City
of Austin and County of Boulder and commit to a 2020 goal. Committing to the same goal as
other leading local governments would unambiguously establish Hermosa Beach as a climate
action leader.
While many British Columbia municipalities have already achieved carbon neutral status for
2010, many have backed off the use of offsets to neutralize greenhouse gas emissions.
Hermosa Beach has an opportunity to be achieve “first-to” status for municipal operations in the
United States by committing to neutralize as early as 2015.
Hermosa Beach can seek the more aggressive goals of “Carbon Negative” status and
“Powered by 100% California Renewable Energy”. However, this level of climate commitment
from the City is currently unnecessary for the City to be seen as a national leader. The City
should re-evaluate its climate and renewable energy goals in the future if it finds itself
undifferentiated in a growing pool of cities with simple “Carbon Neutral” goals, which are
currently rare.
➤
➣
➢
Hermosa Beach should set a goal to become Carbon Neutral for municipal operations
by the end of 2020.
Electricity: Page 29
Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan
Electricity
Introduction
Municipal electricity use accounts for 43.4% of total scope 1, 2, & selected scope 3 greenhouse
gas emissions reported in the City’s 2007 operations inventory.
This section of the Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan focuses on the procurement of emissions-free
renewable electricity in order to make carbon neutrality claims and implement Program E5 of
the City’s Sustainability Plan: Municipal Renewable Energy Generating. Efficiency efforts
remain important, nonetheless, and the City should continue to pursue actions outlined in the
Energy Study Report and the Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan.
The Hermosa Beach Carbon Neutral Electricity Procurement Plan explored on-site zero
emissions generation, Southern California Edison’s Green Rate Option, and Community Choice
Aggregation (CCA) for community electricity. In this section, we also discuss a Power Purchase
Agreement, a municipal lease, Direct Access programs, and the use of Renewable Energy
Certificates (RECs) as options. We recommend a combination of on-site generating, RECs,
and pursuit of a CCA for achieving the City’s carbon neutral goals.
On-site Electricity Generation
Production Incentives for Owned Generation
California Solar Initiative
The California Solar Initiative began in 2007 to provide additional incentives for solar generation
in California. When the program began in 2007, non-residential entities were eligible for a
$2.40/watt incentive for installation and a $0.39/kWh incentive for energy production. The
program utilizes a tiered schedule where incentives decline as more solar projects are installed.
In Southern California Edison territory, the California Solar Initiative incentive for non-residential
customers, including local governments, is currently $0.20 per watt of installed capacity (step 10
is the final step for the incentive). As of July 2014, approximately 72 MW of installed capacity
remains available in the program. Go Solar California maintains up-to-date information on the
status of the program. The incentive for residential customers in Southern California Edison
Territory has been exhausted.
Electricity: Page 30
The Local Government Renewable Energy Self-Generation Bill Credit Transfer
The Local Government Renewable Energy Self-Generation Bill Credit Transfer allows local
governments with on-site energy generation to transfer excess bill credits between accounts.
This would allow Hermosa Beach to generate excess solar power at one facility and transfer
any credit to other accounts. According to CPUC Guidance, the program applies only to local
government-owned systems and would not apply to a power purchase agreement.
Southern California Edison does not require transfer of the Renewable Energy Certificates
(RECs) produced by the generating facility, which would transfer the renewable benefits of the
energy to another party. Hermosa Beach could retain these RECs to claim use of renewable
energy and associated emissions benefits (if allowances are voluntarily retired) if it has no other
agreement to transfer the RECs to another party.
Southern California Edison can offer up to 124.6 MW total under their bill credit transfer
program. As of June 16, 2014 107.72 MW remains available. SCE charges a $500 set up fee
and $30 monthly billing fee per generating account.
Other Options for Procurement of On-Site Generation
Entering into a Power Purchase Agreement or lease agreement can spread the costs of solar
installation over several years, reducing the need for upfront payments. Unlike local
governments, private owners of solar generating equipment can also utilize investment tax
credits to reduce system cost.
Power Purchase Agreement
Under a Power Purchase Agreement, a third party owns and installs the equipment needed to
generate on-site solar power, and Hermosa Beach signs a contract to purchase all power
delivered by the unit at a pre-specified price per MWh. A Power Purchase Agreement can be a
compelling option to pay for solar over time, and the City can negotiate the option to purchase
the equipment at a substantially reduced rate at the end of the contract term.
The U.S. National Renewable Energy Laboratory has published a Power Purchase Agreement
Checklist for Local Government. In addition, a presentation from the Massachusetts
Department of Energy Resources outlines the pros and cons. Among the cons are that the City
would receive two electricity bills and that transaction costs for establishing the agreement may
be high. Another con is that because the system would be privately owned, the city cannot
participate in the Self-Generating BIll Credit Transfer, which would have allowed the city to
overproduce at one site and use that energy at a site with a higher demand.
Solar Lease
A third party owns and installs the equipment needed to generate on-site solar electricity, and
Hermosa Beach signs a contract to lease this equipment at a pre-specified price. Some
Electricity: Page 31
agreements have an option to purchase the equipment at a substantially reduced rate at the
end of the lease term. One option unique to local governments is the California Lease Finance
Program (CaLease). However, this program has a $500,000 minimum financing amount.
Another option is the Southern California Regional Energy Center Public Agency Master Lease,
which offers a minimum loan of $250,000, but allows multiple projects to be bundled under a
single loan.
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Credit for On-site Renewable Electricity
Generating
California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requires utilities to procure a specified quantity
of renewable electricity. The current mandate requires 33% of energy to come from renewable
sources by 2020. While the use of renewable energy helps the state meet its greenhouse gas
cap, additional generation or use of renewable, all else held equal, does not reduce the cap.
Any reductions in greenhouse gas emissions that come from meeting or exceeding the RPS
requirement will lower an electricity utility’s compliance obligation - the allowances they must
surrender each year to comply with the cap. Excess procurement will not affect the overall
greenhouse gas emissions cap for California, but rather free up additional space under the cap
for other sources to emit greenhouse gasses. In effect, greenhouse gas reductions that come
from exceeding RPS or implementing greenhouse gas reduction measures would decrease the
cost of a compliance unit. The notable exception is presented below.
Because of California’s Cap-and-Trade program, the greenhouse gas reduction benefits of
renewable energy are separate from other environmental properties. As such, The National
Green-e standard has special procedures for creating RECs from voluntary renewable energy
generated in California. Voluntary renewable energy is electricity that is procured in excess of
an entity’s compliance obligation under the State’s Renewable Portfolio Standard. This includes
electricity rooftop solar projects on Hermosa Beach municipal facilities, whether owned by the
City or procured through a lease or Power Purchase Agreement. Southern California Edison
would not obtain RPS credit for voluntary renewable energy generated within its service
territory.
California’s Voluntary Renewable Electricity Program allows for retirement of greenhouse gas
allowances for renewable energy. Each year from 2015 to 2020, up to 0.25% of allowances
under California’s Cap-and-Trade program will be retired through the program. Allowances are
retired on a first-come, first-served basis. Hermosa Beach cannot own and sell credits
produced under the Voluntary Renewable Electricity Program.
Claiming Emissions Reductions
Under The Climate Registry’s rule, retiring allowances is not necessary for Hermosa Beach to
claim greenhouse gas reductions for on-site renewable energy generation. However, Hermosa
Electricity: Page 32
Beach’s participation in the program is necessary for it to claim that its use of renewable energy
reduced greenhouse gas emissions in California.
If allowances remain in the Voluntary Renewable Energy Reserve Account after the California
Air Resources Board serves all greenhouse gas allowance retirement requests, then these
allowances may be auctioned. This has two implications for producing real, additional
reductions to greenhouse gas emissions in California:
1. If the Reserve Account is undersubscribed, meaning that there are fewer requests for
retirements than allowances available in the account, then Hermosa Beach’s
participation produces real, additional reductions in statewide greenhouse gas
emissions. This is because the City’s participation in VREP prevents another entity from
purchasing the allowance via auction. Hermosa Beach could then claim zero-emissions
electricity under the ARB’s rules.
2. If the Reserve Account would be exhausted regardless of Hermosa Beach’s
participation, then Hermosa Beach’s successful retirement of allowances does allow
Hermosa Beach to take credit for zero-emissions electricity under the ARB’s rules, but
does not produce real, additional reductions in statewide greenhouse gas emissions.
Retiring allowances, though not required for Hermosa Beach to claim carbon neutrality under
The Climate Registry rules, makes the City’s neutrality claim more robust. The City must enact
and sustain greenhouse gas reduction activities that allow it to retire allowances in order to
make valid Carbon Negative or Climate Positive claims.
Qualified Renewable Energy Sources
Section 95841.1 of the California Cap-and-Trade Regulation identifies general requirements to
retire greenhouse gas allowances under the program:
1. The generator must be new and not have served load prior to July 1, 2005.
2. The generator of the renewable energy or RECs must be certified as RPS-eligible by the
California Energy Commission or meet the design and installation programs of the
Guidelines for California’s Solar Electric Incentive Programs in place at the time the
system received an approved utility incentive claim. The California Energy Commission
maintains a list of generators that meet RPS-eligibility requirements.
3. Voluntary renewable electricity must be directly delivered to California (PCC-1 and PCC-
2).
4. The REC must be generated in the same year that Hermosa Beach requests the
retirement of greenhouse gas allowances through the ARB. For example, 2014 vintage
RECs can only be retired as 2014 vintage greenhouse gas allowances.
5. The REC must be tracked by and retired with the Western Region Renewable
Generation Information System (WREGIS) before submitting an application to the ARB
for allowance retirement.
Electricity: Page 33
6. The ARB determines the greenhouse gas reduction that comes from a given unit of
power consumption.
How to Apply
The annual application deadline for requesting the retirement of a REC(s) is July 1 of the year
after the unit of renewable energy was generated. July 1, 2014 was the first deadline for parties
to request retirement of allowances. As of September 2014, the California Air Resources Board
reports zero retirements from the program’s account.
If Hermosa Beach generates on-site renewable energy in the future, it can apply to the program.
In order to reduce the City’s application burden, one application for multiple systems with
nameplate capacities of 200 kW or less may be aggregated and submitted together.
Criteria for Siting Solar Photovoltaic Systems
Generating zero-emissions renewable electricity at locations recognizable as city facilities is an
attractive option to demonstrate the city’s climate actions while reducing gross greenhouse gas
emissions. The following criteria will help the City determine appropriate locations for on-site
solar photovoltaic systems:
● If rooftop-mounted, the building and roof have the structural integrity to support a solar
photovoltaic system.
● The host facility won’t undergo significant changes that affect the roof and photovoltaic
system during the financing contract, or, if purchased, the assumed 30-year life of the
solar system.
● The host facility is part of an electricity service account that has sufficient usage to size a
cost-effective solar photovoltaic system. In general, larger systems have a lower cost
per watt-hour of electricity, since fixed costs are defrayed over additional units of
electricity. Also, in certain financing scenarios the energy must be used on-site as a bill
transfer credit is not allowed under a municipal lease arrangement or power purchase
agreement.
● Ideally, the solar photovoltaic system would be visible from publicly-accessible areas,
allowing the photovoltaic panels to be a visible part of the city’s public education a nd
outreach efforts.
Southern California Edison’s Green Rate Option
The Green Rate, a high-renewables content energy subscription program, will be available to
ratepayers within SCE’s territory beginning January 2015. This program enables customers to
participate in off-site renewable energy generation through SCE by subscribing to 50% or 100%
renewable resource content for a determined price premium. We estimate the Green Rate
Charge to be a 6.77 cent/kWh premium over the City’s estimated average generating charge of
7.53 cents/kWh. With a subscription to this new program, the City of Hermosa Beach could
Electricity: Page 34
meet their entire energy load with one hundred percent renewable energy; however this method
will be far more costly than other alternatives. Also under SB 43, the founding legislation for this
program, SCE is only required to offer the Green Rate until January 1, 2019. No provisions are
currently established to continue the program beyond this deadline.
According to a report compiled by GSE Solutions, the City’s average annual energy usage is
1,717,582 kWh. Detailed, itemized bills provided by the City covered 1,339,598 kWh of usage,
and we used the rates on those bills to estimate the annual premium for the Green Rate option.
The table below shows a comparison of the current annual total paid by the City for electricity
with a standard renewables content and the projected annual price should Hermosa Beach
subscribe to 100% renewable energy on the Green Rate.
Green Rate vs. Annual Total
Annual
Electricity
Use (kWh)
Estimated
Annual Green
Rate Premium
Current
Annual
Charge
Total Projected
Annual
Charges
GSE Solutions
Report
1,717,582 $116,318.09 $300,961.00 $417,279.09
Provided SCE Bills 1,339,598 $90,720.26 $264,672.61 $355,392.87
Direct Access Program
Direct Access is an electricity procurement option in California that allows certain customers to
purchase their electricity directly from Electric Service Providers. Electric Service Providers are
able to offer a greater variety of retail options to electricity customers, offering more competitive
pricing or greater renewable energy attributes than is offered by SCE’s bundled product. Direct
Access first became an option in California in 1998, but was suspended in September 2001.
Electricity customers with existing Direct Access contracts could continue. Through 2010, 7,764
GWh of annual customer load remained with the Direct Access program.
Direct Access is an extremely limited option for Hermosa Beach. New direct access connections
are offered only via an annual lottery, so there is little certainty that Hermosa Beach would be
able to choose this option.
Furthermore, Hermosa Beach’s annual electricity demand may be insufficient to obtain a
competitive rate quote from an Electric Service Provider. Additionally, as many Electric Service
Providers use unbundled RECs to offer green power, there would be no greenhouse gas
reductions benefit over separately purchasing and retiring RECs. Hermosa Beach’s annual
electricity demand in 2010 was under 2 GWh. Even a municipality with over ten times the
Electricity: Page 35
annual electricity demand (Santa Monica) found it could not obtain competitive rates from
prospective Electric Service Providers for Direct Access service. The staff report at the time
alleged that the City did not receive a competitive rate because the City’s 28.95 GWh in annual
demand was “too small to offer significant price discounts or flexible terms over a long -term
contract.”
In 2009, SB 695 re-opened Direct Access to new non-residential customers in 2010. Four
phase-in periods were offered via first-come, first-served applications to allocate an additional
3,946 GWh in annual load for new Direct Access customers. In each period, there was more
demand for the Direct Access than there was load available, and many potential customers
were turned away. Southern California Edison’s overall Direct Access program cap is 11,710
GWh per year, about 13.5% of the utility’s 2012 load of 86,558 GWh.
Direct Access Lottery
A post phase-in enrollment process allows aspiring new direct access customers to join an
annual waitlist. Waitlist applications are accepted during an annual phase-in enrollment period,
the second full week of June, and new Direct Access customers are assigned via a lottery if and
when existing direct access customers end their contract.
If the City wished to participate in the Direct Access lottery, it would first choose an approved
Electric Service Provider.
Before the second week in June, Hermosa Beach’s selected Electric Service Provider would
complete and submit a Customer Information Service Request (CISR) form to obtain the City’s
energy usage and billing histories from Southern California Edison. The form requires the
signature of the Hermosa Beach City Manager or another person authorized to bind the City to
a financial contract. Southern California Edison must receive and approve the CISR in advance
of the June enrollment period.
During the second week of June, Hermosa Beach would submit a Six-Month Advance Notice
Form to switch service from Southern California Edison to its chosen Electric Service Provider.
Southern California Edison would then assign Hermosa Beach’s application a random waitlist
number.
Each month, Southern California Edison will review available Direct Access and randomly select
numbers from the waitlist and notify Hermosa Beach if load is available. If selected, Hermosa
Beach would be allowed to switch to its preselected Electric Service Provider beginning January
1 of the following calendar year. The chosen Electric Service Provider must submit a Direct
Access Service Request form in order to complete the transition. Each waitlist is for one
calendar year. Hermosa Beach would need to submit a new application each June if it wished
to remain on the waitlist.
Electricity: Page 36
Customers subscribing to a Direct Access program may be automatically enrolled in a
Community Choice Aggregation program, unless they opt out.
The state maintains a list of registered Electric Service Providers, 21 of whom have agreements
with Southern California Edison. Two providers are notable for Hermosa Beach’s Carbon
Neutrality efforts.
1. Three Phases Renewables is a Manhattan Beach-based company that focuses on 100%
renewable energy.
2. The City of Santa Monica has a Direct Access contract with Commerce Energy to
provide 100% of municipal energy demand with 100% renewable power. However, due
to a lapse in service, Commerce only supplies 59% of the City’s energy demand.
Community Choice Aggregation
AB 117, passed in 2002, established the legislative precedent for forming a Community Choice
Aggregation (CCA). This bill enables California cities, groups of cities, or counties to supply
electricity to customers within their jurisdiction. Establishment of a CCA allows the community
to specifically allocate resources for electricity procurement, while the Investor Owned Utility
(IOU) retains ownership of all transmission and delivery systems. Once a city or community
forms a CCA, they gain autonomy over their energy sources, and are thus free to pursue
specific initiatives like carbon neutral electrical generation. Community Choice Aggregators
comply with California’s RPS, but they can procure renewable energy above and beyond this
requirement.
The City of Hermosa Beach could utilize this procurement method in one of three ways to reach
their overall goal of Carbon Neutrality. First, the City may launch its own effort to form a CCA as
a single city. This method could prove cost-intensive as none of the fees or surcharges
associated with the formation of this entity would be shared. Second, the City could pursue a
partnership with surrounding cities, communities, or counties with similar, progressive climate
goals and establish a CCA in which startup costs would be split. Finally, the City of Hermosa
Beach may opt to join an already emerging or pre-existing CCA.
CCAs have garnered significant success in California since the formation and growth of Marin
Clean Energy (MCE) beginning May 2010. Sonoma Clean Power soon followed this success
and will provide service by the end of the 2014 calendar year. These successes in the North
Bay have given rise to other efforts to form CCAs in California. Listed below is a synopsis of
actions taken by California communities toward CCA formation.
Electricity: Page 37
Lancaster Choice Energy
Lancaster Choice Energy plans to be the next operational CCA in California. This entity plans
to begin accepting Municipal enrollment in May 2015, Commercial/Industrial enrollment in
November 2015, and Residential enrollment in November 2016. Lancaster Choice Energy has
reached agreement with SCE as an approved Community Choice Aggregator Service and has
already received accreditation on their Service Provider Application.
San Diego Energy District
The San Diego Energy District is in its beginning stages to become a CCA serving the City and
County of San Diego. A Technical Feasibility Study has recently been authorized for the region.
Clean Power S.F.
Clean Power S.F. is planned to serve residential electricity customers in the City of San
Francisco. Thus far, the efforts in the area to form this service have reached just short of
residential service, which was expected at the end of 2013 and is currently accepting pre -
enrollment.
East Bay Community Choice Energy
The County of Alameda has endeavored to create a CCA serving its residential electr icity load
excluding the City of Alameda. The Alameda County Board of Supervisors voted to launch a
feasibility study in June 2014.
Electricity: Page 38
Summary of Current CCA Planning & Pre-operational Efforts in California
CCA Current Stage
Lancaster
Choice Energy
Preoperational:
Community Choice Aggregator Service Agreement with Southern
California Edison has been approved and Service Provider Application
has been approved.
Service Begins:
● Municipal enrollment May 2015
● Commercial/Industrial enrollment in November 2015
● Residential enrollment by November 2016
San Francisco Preoperational (delayed):
Implementation Plan certified by CPUC and registered as a CCA. For
residential customers only.
Was expected for late-2013. Pre-enrollment is open.
East Bay
Community
Choice Energy
Feasibility:
After an initial study, Alameda County Board of Supervisors voted to
launch a Feasibility Study in June 2014.
San Diego
Energy District
Feasibility:
Technical Feasibility Study authorized by City of San Diego.
Contra Costa
County
Under Consideration:
Public information presentations underway
Hermosa Beach Under Consideration:
The City Council adopted a resolution to join with other cities for a
feasibility study.
Humboldt
County & Arcata
Under Consideration:
Student-authored feasibility study released 2011 & 2013 from UC Davis.
San Luis Obispo
County
Under Consideration:
The County’s EnergyWise Plan suggests evaluation of a CCA.
Santa Barbara Under Consideration:
County’s emissions reduction strategy includes ‘evaluate CAA
formation’ in Staff Report for Climate Action Plan, August 2014.
Yolo County,
City of Davis
Under Consideration:
Yolo Climate Action Plan requires the County to determine ‘feasibility of
CCA Issue’ brought up on City Council Agenda in August 2012.
Electricity: Page 39
Renewable Energy Certificates
Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) can be part of a long-term or transitional strategy to
incorporate renewable energy into Hermosa Beach’s electricity mix. Because California both
requires utilities to procure a certain amount of renewable energy and caps greenhouse gas
emissions, the rules surrounding the use of RECs for Carbon Neutrality claims is somewhat
complicated. RECs do not directly translate into greenhouse gas offsets because the
replacement power is not fully accounted for. However, special rules apply to convert California
RECs into offsets, and commonly-accepted greenhouse gas accounting rules allow Hermosa
Beach to use certain RECs to reduce gross emissions.
Accounting for Renewable Energy Purchases in the Emissions Inventory
The multi-partner, sector-specific Local Government Operations Protocol and The Climate
Registry’s General Reporting Protocol provide greenhouse gas accounting and reporting
guidance for cities.
Section 6.2.4 of the Local Government Operations Protocol outlines guidance for green power
and renewable energy certificate purchases. In summary, the guidance suggests that local
governments report “green power” or REC purchases as supplemental information in their
inventory report; the purchases should not be deducted from scope 2 emissions. The reasoning
behind this recommendation is that deducting this electricity use would result in double counting
of the greenhouse gas benefit from renewable energy because the renewable energy is already
accounted for in the electricity emissions factor. In the 2010 update, the partners that publish
the protocol wrote:
“The partner organizations will continue to monitor and track the evolution of green
power programs and the REC market. We hope that a broadly used, credible tracking,
and retirement processes will soon be in place and that we will be able to provide better
guidance to account for the GHG reductions associated with these purchases in future
versions of this Protocol.”
It is Kaizenergy’s opinion that a 2013 update to the Climate Registry’s General Reporting
Protocol provides the guidance needed for local governments to adjust scope 2 electricity
consumption and emissions for REC purchases. The Local Government Operations Protocol
provides sector-specific guidance for implementation of the General Reporting Protocol.
The 2013 update also provides for the use of program-specific utility emissions factors for
entities that subscribe to a utility’s green power program, such as Southern California Edison’s
Green Rate Option.
The 2013 update to the General Reporting Protocol also provides a method to adjust for the
ownership and retirement of unbundled RECs that meet the Green-e standard. This includes
Electricity: Page 40
RECs from solar electric, such as concentrated solar thermal, wind, geothermal, certified low-
impact or EcoLogo hydropower, pipeline or irrigation canal turbine hydropower, and biomass
(non-chemically treated woody waste, agricultural crops or waste).
Adjusting Hermosa Beach’s emissions inventory for REC purchases is simple: the City follows
the same methodology as in its 2005 and 2007 municipal emissions inventories, adjusting for
the emissions factor of renewable energy. Emissions are calculated by multiplying the quantity,
in Megawatt-hours, of qualified, current-year RECs retired on Hermosa Beach’s behalf by the
emissions factor of the renewable energy source. Some renewable energy generation projects
create anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, such as additional organic material
decomposition behind a hydroelectric dam. Greenhouse gas emissions from any electricity
purchases not covered by retiring RECs will be calculated as usual: Megawatt -hours times the
emissions factor of the source (e.g. Southern California Edison’s utility-specific emissions
factor).
Nationally, the use of RECs for greenhouse gas accounting is subject to a number of rules:
● The REC must be separate from offsets. For example, offsets produced by a livestock
project that captures and combusts biogenic methane must not include the carbon
offsets produced by the renewable energy generation.
● RECs must be of near-similar vintage to the inventory year they will be used to offset
electricity purchases. REC accounting standards allow some leeway: RECs can be
produced up to six months before or three months after the period covered by the
inventory (typically a calendar year).
● To ensure that RECs lead to the creation of new renewable energy generation, they
must come from facilities that began operations fewer than 15 years before the inventory
year.
The California policy environment creates two additional requirements for RECs:
● RECs must include all renewable and environmental attributes associated with the
production of renewable energy. In California, this means that the greenhouse gas
benefits of renewable energy production must be retired through the Air Resources
Board’s Voluntary Renewable Electricity Program
● RECs must be surplus to regulatory requirements. That is, they must be produced above
and beyond what’s needed to comply with California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard.
According to The Climate Registry, RECs bearing the Green-e Energy and EcoLogo tags will
meet the national and California requirements. RECs from energy not delivered to California do
not require allowance retirement in order to be Green-e eligible.
Green-e Renewable Energy Certificates Requirements for California’s Cap and Trade System
Green-e standards require the full greenhouse gas reduction benefits be included with the REC.
This creates special procedures for renewable energy delivered to areas where greenhouse gas
Electricity: Page 41
emissions are capped, such as California. Green-e standards require RECs created by energy
generated in or delivered to California (PCC 1 and PCC2) to have their associated greenhouse
gas benefit retired through allowances, procured either through the Voluntary Renewable
Energy Program or purchased through other means.
California Renewable Energy Certificates
California Law defines RECs as "a certificate of proof, issued through the accounting system
established by the Energy Commission… that one unit of electricity was generated and
delivered by an eligible renewable energy resource.” This includes “all renewable and
environmental attributes associated with the production of electricity from the eligible renewable
energy resource, except for an emissions reduction credit issued pursuant to [California’s Cap-
and-Trade Program] and any credits or payments associated with the reduction of solid waste
and treatment benefits created by the utilization of biomass or biogas fuels.”
In the table below, each renewable energy classification is presented with procurement options
and whether Hermosa Beach could make valid Carbon Neutrality claims under the Air
Resources Board (ARB) accounting regulations or The Climate Registry’s (TCR) accounting
guidance.
Electricity: Page 42
Categories of California Renewable Energy
Renewable
Energy
Classification
Description Cost
Premium
($/MWh
over grid
power)
Procurement
Options
Carbon
Neutrality
Claims*
PCC 1 Renewable electricity
generated in or near
California, with arrangements
to deliver the power to
California.
$10-$30 DA, CCA ARB, TCR
(with
allowance
retirement)
PCC 2 Renewable electricity
generated outside of
California, bundled with
environmental attributes, but
without arrangements to
deliver the power to California.
$5-$25 DA, CCA ?, TCR
(with
allowance
retirement)
PCC 3 The unbundled (separate from
electricity) environmental
attributes of renewable energy
generated outside of
California.
$1-$10 REC, DA, CCA TCR (if
Green-e
certified)
Green-e
Renewable
Energy
Certificate
The unbundled environmental
attributes of renewable
energy, generated outside of
California.
$1-$5 REC, CCA TCR
California
Green-e REC
A Green-e REC from a
qualifying PCC 1 or 2 facility
with retired CA-eligible CO2
allowance.
$5-$30 REC, CCA ARB, TCR
*for zero-emissions renewable generation. Not all renewable generation is zero non-biogenic emissions
(e.g. biomass processes that require electricity). Cost estimates are for 2013 from Table 6 of Palo Alto’s
Electricity Supply Portfolio Carbon Neutral Plan.
Marin Clean Energy use of Renewable Energy Certificates
Many CCA Programs, utility green power purchase programs, and Direct Access providers
make use of RECs in order to offer “green” power. Marin Clean Energy uses a mix of California
RPS energy and Green-e RECs for its product. According to their 2013 Integrated Resources
Plan:
Electricity: Page 43
“MEA is largely resourced for the next several years, having contracted for most of its
projected needs for bundled renewable energy through 2017, non -renewable energy
through 2017 and capacity through 2015. However, MEA has a short term need for
bundled renewable energy in 2014 (PCC1) and a longer term need beginning in 2017
(PCC1 and PCC2). MEA also has a need for capacity purchases to meet resource
adequacy obligations beginning in 2015.
...
The majority of MEA’s voluntary renewable energy purchases (those in excess of RPS-
eligible purchases) are under contract through the end of 2013. MEA has a need for
renewable energy certificates in 2014 and beyond to support RPS compliance (PCC3)
and voluntary renewable energy targets (Green-e). MEA also has a need for carbon
neutral energy in 2014 and beyond to support voluntary GHG emissions targets.
In 2013, MCE offered 60% renewable or zero emissions energy. Twenty-seven percent
of its total load came from RPS-eligible generation. The balance is met with Green-e
certified REC purchases.”
The graphic below highlights Marin Clean Energy’s plan to use bundled and bundled RECs in
order to offer its renewable energy programs.
Marin Clean Energy Renewable and Non-Renewable Energy, 2013 to 2022
Electricity: Page 44
Recommendations
First and foremost, the City should continue and expand upon existing energy efficiency
programs. As the GSE Solutions report indicates, the City has opportunities to improve building
energy efficiency by 40% or more. The City should pursue Projects 1 and 2, and the bundle of
hot water and HVAC projects identified in the GSE Solutions report. After committing to Carbon
Neutrality, the City should include the cost to neutralize emissions from electricity
(approximately 0.3 cents additional per kWh) when evaluating whether to pursue electricity
efficiency and retrofit projects.
To take a highly-visible climate action step, Hermosa Beach should take steps to install solar
photovoltaic systems on municipal property. The City should continue to explore the options of
a Power Purchase Agreement and Solar Lease. The City should also request the retirement of
greenhouse gas emissions allowances through the state’s Voluntary Renewable Electricity
Program in order to claim unambiguous emissions reductions.
RECs are a commonly-accepted element of a green or carbon neutral portfolio, and should be
an element of Hermosa Beach’s municipal Carbon Neutrality efforts. Some entities employ
RECs as a short term strategy while they wait for new generating projects to be built. Hermosa
Beach can retire Green-e RECs to make greenhouse gas reduction claims under The Climate
Registry’s General Reporting Protocol.
Over the long term, Hermosa Beach should establish a CCA program and become one of
program’s first customers. This would allow for a unified approach to community and municipal
greenhouse gas emissions reductions, with community members participating in the same
program as the municipality. A CCA program can offer a 100% renewable, emissions-free
energy option for the municipality, households, and firms. According to Southern California
Edison rate schedule OBF-2, on-bill financing programs for energy efficiency retrofits will
continue to be available under a CCA program.
Even with on-site solar generation and a CCA program, Hermosa Beach will likely continue to
purchase streetlight services from Southern California Edison, particularly for streetlights on
wood poles. The City can shift these accounts to Edison’s Green Rate option, or purchase
Green-e RECs equal the amount of electricity used by SCE-owned streetlights.
Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 45
Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan
Municipal Fleet
Introduction
The Clean Fleet Policy and Action Plan, created in 2013, specifies a long-term goal of net-zero
greenhouse gas emissions for the municipal fleet and alternative fuel used by 100% of
contracted city service vehicles. The Plan also sets an interim goal to determine the feasibility
of 50% emissions reduction for the City fleet and 20% emissions reduction for contractor service
vehicles. These goals demonstrate the City’s strong commitment to reducing the carbon
footprint of its municipal operations.
The City’s policies to “maximize the use of alternative fuel and low emission vehicles used to
supply city services,” “reduce vehicle emissions through efficient fleet management and
operations,” and “facilitate infrastructure to support alternative fuel vehicles” are in line with
current best practices for California Local Governments, as identified by the Institute for Local
Government and the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI).
Currently, the municipal fleet is comprised of CNG, diesel, gasoline, and propane fueled
vehicles. According to Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan checklist, the City utilizes vehicles
with fuel ranges from 11-44 mpg gasoline, 9-12 mpg diesel, 13-30 mpg CNG, and 30 mpg
propane, all of which have varying emissions intensities. Though over 20% of the vehicle fleet
is comprised of alternative fuel vehicles, making Hermosa Beach ahead of, or in line with many
neighboring cities (Manhattan Beach has 13%, for instance), it is behind some area cities. For
example, Santa Monica’s non-emergency fleet is comprised of 81% alternative fuel vehicles.
Some national cities also have more aggressive goals. Indianapolis, for instance, is the first city
in the U.S. to pledge to convert its entire municipal non-police fleet to electric or plug-in hybrid
electric vehicles by 2025.
Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 46
Hermosa Beach’s City Fleet by Fuel Type
Fuel Type Number of
Vehicles (In Use)
Models
CNG 6 Camry, Interceptor, F-150, F-250
Diesel 8 Leader, Spartan, Fire Truck, Equipment
Gasoline 57 Tahoe, Escape hybrid, Crown Victoria, Durango, F-
150, F-250, F-350, F-450, Interceptor, Wrangler,
Explorer, Utility truck, Impala, Taurus,
Propane 1 Interceptor
Source: Hermosa Beach Energy Efficiency and Climate Action Plan Checklist
Related Sustainability Plan Goals
The City’s Sustainability Plan details three goals for the City’s fleet:
● T10: Adopt a clean fuel/ultra low emission vehicle buying policy for all City vehicles and
devise a long-term plan for replacement, identifying several options for low emissions
vehicles that includes a cost-benefit analysis for all fleet vehicle types.
● T11: Evaluate CNG filling station for municipal vehicles.
● T12: Provide EV charging stations for City vehicles.
Recommendations for Light-Duty Vehicle Fleet
Hermosa Beach’s 2013 City Fleet Policy and Master Plan is aligned with current regional best
practices and policies. The City can continue to pursue their goal of Carbon Neutral municipal
operations by continuing to adopt the most current trends in green fleet procurement and
management. As the technology, performance, cost, financing options, and availability of
alternative fuel vehicles are quickly evolving, the fleet policy should be responsive to these
trends. The City of Hermosa Beach should review and revise the policy on a regular basis to
ensure the City is acquiring the lowest emission vehicles that meet its needs. These
recommendations are meant to provide guidance for future fleet procurement and management
decisions. The recommendations are based upon the successful practices of other government
agencies and best practices identified by respected resources.
To remain consistent with the City Fleet Policy’s guideline, which states, “Review available
green vehicle options including: electric vehicles, hybrids, CNGs, hydrogen, biodiesels, and any
other emission reducing vehicles,” the City of Hermosa Beach should continue to consider the
latest and lowest-emissions alternative fuel technology when replacing fleet vehicles. Zero-
emissions vehicles are now becoming staples of alternative fueled vehicle fleets, in addition to
Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 47
conventional hybrid and natural gas vehicles. These zero-emissions vehicles have
environmental and operating advantages over other alternative fuel vehicles. Plug-in hybrid
electric vehicles, fuel-cell electric vehicles, and battery-electric vehicles are now available in
most vehicle classes. To keep up with the fast-changing California market for alternative fuel
vehicles through comparison of price, performance, and environmental qualities of specific
vehicles, Hermosa Beach should consult the California Air Resource Board’s Drive Clean
Buying Guide and the guidance provided in Zero-Emission Vehicles in California: Community
Readiness Guidebook created by the State of California Governor’s Office of Planning and
Research.
California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard
The Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) is a California regulation adopted by the Air Resources
Board (ARB) that requires petroleum suppliers to reduce the life-cycle carbon intensity of
transportation fuels sold in the state. The regulation provides additional opportunities for
Hermosa Beach to reduce gross greenhouse gas emissions and additionally neutralize net
emissions from the transportation sector.
The regulation establishes a declining schedule for the average adjusted carbon intensity, in
grams of CO2/MegaJoule (g/MJ), of fuel sold in the state. In 2014, the required adjusted carbon
intensity is 94.41 g/MJ. To reduce the greenhouse gas intensity of gasoline sold in California
10% by 2020, the average adjusted carbon intensity of fuels sold must decrease to 86.27 g/MJ.
Producers, refiners, blenders, and distributors of transportation fuels must acquire and
surrender LCFS credits, denominated in metric tonnes of CO2-equivalent, to demonstrate
compliance with the regulation.
Hermosa Beach does not generate LCFS credits when using electricity or natural gas as vehicle
fuels, as these credits are retained by the respective utilities. However, Hermosa Beach’s use
of low-carbon fuels reduces the City’s gross greenhouse gas emissions.
Adjusted carbon intensity values compensate for differences in the energy economy of a
vehicle. According to the ARB, an electric-powered vehicle travels 3.0 times further on a unit of
energy than a gasoline-powered vehicle.
Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 48
Adjusted Carbon Intensity of California Vehicle Fuels
Fuel Type Adjusted Carbon Intensity
(grams CO2e/MJ
California Gasoline (CARBOB) 95.86
California Reformulated Gasoline (CaRFG) 95.85
Midwestern Corn Ethanol 99.40
California Low-CI Ethanol 80.70
California-Sourced Compressed Natural Gas 75.22
California-Sourced Landfill Gas 12.51
Cellulosic Ethanol 20.40
Electricity (California average electricity mix) 41.37
Electricity (California marginal electricity mix) 34.90
Electricity (Zero Emissions Generating) 0.00
Hydrogen 33.09
Source: ARB Low Carbon Fuel Standard Staff Report Volume 1 Table IV-1
Electricity, landfill gas, and hydrogen are attractive options for reducing life-cycle emissions from
transportation. Electricity is an especially attractive option, as the carbon intensity is a function
of the mix of sources used to produce the electricity. For zero-emissions renewable energy, the
carbon intensity value is zero.
According to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Alternative Fuels Data Center, electric vehicle
infrastructure is most prevalent near Hermosa Beach, with 3 stations and 7 chargers, including
2 DC fast chargers, listed within the city. Three compressed natural gas (CNG) fueling stations
are available in Torrance and near the Los Angeles Airport. Two of Southern California’s 9
hydrogen stations are located in the South Bay. Three biodiesel (B20+) and ethanol (E85)
facilities are located in the Harbor Gateway corridor.
Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 49
Alternative Fueling Stations near Hermosa Beach
Source: U.S. Department of Energy
Hermosa Beach should continue to prioritize plug-in electric vehicle purchases where they are
practical. The convenience and future expansion potential of electric vehicle supply
infrastructure and the low carbon intensity of electricity for vehicles makes plug-in electric
vehicles an ideal choice for reducing gross emissions. Hermosa Beach should invest $50,000
in electric vehicle service equipment (chargers) and an additional $250,000 to accelerate its
Clean Fleet Policy and Master Plan.
Public Safety Vehicles
As identified in the City’s Clean Fleet Policy, some fleets, particularly public safety, have limited
or no alternative fuel options that meet their requirements. Where electric, natural gas, or
hydrogen-fueled vehicles are not practical, Hermosa Beach could look to acquire Flex-Fuel
vehicles, which can run on fuel blends of up to 85% ethanol (“E85”).
Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 50
Ethanol has been criticized due to its high energy requirement to refine blends from certain
feedstocks, and the indirect greenhouse gas emissions that result from additional land required
to farm fuel crops. The California Low Carbon Fuel Standard takes a life-cycle perspective on
environmental impacts in order to mitigate potential upstream environmental degradation due to
use of ethanols and other fuels.
American automobile manufacturers offer a number of E85-capable Police Pursuit Vehicles,
including the Chevrolet Impala, Dodge Charger, and Ford Police Interceptor Utility. The
Hermosa Beach City Council recently authorized the purchase of four police vehicles. The 2014
Ford Police Interceptor Utility vehicle offers both a standard E85-capable 3.7-L V6 model and an
upgraded 3.5-L V6 EcoBoost model that Hermosa Beach selected. The EcoBoost model offers
higher performance, but is not E85-capable. The three 2015 Ford Fusion Hybrid vehicles the
City authorized offer improved fuel economy but are not E85 capable.
Cellulosic Ethanol has a carbon intensity of 20.40, but is not widely available for use in
California. The more commonly available California Low-CI Ethanol has a carbon intensity of
80.70. As of September 2014, 220 flex-fuel capable models are available in the U.S. for general
use.
Alternatively, the City could look to purchase and retire greenhouse gas emissions credits
produced under the Low Carbon Fuel Standard. Transportation-specific offset options and
procedures are discussed later in this section.
Financing Options and Considerations
As consistent with the City Fleet Policy guideline stating “Research available grants, dealer
incentives, and organization incentives” within the City’s purchasing, maintenance and
environmental considerations, the City of Hermosa Beach should continue to consider all
available financing options when purchasing or leasing (or considering the purchase or lease of)
an alternative fuel vehicle. A review of best practices identified the following financing options
for consideration:
● Municipal Lease Financing: Although local governments do not benefit from tax credits
offered for the purchase of zero emission vehicles, many lenders offer municipal lease
financing options. Municipal lease financing programs allow municipalities to capture a
portion of the $7,500 tax credit that they would not capture in a direct purchase. The
Nissan Municipal Lease Financing program and the Ford Municipal Financing program
are two examples in which auto dealers provide financing options to local government
agencies. Riverside County; the City of Loveland, Colorado; the City of Houston, Texas;
and the City of Olympia, Washington have all utilized municipal lease financing
programs to acquire electric vehicles for their municipal fleet.
Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 51
● State Procurement Contracts: Local governments are eligible to purchase vehicles
using the California Department of General Services’ (DGS) state procurement
contracts. Although many local government agencies prefer procuring fleet vehicles from
local dealers, using the negotiated prices for alternative fuel vehicles listed with the state
procurement contracts can serve as a baseline price for comparison purposes.
● Consider Total Cost of Ownership: The City should consider how capital and
operating expenditures are allocated when making fleet procurement decisions. Since
fuel costs will be lower in alternative fuel vehicles, the City may find that future operating
savings justify higher initial procurement costs for alternative fuel vehicles.
● Include Co-Benefits in Cost Analysis: Hermosa Beach should explicitly assess other
co-benefits and values that arise from the use of alternative vehicles, such as
environmental health and the marketing of low emission vehicles to the community when
comparing costs of alternative fuel vehicles to those of conventional vehicles.
Potential Partnerships and Resources
Instead of managing its municipal fleet internally, the City of Hermosa Beach could utilize local
fleet management service companies to determine the best way to green their municipal fleet
while maintaining fleet quality and cost-effectiveness.
● Vision Fleet Capital: Vision Fleet Capital strives to implement clean vehicles within
fleets, cutting total cost of ownership, reliance on foreign oil, and enhancing service
levels. Vision Fleet Capital also helps finance and manage fleets by offering low-cost
financing, strategic operational advice, telematics tools, and asset management. Based
locally in Venice Beach, California, Vision Fleet Capital could be a potential partner for
Hermosa Beach to help the City electrify their vehicle fleet in the most cost-effective
manner.
Fleet Management Regulations
The City Fleet Policy states that the City aims to “Reduce vehicle emissions through efficient
fleet management and operations.” Best practices for efficient fleet management from the
Institute for Local Government can assist Hermosa Beach in implementing this policy:
● Use Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and integrated software to control fleet vehicles,
reduce misuse and increase efficiency through trip planning and location information.
● Provide fuel saving tips to drivers of fleet vehicles. These can include prohibiting idling,
rapid acceleration, etc.
● Install battery systems for vehicles with onboard equipment to reduce truck idling when
equipment is in use.
● Use technology options, such as requests via mobile device, for field personnel to
prevent unnecessary trips back to the office.
Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 52
Carsharing
Instead of replacing old or under-utilized vehicles, the City of Hermosa Beach can also consider
using carsharing to meet its fleet needs. Carsharing is a model of car rental where people rent
cars by the hour or fraction of an hour. Local governments throughout the U.S. have used
carsharing to lower fleet costs, reduce carbon emissions, and support sustainable transportation
in their communities. Municipalities that have utilized car sharing to supplement their fleet
include Berkeley, San Francisco, Austin, New York City, Seattle, and Washington DC. Local
governmental support for carsharing services usually involves either the direct contracting of
service and/or provision of parking spaces. These municipalities experienced many benefits
using carsharing within their operations, including lower fleet replacement, maintenance, fuel,
insurance and staffing costs; newer, cleaner, and lower emission vehicles; more efficient vehicle
allocation; increased vehicle access for employees; more available parking; and better data on
vehicle use and mileage. As each municipality’s program varied in scope, the following
provides more detail on the experiences of a few municipalities who have utilized carsharing.
● The City of Berkeley: The first city to replace municipal fleet vehicles with carsharing,
Berkeley has had considerable success reducing vehicle emissions, costs, and
inefficient fleet use through an innovative partnership with City Carshare, the San
Francisco Bay Area’s carsharing service. Berkeley’s partnership with City Carshare not
only uses carsharing to replace municipal fleet vehicles, but also includes carsharing in
the planning and development process and supports carsharing for citizens and
businesses. Berkeley also contracted City Carshare to develop specialized vehicle
reservation software that dedicates vehicles for City employee use during normal work
hours, and allows any member of City Carshare to use the vehicles on evenings or
weekends. In the first year of the program, 4-5 carshare vehicles replaced 10-15 fleet
vehicles. The use of carsharing has resulted in an annual financial savings of about
$8,000 per year, most of which results from not having to use the City’s vehicle
replacement funds to replace fleet vehicles. These savings do not include air quality,
parking, or public health benefits.
● The City and County of San Francisco: As the City and County of San Francisco
retires its older vehicles, City Carshare’s fleet provides vehicles for City employee use so
the City does not have to purchase new fleet vehicles. This partnership reduces San
Francisco’s vehicle fleet size, lowers purchase and maintenance costs, and reduces
carbon emissions.
● Washington DC: In 2008, Washington DC replaced 360 vehicles with a shared fleet of
71 passenger vehicles operated by Zipcar technology through the “FastFleet” program.
FastFleet is Zipcar’s fleet management model that helps fleet managers right-size
current fleets, enables self-service reservations and keyless access, develops analytics
on driver and vehicle history, leverages software and support services, and transitions
fleets to energy-efficient hybrid and electric vehicles where sensible. In Washington DC,
employees use an intuitive web-based reservation system, phone, or mobile device to
select and reserve vehicles and a wallet size access card to unlock the reserved car.
Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 53
FastFleet varies from Zipcar’s conventional carsharing model in that it does not supply
the vehicles. Instead, the City’s existing vehicles are equipped with FastFleet’s in -
vehicle technology. After the first year of the pilot program, Washington DC projected a
savings of greater than $6 million over five years.
● The City of Portland: Flexcar (now Zipcar) partnered with the City of Portland to provide
fleet management services. In the pilot, Flexcar managed 12 out of 25 motor pool
vehicles. Employees signed up for Flexar individually, and then each department was
charged for vehicle use. This partnership saved Portland approximately 25% in the
motor pool’s annual operating, maintenance, and fuel costs. After the pilot, Portland
contracted all 25 motor pool vehicles to Flexcar, and Flexcar’s tracking technology
helped Portland identify underutilized cars.
● The City of Austin: The City of Austin, Texas entered a revenue-neutral barter
agreement with the carsharing organization Car2Go. Municipal employees could use
vehicles for free during a six-month pilot phase, allowing Car2Go to gather consumer
testing data and receive dedicated parking spaces avoiding parking fees. This
partnership was innovative in that the City did not directly subsidize Car2Go, but the
parking benefits were valued at about $85,000. After the successful pilot, Austin
extended the partnership and numerous Texas state agencies have signed up for the
Car2Go program.
Potential Carsharing Partnerships for Hermosa Beach
A few different organizations that offer carsharing services in L.A. County may serve as
potential partners for Hermosa Beach. Each carsharing service listed below has experience
working with a municipality and varies in its fleet composition, services offered, and other
program components.
● Car2Go: In June 2014, Car2Go launched its pay-by-the-minute carsharing service in
several South Bay Cities of LA County, including Hermosa Beach. Car2Go members
use a smartphone application to find a vehicle, drive it, and then are able to park it in any
public parking space identified as 2-hour parking or longer. This model differs from
conventional round-trip services such as those provided by Zipcar. Hermosa Beach
could contact Car2Go about the possibility of extending carsharing services for
municipal fleet use, similar to Car2Go’s arrangement with the City of Austin, Texas.
● Zipcar: Now owned by Avis and operating in over 20 cities across North America, Zipcar
is the world’s largest carsharing service and is an alternative to traditional car rental and
ownership. Members use a Zipcard to unlock their car, pay a $6 per month membership
fee and a driving rate of $8-10 per hour. Zipcar is a round-trip service, meaning
members must return vehicles to the same parking space from which they obtained it.
Beginning in 2009, the City of Los Angeles partnered with Zipcar to dedicate 40 on-
street parking spots near USC and UCLA campuses to Zipcar. Washington DC
partnered with Zipcar to utilize Zipcar’s FastFleet program to help them more efficiently
Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 54
manage their municipal fleet. Hermosa Beach could partner with Zipcar either through
the provision of parking spaces or by using Zipcar’s FastFleet as a tool to manage
Hermosa Beach’s municipal fleet.
Recommendations for Other Vehicles
To achieve Carbon Neutrality for municipal operations, the City of Hermosa Beach must
consider ambitious and innovative strategies. A review of the programs implemented by other
municipalities identified the following strategies for consideration for Hermosa Beach:
Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEVs)
Hermosa Beach should also consider utilizing Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEVs) within its
vehicle fleet. Falling under the U.S. classification for low-speed vehicles, NEVs are battery
electric vehicles have a maximum speed of 25 mph and are legally limited to roads with speed
limits of 45 mph or less. Although NEVs are not included in vehicle sales forecasts and
passenger fleet projects, these short-range, low-speed vehicles designed for local use could
become a key component of the electric vehicle mix, especially in mature suburban areas like
the South Bay that will likely not attract transit investments in the near future.
Beginning in 2004, the South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG) began to research
a land use and transportation strategy that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, pollution,
and gasoline use without focusing on transit investments or increased residential density. This
led to the adoption of the Sustainable South Bay Strategy (SSBS) in 2010, which proposes that
cities create compact destinations in neighborhood centers to encourage walking, cycling, and
the use of NEVs for travel between these centers. As part of this strategy, the SBCCOG
launched a NEV Demonstration Project which loaned a fleet of NEVs to South Bay households
for an 18-month period.
This project was highly successful, finding that of those who participated, NEV mode share
averaged 46% of the roundtrips. The average round-trip travel distance ranged from 2-5 miles.
Due to Hermosa Beach’s compact size, NEVs could also be an effective component of travel for
municipal employees, whose average work trip or personal errand is likely only a few miles.
Global Electric Motorcars (GEMs), a type of Neighborhood Electric Vehicle by Polaris, are small
vehicles which serve as an alternative to golf carts. GEMs have served municipal fleets as
utility, parking and security, and even landscaping and construction vehicles. Municipalities who
have employed NEVs within their fleet include the City of Palm Springs, the City of Cypress, and
the City of Santa Monica.
Hermosa Beach should purchase two neighborhood electric vehicles for municipal fleet use and
later determine whether these vehicles are a suitable replacement for other fleet needs.
Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 55
Bicycle Fleet
The Institute for Local Government’s Sustainability Best Practices Framework recommends
establishing a pool of shared bicycles to allow employees to borrow a bicycle for use during the
workday. Providing bikes to employees reduces vehicle trips made during the day for business
and personal errands, therefore reducing emissions. Municipalities all over California have
adopted employee bike share programs, including Long Beach, Santa Monica, Cupertino, San
Jose, and San Francisco. Municipal bike fleet programs typically provide bicycles, secure
bicycle storage, and showers and lockers. They usually require employees to complete a
bicycle safety training program to participate. Traveling by bike especially makes sense in the
City of Hermosa Beach due to its compact size.
Although most cities provide regular bicycles, Hermosa Beach can also consider adding electric
bicycles to its fleet program. Electric bicycles make it easier to travel on hilly terrain but still emit
zero tailpipe emissions. An electric bike can achieve over 2,000 mpg-equivalent, making them
a highly energy and cost-efficient option for Hermosa Beach. Hermosa Beach could be one of
the very first cities to utilize electric bikes within their bike fleet. Purchasing regular or electric-
assist bicycles also provides Hermosa Beach with an opportunity to support local businesses.
See the following for a list of several local bike shops:
● Hermosa Cyclery, Inc: Located on the Strand at 20 13th Street in Hermosa Beach,
Hermosa Cyclery specializes in strand cruisers that are easy to ride around the city and
is regarded as a trusted bicycle service center.
● The Old Bike Shop: Located at 430 Pier Ave. in Hermosa Beach, the Old Bike Shop is
an owner-operated bike shop that specializes in custom-built high end bikes.
● Beach Cities Cycle: This bike shop is located at 219 Pacific Coast Hwy in Hermosa
Beach.
● Motion Bicycle Establishment: Motion Bicycle Establishment sells, rents, services, and
repairs all types of bikes and is located at 914 Aviation Blvd in Hermosa Beach.
● Electric Bikes LA: Located at 433 Main Street in El Segundo, Electric Bikes LA is the first
bicycle store in the region dedicated to the sale and repair of electric and folding bikes.
Offsetting Emissions from Vehicles
Implementation of California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) is leading to the availability of
low greenhouse gas transportation fuels in California. However, costs to transport these fuels
from their production location to Hermosa Beach can be high. Additionally, many vehicles are
not designed to use low-carbon fuels.
The LCFS credits generated under the program are tradable. LCFS credits trade for $24 to $85
per credit, which, like allowances and offsets, are denominated in units of metric tonnes of
carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e). Compared with the $11.50 cost of California allowances,
Municipal Fleet Recommendations - Page 56
LCFS credits are an expensive means of offsetting emissions. However, in the future their use
could allow for sector-specific neutrality claims. Instead of offsetting transportation emissions
with forest or livestock projects, retiring LCFS credits will allow Hermosa Beach to claim that it is
subsidizing low carbon fuels consumed by others on Hermosa Beach’s behalf.
Whether entities without compliance obligations like Hermosa Beach can acquire and voluntary
retire LCFS credits for climate action goals has not been tested as of this writing. Additionally,
no greenhouse gas accounting method currently exists to adjust fuel purchases for LCFS
credits.
If a commonly accepted method to account for LCFS credit emerges, one specific LCFS credit
opportunity may aid the City’s climate action outreach and education campaign. Digester gas is
not currently a common transportation fuel, but the Climate Trust believes LCFS could change
that. Many livestock farms in California are looking to capture methane in order to generate
ARB offset credits. If the biogas is then consumed as transportation fuel in California, LCFS
credits can be generated above and beyond these offsets, which are for avoided methane
emissions. If Hermosa Beach decides to establish a direct relationship with a livestock project
for purposes of acquiring greenhouse gas offsets, the City may be able to negotiate receiving
any LCFS credits produced by the project.
The Low Carbon Fuel Standard is not to be confused with Federal renewable fuel regulations,
which are based on the quantity of renewable stocks blended into transportation fuel, not the
resulting change in greenhouse gas emissions. Federal regulations require fuel suppliers to
blend renewable fuels into gasoline and diesel. In a manner similar to the Renewable Portfolio
Standard, each refiner or importer of fuel must meet a Renewable Volume Obligation by
surrendering a series of Renewable Identification Numbers to the U.S. EPA. The Renewable
Identification Numbers can be separated and traded. When renewable fuel with a Renewable
Identification Number is produced in or imported to California, that fuel may also generate LCFS
credits for California’s program, which is a separate regulation.
Employee Commutes - Page 57
Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan
Employee Commutes
Introduction
The City’s Sustainability Plan calls for a 20% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from
employee commutes relative to 2005 levels by 2020, which were 348 metric tonnes of CO2-
equivalent2. The 2012 draft inventory shows 218 metric tonnes, a 37.4% reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions versus 2005. However, it is important to note that the number of full-
time equivalent City employees decreased 33.8% during this period.
In pursuit of attaining the greenhouse gas reduction goal for employee commutes, the City’s
Sustainability Plan recommends revising Hermosa Beach’s existing rideshare program to better
incentivize employees to substitute more environmentally conscious alternatives to single
occupant vehicle (SOV) trips for commuting. Launched in 1990 to comply with the South Coast
Air Quality Management District’s Regulation XV, the City’s existing rideshare program provides
employees who use alternative transportation modes 3 out of 4 days per week with $30 per
month. Despite the incentive in place, the program had no participants as of July 2013. Just
11% of employees biked, walked, used transit, or a combination of these modes at least once a
week. An employee commute survey conducted in 2013 on 108 out of 142 employees found
that about 31% of employees were interested in participating in a rideshare program, and 50%
of employees would be influenced by tax savings or other monetary incentives.
Using data gathered from the 2013 City of Hermosa Beach Employee Commute Survey,
information regarding other cities’ employee commute reduction programs, and best practices in
transportation demand management, Kaizenergy has outlined a strategy and plan the City of
Hermosa Beach could use to overhaul its employee commute reduction program thus
increasing participation and reducing resultant municipal carbon emissions.
Hermosa’s Employee Commute Reduction Challenge
Traditional commuter rideshare programs rely on matching employees with similar schedules,
origins, and destinations. Creating successful carpool or vanpool matches is mostly a numbers
game. Successful traditional rideshare matches rely on a large pool of people who are eligible
2 The Energy Efficiency & Climate Action Plan Draft Inventory, Forecasting and Target-Setting Report
shows employee commutes at 348 metric tonnes in 2005. However, the City’s previous inventory reports
employee commutes at 399 metric tonnes for 2005. The more recent document is presented to show
change over time.
Employee Commutes - Page 58
to match, a subset of whom are interested in ridesharing. Strategies to match more carpools or
vanpools include increasing the size of the pool of potential ride-sharers and/or improving and
increasing incentives to motivate more people to share rides.
The City of Hermosa Beach’s current employee commute reduction challenges are twofold.
First, Hermosa Beach is a relatively small employer, with only 142 employees across multiple
sites. This limits the potential for rideshare matching. Second, the City’s 2013 Employee
Commute Survey indicated that, due to the structure of existing incentives, their effectiveness is
limited.
As seen below, many potential carpool matches live in or near the City. While matching
employees who live nearby into carpools will reduce vehicle trips and the need for on-site car
parking, these consolidated short-distance trips will not cause substantial reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions from employee commutes. However, successful matches could
provide an example of the program’s benefits for other employees who live farther away.
Hermosa Beach could also incentivize employees who live nearby to commute using
neighborhood electric vehicles or electric-assist bicycles if these vehicles are added to the City’s
fleet.
Employee Commutes - Page 59
Map of Zip Codes with 2 or more employees
Legend: Number of employees per zip code:
1 to 3 4 to 5 6 to 9 10 to 20
Top Zip Codes
Zip Code Place Number of
Employees
Distance from
Hermosa Beach
(miles)
90278 North Redondo Beach 20 2.0
90277 South Redondo Beach 14 2.3
90254 Hermosa Beach 9 0
90260 Lawndale 6 4.7
90275 Rancho Palos Verdes 6 13.3
Employee Commutes - Page 60
Heatmap of All Employees Responding to 2013 Commute Survey
Best Practices in Local Government Commute Trip Reduction
Programs
To reduce their municipal carbon footprint and to comply with regional regulatory agency trip
reduction requirements, many municipalities have begun implementing employee commute
reduction programs. Reviewing best practices in local government transportation demand
management programs as well as the practices of neighboring cities and other successful local
programs can help Hermosa Beach identify most effective methods to decarbonize its employee
commutes.
Statewide Best Practices
The Institute for Local Government identifies several best practices for municipalities developing
programs to reduce employee commutes via SOV. These best practices focus on using
effective incentives and acquiring the necessary infrastructure to encourage employees to bike,
walk, take public transit, or carpool to work. Hermosa Beach’s existing program is in line with
the incentive best practices identified by Institute for Local Governments, but the City could
enhance the attractiveness of these incentives and ensure the City provides the necessary
Employee Commutes - Page 61
infrastructure for employees to feel comfortable walking or biking to work. The best practices
described by the Institute for Local Government are summarized below3:
Create an Incentive Program
The Institute for Local Government states that a municipality should “offer agency employees
incentives to use alternatives to single-occupant commuting.” Incentives could include parking
cash-out, flexible schedules, public transit incentives, bike share and rideshare services and
subsidies, transit subsidies, and telecommuting. Rideshare programs should incorporate a
“Guaranteed Ride Home” program and utilize smartphone technology.
Provide Infrastructure
As mentioned in the employee fleet recommendations, the Institute for Local Government
suggests municipalities “establish a ‘bike barn’ to enable agency employees to borrow a bicycle
to use for local meetings.” The bikes purchased for the bike barn could also be rented to
employees for commute purposes. The Institute for Local Government also suggests
municipalities “construct bicycle stations for employees that include bicycle storage, showers,
and bicycle repair space” and provide locker and shower facilities for employees who bike or
walk to work.
Review of Other Programs in Nearby Cities
The City of Hermosa Beach and neighboring South Bay cities face a unique set of challenges in
motivating employees to cut SOV commutes: they are already mature, built-out suburbs without
the robust public transit service found elsewhere in L.A. County. Nonetheless, we found that
adjacent cities have ascertained more effective commuter incentive programs. The following
discussion describes employee commute reduction strategies employed in the South Bay cities
that neighbor Hermosa Beach as well as the successful approach taken by the City of Santa
Monica, a municipality recognized statewide for its environmental leadership.
Manhattan Beach
The City of Manhattan Beach offers an incentive of $60 per month to employees who carpool,
bike, walk, take public transit, or use a combination of these modes to get to work. The City
currently has about 12 employees who participate (6 carpool, 2 bike, 2 walk, 1 public transit,
and 1 combination of modes). The program costs the City about $8,500 per year. Information
about the program is posted on the City’s employee “intranet” with all necessary instructions
and forms. The City does not currently have a bike fleet or share program. In Manhattan
Beach, only one staff member administers the program.
3 http://www.ca-ilg.org/sustainability-best-practice-area/efficient-transportation#agency-employee-
programs
Employee Commutes - Page 62
Redondo Beach
The City of Redondo Beach launched its “Employee Rideshare Program” in 2008. Employees
who carpool, walk, bike, use public transit, vanpool, or drive alternative fuel vehicles earn
incentive points on a daily basis that can be traded in for Sears gift certificates. Redondo Beach
offers guaranteed return trip services, ride matching services, free CNG fueling, and an annual
prize drawing for all employees who participate.
Torrance
The City of Torrance launched its “Catch a Ride” program to comply with the South Coast Air
Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) rule 2202. Rule 2202 requires employers with 250 or
more employees to reduce mobile source emissions generated from employee commutes. In
the Catch a Ride program, employees who carpool, walk, bike, use public transit, or vanpool
earn points on a daily basis that can be traded in for time off, gas vouchers, gift cards, and
discounts on public transit. Program participants are eligible for emergency rides home,
preferential parking, free car washes, and ride matching services.
Santa Monica
The City of Santa Monica reduced emissions from employee commutes through its Rideshar e
Club. The Rideshare Club consists of three sub-categories, the Commute Club, the Transit
Club, and the Vanpool Subsidy Club. The Commute Club provides incentive points to
employees who bike, carpool, drive an electric scooter, walk, ride the bus, and more.
Participants can drive as part of their commute or mix these options. A carpool consists of two
or more people (they do not need to be coworkers at the City, but children without driver’s
licenses do not count) who ride together at least 51% of round trip travel. Employees earn
incentive points for each day they rideshare, and they exchange these points quarterly for a
bonus on their paychecks. Commute Club participants must earn a minimum of 4 incentive
points per month and a maximum of 40 points per month. Transit Club provides riders of mass
transit fare reimbursement for travel costs to and from work. Mass transit includes bus, light rail,
and train. To qualify, employees must use transit for at least 15 roundtrips per month. They are
provided up to $84 for bus and $100 for rail. The Vanpool Subsidy Club provides employees
who participate in a vanpool with up to $100 per month. To provide alternative mode
commuters with mobility options at work, the City allows staff to borrow a bike from its “Bikes At
Work” fleet to run errands, exercise, or attend meetings.
Recommendations
To reduce gross greenhouse gas emissions attributed to employee commutes, the City of
Hermosa Beach should revise its Employee Commute Reduction Program (ECRP) to better
incentivize employees to adopt alternative modes of commute and to generate lasting program
participation. This section provides a brief description of the strategies the City could employ.
Employee Commutes - Page 63
1. Appoint an Employee Transportation Coordinator
The City should institutionalize its commuter program by designating a staff member to
serve as the citywide Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC). This staff person’s
work plan would include launching a revamped program and tracking the success of the
program through annual surveys. Typically, ETCs are staff members in human
resources, but Hermosa Beach might find it is more successful in recruiting staff who are
already involved in promoting other sustainability-related initiatives. At an employer of
Hermosa Beach’s size, the ETC role would not be a full-time position. This person would
also serve as the go-to peer to answer questions, administer incentives, and
disseminate informational materials to educate and inform fellow staff members about
their options. Finally, this role would include investigating resources the City could
access from Metro’s Commute Services, in order to further strengthen the program.
2. Form Partnerships
In concert with the newly-appointed ETC, Hermosa Beach should form partnerships with
nearby employers to increase the likelihood of a carpool or vanpool match. The options
are limited, but they include:
● The Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce’s 300 members, who represent
firms that employ many private sector workers in Hermosa Beach.
● The Hermosa Beach City School District. School District offices are a short walk
from Hermosa Beach City Hall, on the campus of Hermosa Valley School.
However, as 55% of commute survey respondents work a 4/10 schedule, from
7AM to 6PM Monday through Thursday, and school district employees may have
different work schedules than City employees.
Hermosa Beach could also promote online ride matching through services already
provided by Metro (www.ridematch.info). Unfortunately, no existing vanpool routes
terminate in Hermosa Beach; many terminate in El Segundo.
3. Restructure Incentives
A common theme among successful local employee commute reduction programs is the
provision of incentives to participants. These programs typically provide a monetary
incentive to employees who participate a certain number of times per month, or
employees earn incentive points on a daily basis that can be traded in for monetary
incentives or other prizes. Of the 64 employees who answered the question, “What is
the minimum monthly cash reward that would entice you to carpool, bike, walk, or take
public transit to and from work at least 50% of the time?” in the 2013 Employee
Commute Survey, 42% answered $30-50, and 37.5% answered greater than $50. Based
on these results and the programs of neighboring cities, here are some future
considerations:
Employee Commutes - Page 64
● Create a tiered incentive system: Although as of July 2013 no employees were
participating in the City’s rideshare program, about 11% were biking, carpooling,
walking or taking transit to work at least one day a week. This gap in
participation could reflect the program’s stringent requirement, enforcing 3 days
participation each week to qualify for incentives. To encourage more employee
participation, the City could create a tiered incentive system in which participants
utilizing the program more receive a larger incentive. For instance, employees
who participate 5 days per month receive $20, and those who participate 10 days
per month receive $50.
● Create a “points based” incentive system: Like the Cities of Redondo Beach,
Torrance, and Santa Monica, Hermosa Beach could create a system based upon
incentive points that are earned on a daily basis. This system also encourages
employees to participate who are not ready for the existing program’s stringent
requirement of 3 days per week. At the end of the month or the quarter,
employees can trade in their incentive points for cash or prizes.
● Incorporate alternative fuel vehicle commuters: Some municipalities, like
Manhattan Beach, offer incentives to employees who commute in 100%
alternative fuel vehicles (100% electric, CNG, LNG, hydrogen fuel cell).
Hermosa Beach could even look to subsidize alternative fuel vehicle purchases
and leases as a component of planned compensation increases. If the employee
saves money on vehicle operation costs, the alternative fuel vehicle incentive
could put additional money in the employee’s pocket above and beyond the
City’s contribution.
The City of Hermosa Beach may also consider providing direct subsidies or a pre-tax
set-aside for workers who use transit and vanpool.
● Direct subsidies: Employers can provide up to $230 per month tax-free to
employees who use transit or vanpools. The employer therefore pays the benefit
and receives equivalent deduction from business income taxes. The employer
pays directly for vanpool expenses or purchases transit passes for employees.
● Set aside pre-tax dollars: Employees are allowed to set aside up to $230 per
month of their pretax income to pay for transit or vanpools. Employees save on
payroll and income taxes since it is not reported as a taxable salary. The amount
set aside is a benefit and therefore reduces employer payroll costs.
● Partially subsidize costs: The employer subsidizes a portion of vanpool or transit
costs in addition to salary, and allows employees to pay the rest.
Finally, if it is eligible to do so, Hermosa Beach should submit a Rideshare Service
Agreement with Metro’s Commute Services division in order to make its employees
eligible for Metro Rewards. Metro Rewards is an incentive program available at no cost
Employee Commutes - Page 65
to participating employers. In 2014, the Metro Rewards program provided workers who
commuted using an environmentally-friendly mode with a coupon discount book to
purveyors of goods and services throughout Los Angeles County worth $1,000 in
immediate savings. The eligibility threshold is much lower: Employees must rideshare at
least 8 work days a month during three consecutive months.
4. Add Bike Accommodations
To support bicycle commuting and the use of bicycles for mid-day trips, the City of
Hermosa Beach should investigate:
● Ensuring there is adequate and safe bicycle parking at all work sites.
● Including building showers and lockers with bicycle commuters in facility
renovation plans.
● Launching a bike barn at City Hall and the City Yard to allow for use of shared
bicycles, including electric-assist bicycles.
● Initiating a Take Home Bike Program, which allows nearby employees to take
home bicycles or neighborhood electric vehicles for use in commutes.
5. Determine a Telecommuting Policy
Instituting a telecommuting policy could help the City significantly lower vehicle
emissions attributed to employee commuting, especially if initiated as an option for long-
distance commuters. This would be both effective in reducing emissions and attractive to
employees with significant commutes. Thirty-four percent of employees surveyed
expressed interest in this option in the 2013 Employee Commute Survey. These
employees indicated their ability to use such a policy 3 to 4 times a month; however 46%
stated their work would not be compatible with telecommuting, and 17% were not
interested. Several cities had success. A few strategies the City of Hermosa Beach
should include when determining a telecommuting policy are listed below:
● Establish an eligibility list of suitable job categories, employment status, and prior
performance ratings for telecommuting.
● Create a performance agreement for those employees eligible to telecommute,
specifying a minimum for office-based hours, accessibility during regular work
hours, methods of communication with supervisor, and necessary requirements
for alternative worksites including computer specification and special equipment,
desk size and configuration.
Other Emissions: Page 66
Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan
Other Emissions
Natural Gas
Hermosa Beach uses natural gas for both building energy and some vehicles in the City’s fleet.
Increasing the energy efficiency of the City’s natural gas vehicles and equipment is key to gross
emissions reductions. However, even with efficiency improvements, the 2013 Hermosa Beach
Carbon Neutral Scoping Plan found that gross reductions in natural gas emissions are limited by
the fuel’s inherent greenhouse gas intensity. This is in contrast to gross greenhouse gas
emissions from electricity, which can be eliminated through use of renewable generation.
Efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions have generated interest in low-carbon sources of
natural gas. The section on the City’s vehicle fleet details an option for transferable credits
when renewable natural gas is used as a transportation fuel. Biogas Transfer Credits may be a
future option for other uses of natural gas.
Biogas Transfer Credits
Biogas Transfer Credits are a concept to separate the renewable qualities and emissions
benefits from physical biogas, in a manner similar to RECs and LCFS credits. Biogas (or
biomethane) is natural gas that is produced from the breakdown of organic material in the
absence of oxygen. Biogas can be produced through anaerobic digestion at facilities that
handle green waste, manure, municipal solid waste, and sewage. Biogas must typically be
cleaned in order to improved quality, but can then be compressed into Biogas CNG or liquefied
into Biogas LNG. Biogas combustion is considered a biogenic source of greenhouse gas
emissions, and is not included in gross emissions totals in greenhouse gas inventories.
Historically, most biogas used for energy in California has been combusted on -site or nearby a
landfill, dairy, or sewage treatment plant. A new law may bring new opportunities for pipeline
biogas use in California. In 2014, the California Public Utilities Commission adopted regulations
to implement AB 1900 (2012) enabling biogas injections into natural gas pipelines. The
implementing regulations pertain to safety requirements and recordkeeping for biogas
injections, including a facility’s annual biomethane production rate. The law does not establish
Biogas Transfer Credits in California, but future laws or regulations could do so.
If Biogas Transfer Credits (or conceptually similar units with a different name) become available
in the U.S. or California, Hermosa Beach could look to acquire credits to offset its natural gas
consumption. For Hermosa Beach to take credit in its inventory, greenhouse gas accounting
guidance would need to incorporate a method to adjust for the credits.
Other Emissions: Page 67
Contract Vehicles
Hermosa Beach contracts its street cleaning, landscaping, and refuse & recycling services. The
City has already included stipulations that some of these contractors use cleaner, natural gas
vehicles. The City’s street cleaning provider and refuse/recycling service use natural gas
vehicles.
The City’s Clean Fleet Policy and Action Plan establishes several goals for contracted vehicles:
● Interim:
○ Determine feasibility of 50% emissions reduction for City fleet and 20%
emissions reduction for contractor service vehicles (implemented with new
contracts, or with amendments when feasible).
● Long-term:
○ Net zero greenhouse gas emissions for City fleet.
○ Alternative fuel used for 100% of contracted City service vehicles. This is a lesser
goal in that it is not a net carbon neutral goal.
In the future, Hermosa Beach can specify contract terms that require the service provider to
neutralize greenhouse gas emissions from the services they perform on behalf of Hermosa
Beach. Alternatively Hermosa Beach could require that the contracted service provider disclose
the volume and carbon intensity of fuels and amount of electricity used to service the contract,
and Hermosa Beach can then take additional steps to offset those emissions.
Solid Waste
The City’s 2007 inventory reported 167 metric tonnes from waste in landfills. Hermosa Beach
does not have operational or financial control over a landfill. However, emissions from waste
sent to landfills are considered to be Scope 3 emissions under the Air Resources Board’s Local
Government Operations Protocol. The City should include these emissions within its offset
program.
The City’s 2007 inventory reported 85 metric tonnes from all contract service vehicles. Because
Hermosa Beach can exercise operational control over its waste service provider, compressed
natural gas combustion emissions from Athens Services’ collection of waste and transfer to
landfills would be considered Scope 3 transportation emissions from contracted services.
Hermosa Beach’s current contract with Athens Services ends in 2021. Before Hermosa Beach
considers a new waste hauling contract, it can include Athens Services’ GHG emissions in th e
city’s annual purchases of GHG emissions offsets. Hermosa Beach can also seek to include
contract terms that Athens offset their emissions, if the City amends the contract before 2021.
Other Emissions: Page 68
Water
According to the 2007 Municipal Inventory, Hermosa Beach has operational control over limited
sprinkler and irrigation systems and lift stations. These emissions, derived from electricity, may
be addressed through electricity procurement strategies. Hermosa Beach may wish to consider
upstream emissions related to water treatment and distribution. In the 2013 Hermosa Beach
Carbon Neutral Scoping Plan, West Basin Water District’s emissions factors for imported and
recycled water were found to be 0.00414 and 0.00388 kgCO2e/gallon, respectively. Hermosa
Beach could elect to track and offset upstream emissions from water use, but it is not necessary
for the City to claim carbon neutral status under the Local Government Operations Protocol.
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 69
Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets
The Role of Offsets in Climate Commitments
Greenhouse gas offsets, typically denominated in metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent
(CO2-e), represent avoided greenhouse gas emissions produced from a monetary investment in
a specific project. Offset projects range from those that capture and destroy methane and other
potent greenhouse gases to those that sequester emissions in soil, plants, and trees.
All aggressive (80% reduction or more) entity and community climate commitments referenced
in this document either explicitly permit offsets or are silent on their use in achieving their goal.
Some commitments include separate goals for gross reductions - those achieved without the
use of offsets - in addition to a goal for net emissions.
Commitments from organizations that plan to use offsets differ in the types of offsets that they
will use. Some local governments and entities prefer to use offsets that are in some way
connected to the city or entity. For instance, Austin Texas has its own boutique offset program,
and the University of California plans to develop its own as well. Others have prescribed
standards for the types of offsets they will pursue. Offsets range in quality: the ability to
demonstrate that the offset is real, measurable, verifiable, additional, and permanent. Offsets of
lower quality and those that are not connected to a particular sector or geography are typically
cheaper. Various registries and protocols have been established to guarantee offset quality.
Defining Offsets
Real The offset has produced an actual reduction in GHG emissions, rather than
shifting emissions to some other source.
Measurable The offset can be quantified, typically in metric tonnes of CO2-equivalent.
Verifiable An outside auditor can determine the existence of a single offset unit, which
is then tracked using an offset registry.
Additional The offset was produced as a result of its value. The offset would not have
occurred in the absence of an offset payment.
Permanent The offset cannot be reversed. If there is risk of reversal (e.g. the risk that
forestry carbon stocks will be destroyed by wildfire), the offset protocol
typically requires some portion of offsets be set aside.
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 70
Cities and Offsets
Guidance on the Use of Offsets
Accounting guidance for local governments doesn’t allow cities to replace gross emissions with
offsets. Instead, local governments report their use of offsets – and resulting net emissions – as
an informational item.
Local Government Operations Protocol (section 13.1.2.5)
“Carbon offsets retired/generated and sold.
Local governments should account for and report all carbon offsets which they purchase
and retire. These offsets may not be deducted from Scope 1 or Scope 2 emissions due
to the fact that a complete accounting framework which accurately and credibly tracks
the ownership and retirement of these credits has not yet been established.
Local governments should also report any offsets that they both generate and sell as
part of a climate mitigation project.”
U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
“The ICLEI community protocol requires the community to report gross GHG emissions
without the impact of carbon offset projects, stocks, sinks, sequestration projects,
purchases of carbon credits, or renewable energy certificates. The community may
optionally, and separately, report the emissions reductions associated with any of the
above activities.”
City Standards for Offset Quality
Few cities have specified the level of quality, types of projects, and project locations that they
expect from offsets used to meet climate commitments.
British Columbia does have requirements for offsets used to meet that province’s goal for
carbon neutral municipalities for 2012 and beyond. Offsets must be generated in British
Columbia and meet the requirements set by the Pacific Carbon Trust, a boutique offset program
established as a joint venture of the provincial government and a League of Cities equivalen t.
Many local governments achieved carbon neutral municipal operations in 2012 or earlier, but
the entire province is now readjusting its Carbon Neutral pursuits as a result of an offset
scandal. The local offset registry, the Pacific Carbon Trust, has been absorbed by the provincial
government after a scandal caused attempts to repeal the requirement that local governments
neutralize their emissions. Local government were purchasing offsets at a cost of more than
double the amount of their wholesale cost, and some of the offsets the Trust purchased and
sold to local governments were ineligible under the provincial rules.
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 71
British Columbia’s experience highlights the potential trade-off of establishing a new, boutique
offset program. Establishing the Trust allowed British Columbia greater control over the
locations and types of offset projects that would be funded. However, costs of the boutique
offset program may be higher than under an established, multisectoral offset program, and as
with any new entity, oversight is important to ensure that actions are within the public interest.
One alternative to establishing a boutique offset program is to invest in a narrow range of
projects offered by an existing offset registry. Hermosa Beach could, for example, seek out
forestry projects in the Western United States.
Municipal Utilities
Several municipal utilities make use of both offsets and renewable energy certi ficates (RECs) in
order to make climate-related claims. Palo Alto Utilities uses RECs that are eligible under
California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard. The Sacramento Municipal Utilities District invests in
its own projects as well as RECs eligible in California. Outside of California, Austin Energy
makes direct contracts with wind generators. Seattle Power & Light uses offsets from the
Climate Action Reserve and other third-party organizations.
Universities and Colleges
The few colleges that have already achieved carbon neutral status have chosen to be
transparent about their use of offsets and the projects in which they invest. As educational
institutions, these entities can incorporate a discussion of climate commitments and the use of
offsets within their curriculum. That offsets are required to meet Carbon Neutrality commitments
can highlight the vast challenge in decarbonizing organizations and places.
The College of the Atlantic in Maine claims to be the first Carbon Neutral educational institution.
It chose to use offsets from specific projects from two carbon project developers: the Carbon
Fund and the Climate Trust. These developers invested in a traffic signal optimization project in
Portland, OR and a truck stop electrification project in Oregon and Washington. These two
projects are verified to the Oregon Standard, an offset standard created by the state legislature.
Colby College, also in Maine, first invested on-campus: in a biomass project and energy
retrofits. For the remaining emissions, Colby purchased and retired carbon offsets from three
projects: two landfills in Maine and Connecticut and one farm in Michigan. The offsets are
registered with the Climate Action Reserve and meet the Reserve’s verification requirements.
However, the offsets are not eligible for conversion to California Compliance Offsets because
they were not verified to the more stringent California standard.
Green Mountain College, another Carbon Neutral educational institution, invested in a farm
methane project in Vermont.
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 72
Corporations
Microsoft is one of the few companies which details its use of offsets. Microsoft looks to use
offsets that are credible, verifiable, and additional. Through the Gold Standard and Veri fied
Carbon Standard offset registries, Microsoft has invested in reforestation in Kenya, home fuel
switching in Mongolia, wind farms in China, and alternatives to deforestation in Brazil.
Consumers
TerraPass is a consumer service that retires offsets from the Verified Carbon Standard and
Climate Action Reserve on behalf of consumers. One project registered on the Climate Action
Reserve, the Arcata Community Forest, expanded an existing forest to protect adjacent land
from logging.
Offset Programs Available to Hermosa Beach
Both California Compliance Offsets and voluntary offsets are available to Hermosa Beach.
California Compliance Offsets
California Compliance Offsets are admissible to the state’s Cap-and-Trade program. They are
issued by the Air Resources Board. In certain cases, California Compliance Offsets can be
converted from offsets generated by the Climate Action Reserve, Verified Carbon Standard, and
American Carbon Registry.
California Cap-and-Trade
California’s Climate Change Scoping Plan outlines the state’s strategy for reducing greenhouse
gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, as required by AB 32 (2006). The Scoping Plan relies
heavily on a cap on greenhouse gas emissions that come from electricity, natural gas,
transportation fuels, and certain other industries like cement production. Entities in these
sectors must acquire and surrender an amount of emissions allowances equivalent to their
greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions from other sectors, like agriculture and
landfills, are uncapped and will likely remain uncapped due to monitoring and verification
challenges in enforcing compliance. Emissions reductions projects from uncapped sectors can
produce compliance offsets.
California Greenhouse Gas Allowances
The California Air Resources Board issues both California Greenhouse Gas Allowances and
ARB Offset Credits, which together serve as compliance instruments for sources subject to
state’s Cap-and-Trade program. Up to 8% of the total compliance obligations for a year can be
met using ARB Offset Credits. The Air Resources Board issues ARB Offset Credits for projects
that meet certain criteria contained in an approved offset protocol. Registry Offsets from
projects meeting the same criteria but registered with the American Carbon Registry, Climate
Action Reserve, or Verified Carbon Standard can be converted to ARB Offset Credits.
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 73
California Greenhouse Gas Allowances and ARB Offset Credits are both denominated in metric
tonnes of CO2-equivalent, and are identical aside from the ARB Offset Credits being limited to
8% of the overall compliance obligation. Hermosa Beach can acquire and retire either
California Greenhouse Gas Allowances or ARB Offset Credits to offset its greenhouse gas
emissions within California’s Cap-and-Trade program.
Allowances are available in vintages corresponding to the three established compliance periods,
2013-14, 2015-17, and 2018-20. When retiring allowances to offset the City’s emissions from
municipal operations, the City should retire offsets of the same vintage as the year to be offset.
For example, if the City wishes to offset its 2015 emissions, it should retire 2017 vintage offsets.
Acquiring California Allowances to Offset Hermosa Beach’s Emissions
Hermosa Beach is not a covered entity and does not have a compliance obligation under
California’s Cap-and-Trade Program. Hermosa Beach does indirectly participate in California’s
Cap-and-Trade system. Southern California Edison, Southern California Gas, and
transportation fuels distributors who sell products and services to Hermosa Beach and their
contractors do have a compliance obligation, and these entities must surrender allowances to
the Air Resources Board for each compliance period.
Hermosa Beach has several options to retire California Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Allowances.
The City can register on the California Air Resources Board’s Compliance Instrument Tracking
System Service (CITSS) to purchase allowances at auction and transfer compliance
instruments to the Retirement Account. The City can register as a Voluntary Associated Entity
pursuant to California Code of Regulations Section 95814. Under this scenario, the City could
acquire allowances:
● Directly from the Air Resources Board at quarterly auctions. The City must register as
an auction participant after establishing a CITSS Account and submitting a bid
guarantee prior to each auction.
● From a third party via an exchange. The Intercontinental Exchange and CME Group
offer futures contracts for California Carbon Allowances (CCA). Futures contracts
provide for delivery of a tangible or intangible asset at a future date. For instance,
between now and December 24, 2015, Hermosa Beach could purchase and retire 2017
Vintage California Carbon Allowances to be delivered to Hermosa Beach’s CITSS
account at the end of December 2015.
● From a third party via an over-the-counter transaction. The third party must maintain a
CITSS Account and the transaction must be registered on CITSS to guarantee
legitimacy.
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 74
Hermosa Beach can also work with a registered Voluntarily Associated Entity to purchase and
retire offsets on behalf of the City. A Voluntarily Associated Entity would conduct transactions
on Hermosa Beach’s behalf. Several brokers hold CITSS accounts and provide carbon
offsetting (or “balancing”) services on behalf of third parties, like Hermosa Beach. These
include:
● 3Degrees - offers Carbon Balancing Services
● Element Markets - developer and supplier of GHG credits, including California
● Evolution Markets - Kyoto, EU-ETS, RGGI, & California
Hermosa Beach should expect to pay a slight price premium or service fee when working with
an exchange or Voluntary Associated Entity to purchase and retire allowances. For instance,
contracts for 2014 allowances delivered at the end of September 2014 traded for $12.00 on the
Intercontinental Exchange, while allowances from the August 2014 Air Resources Board auction
settled at $11.50.
Retiring California Allowances to Offset Hermosa Beach’s Emissions
Retiring California Compliance Instruments is simple. Hermosa Beach, a broker, or a third party
can access CITSS and process a transfer from the General Account to the Retirement Account.
Instruments transferred to a compliance account will result in real offsets to Hermosa Beach’s
emissions.
Analysis of California Allowance Prices
California allowances are of the highest quality, as they are used for compliance in a legally-
binding Cap-and-Trade program. As such, California allowances are more expensive than
offsets for voluntary programs.
The California Air Resources Board has sold allowances at auction since the fall of 2012.
Allowance prices peaked at $14.00 in May of 2013. The settlement price at 2014 auctions (as
of August) has concentrated between $11.48 and $11.50.
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 75
California Air Resources Board Allowance Auction Prices
In the 2010 Economic Analysis, the Air Resources Board projected a 7% annual price increase
from 2012 through 2020, which is roughly what a company could earn on invested capital. The
reasoning behind that is because entities with a compliance obligation can hold onto allowances
for a future compliance period, and allowances are subject to a rate of return similar to what
allowance holders can achieve from asset classes of a similar risk. If allowance holders
expected allowances to appreciate at a higher rate (say 10%), they would buy and bank
allowances in pursuit of an extraordinary profit opportunity. This would bid up the price of
allowances to a price level where the extraordinary profit opportunity vanishes (back to 7%).
The 2010 Economic Analysis projected an allowance price of $25 per metric tonne in 2020. At
a 7% annual price increase, expected 2014 values would be $16.66 per tonne, $5.16 higher
than the latest auction. Because of this price discrepancy, an updated analysis is needed to
forecast allowance prices through 2020. The analysis below projects a 5.8% (low-case), 7%
(mid-case), or 11% (high case) annual increase in allowance prices after 2014.
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 76
Projected California Air Resources Board Allowance Prices
Cost
Projection
Annual %
Increase 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Low 5.8% $11.50 $12.17 $12.87 $13.62 $14.41 $15.24 $16.13
Middle 7.0% $11.50 $12.31 $13.17 $14.09 $15.07 $16.13 $17.26
High 11.0% $11.50 $12.77 $14.17 $15.73 $17.46 $19.38 $21.51
Analysis by Kaizenergy
The California State Legislature must amend state law for the state’s Cap-and-Trade program to
continue beyond 2020. Two factors point towards continuation of the Cap-and-Trade program.
First, the legislature and public’s support for addressing climate change through carbon pricing
remains strong. Second, allowing the program to end would mean a significant loss of revenue
from allowance sales. With future Cap-and-Trade auction revenues already committed to the
California High Speed Rail project, abandoning carbon pricing would leave the project partially-
finished or in search of another multi-billion dollar source of funds.
Voluntary Offset Registries
Voluntary greenhouse gas emissions offsets have been available for two decades. Most
climate commitments have used voluntary offsets to validate emissions reductions claims.
Outside of California, Quebec, and a handful of other places subject to Cap-and-Trade
programs, voluntary offsets are the standard instruments of making carbon claims.
Voluntary offsets are available at a fraction of the price of compliance offsets. A 2013 study of
voluntary offsets found an average price of $4.90 per metric tonne of CO2-equivalent, 42% of
the California ARB allowance price.
A system of registries and independent verifiers are responsible for assuring the quality of
voluntary offsets. Registries determine policy related to offset production through protocols,
work with the offset project developer to verify the project, issue offset units based on the metric
tonnes of reductions produced, and track the transfer offset units between parties. Some
projects on these registries can also be certified to produce California Compliance Offsets, if the
projects meet certain protocol and verification requirements
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 77
Voluntary Offset Registries
Offset Registry Share of
Global
Market
Convertible
to ARB
Offsets?
Notes
Verified Carbon Standard 47% Some
projects
70 U.S.-based projects (of 1,200+).
VCS has the most methodologies of
any offset registry.
The Gold Standard 15% No Focuses on offsets produced outside of
the United States, primarily in
developing countries.
Climate Action Reserve 5% Some
projects
California-based organization (Los
Angeles) focused on offsets produced
in the U.S. (360 projects), Mexico (8
projects), and Canada. 51 projects are
in California.
American Carbon Registry 1% Some 95 U.S.-based projects (of 105). Staff
trained on ARB protocols.
Market shares based on 2013 data in Forest Trends State of the Voluntary Carbon Markets 2014
Voluntary Offset Project Types
Offset projects must adhere to an approved protocol or methodology. While the California Air
Resources Board has approved protocols for five project types, the various voluntary registries
have approved dozens of protocols and methodologies.
The table below presents the range of offset projects, which are classified by their Kyoto
Protocol greenhouse gas emissions sector.
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 78
Types of Offset Projects, by Emissions Sector
Sectoral Scope Registries with
approved
method/protocol
Types of projects
1 - Energy Generation ACR, VCS, TGS Cogeneration facilities, fuel use in
cooking stoves
2 - Energy Distribution ACR Recycling of transformer oil
3 - Energy Demand ACR, VCS Building weatherization, campus energy
efficiency
4 - Manufacturing
Industries
None None yet
5 - Chemical Industries VCS Chemical production processes
6 - Construction None yet
7 - Transport ACR, VCS Vehicle fuel switching, truck stop
electrification
8 - Mining/Mineral
Production
ARB, CAR Coal mine methane
9 - Metal Production None None
10 - Fugitive Emissions
from Fuels
None None
11 - Fugitive Emissions
from Gases
CAR, VCS Destruction of ozone depleting
substances, leak detection
12 - Solvents Use None None
13 - Waste Handling and
Disposal
CAR, VCS Landfill methane capture, organic waste
composting
14 - Agriculture, Forestry,
Land Use
ACR, ARB, CAR,
VCS, TGS
Rice cultivation, forestry, urban forest,
prevention of deforestation, fertilizer
management, soil management,
15 - Livestock and
Manure Management
ARB, CAR Manure management, grazing
management
ACR = American Carbon Registry, ARB = California Air Resources Board, CAR = Climate Action
Reserve, TGS = The Gold Standard, VCS = Verified Carbon Standard,
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 79
Recommendations on Use of Offsets
Offsets are an important part of an aggressive climate commitment, as demonstrated by other
cities, corporations, and colleges that have claimed or plan to achieve Carbon Neutrality status.
Offsets put a price signal on carbon emissions. By purchasing offsets, Hermosa Beach
acknowledges the real environmental cost of greenhouse gases emissions from municipal
operations. Offsets also signal that the City is looking for other ways to reduce its emissions as
any investments to reduce gross emissions will, in turn, reduce future offset expenditures. As
such, the sustained use of offsets can be seen as a commitment device for achieving gross
emissions reductions: the City cannot simply ignore the cost of its gross greenhouse gas
emissions. As a climate commitment device, offset retirements are not limited to a certain
percentage of a City’s emissions ㅡ the City pledges to neutralize gross emissions at any level.
However, offsets are not a free pass to emit; they are only effectively utilized as part of a larger
climate action strategy. Hermosa Beach stakeholders may have a negative perception of the
City’s use of offsets, especially if they feel the City’s efforts to reduce gross emissions are
inadequate. Use of offsets alone will not accomplish the City’s other objectives or lead to the
desired co-benefits from the City’s climate action efforts.
Transparency is exceedingly important in climate action, especially when offsets are used.
Hermosa Beach should establish a performance monitoring program that includes regular
reporting of the City’s climate action efforts, along with publishing greenhouse gas emissions
inventories. Offsets utilized within a public education and outreach campaign that focuses on
the City’s efforts to reduce its gross greenhouse gas emissions from municipal operations.
The offsets should tell a story that people can connect to when understanding the City’s climate
actions and considering their own.
The experience of existing cities and entities, particularly the three educational institutions,
highlights the possibility to connect offsets with a community as part of a public education
program about a city’s climate action efforts. By investing in certain projects – projects whose
stories resonate with residents – Hermosa Beach can communicate the climate action
challenges that it is seeking while connecting the community with specific projects they can also
invest in to offset their own emissions.
While a wide range of offset project types exist, Hermosa Beach may find some more suitable
than others if the City wishes to include its own offset retirements as part of a public education
and outreach program. The public may feel more of a connection with offsets generated within
the United States, especially those from projects in California.
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 80
Should Hermosa Beach Use Compliance or Voluntary Offsets?
Hermosa Beach must decide whether to use the cheaper voluntary emissions offsets or the
more expensive California Compliance Offsets. The annual price of offsets to cover the City’s
2007 municipal inventory in all cost projection scenarios is less than 0.1% of the City’s general
fund budget.
Range of Annual Costs to Offset 1,552 Metric Tonnes of CO2-e
Scenario Offset Price per Metric Tonne Annual Cost to
Offset 1,552 MT
ARB - Current $11.50 (August 2014 auction price) $17,848
ARB - Future High $21.51 (high-case projection for 2020) $33,383
Voluntary - Current $5.00 $7,760
Voluntary - Future High $7.50 $11,640
Under this range of prices, the City will find that many of its opportunities to reduce gross
greenhouse gas emissions are not cost competitive with offsets or allowances. For example, for
$99.84, the City could retire the more expensive ARB-eligible allowances (at $11.50/metric
tonne) to offset the tailpipe greenhouse gas emissions of a 2002 Ford Expedition traveling 60
miles round trip, 4 days per week, 48 weeks per year. The annual cost of ARB-eligible offsets
to neutralize for a Prius traveling 15 miles per day is approximately $7.74. Incidentally, the
Expedition driver would save $2,051.30 per year in fuel costs (at $4.00/gallon) by switching to a
Prius. This example illustrates both how inexpensive greenhouse gas emissions are, even
within California’s Cap-and-Trade system, and also the need for strategic climate action policies
that are well-integrated within the City’s existing municipal operations. It also illustrates that use
of offsets can be the most cost-effective option to achieve a given level of reductions.
The price of allowances will increase in the future as California’s cap on emissions decreases
and early actions are exhausted, but even a seven-fold increase in allowance price would only
yield a $60 per-month incentive for the Ford Expedition driver to switch to a carpool. The City
has found this level of incentive too low for many employees.
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 81
Advantages and Disadvantages of ARB and Voluntary Offsets
Advantages Disadvantages
Voluntary ● Are 50% cheaper than California
Compliance Offsets.
● Offers a greater variety of projects.
● Most projects are located
outside of California.
● Voluntary offsets can be
perceived to be lower quality
than compliance offsets.
California
Compliance
● California offsets are perceived as
the highest quality offsets.
● There exists a strong connection
between Hermosa Beach and
statewide actions: these offsets can
help the City explain statewide
actions including cap and trade
program.
● Their use creates additional
emissions reductions within
California; effectively reducing the
cap.
● Their use shows Hermosa Beach is
willing to put a higher price on
greenhouse gas emissions.
● California offsets are more
expensive; and these
additional expenditures could
be used to reduce gross
emissions.
● It may be more difficult for
consumers to acquire and
retire offsets if households
and businesses within
Hermosa Beach want to
invest in the same offset
project as the City.
➤
➣
➢
Hermosa Beach should primarily rely on California Compliance Offsets to validate its
emissions claims. Although California Offsets are slightly more expensive, their higher
perceived quality and the connection they provide to statewide climate actions will make
Hermosa Beach’s climate commitment more robust.
Selecting Among ARB-Approved California Compliance Offsets
Up to 10% of allowances in California’s Cap-and-Trade system can come from offsets. While,
purchasing and retiring California Emissions Allowances has the same effect on emissions as
purchasing and retiring California Compliance Offsets, Emissions Allowances have a number of
limitations that make them less ideal for Hermosa Beach. For instance, it is difficult to explain
within a public education campaign, that, as a result of Hermosa Beach’s offset purchases, a
petroleum refinery or a natural gas power plant had to pay a slightly higher price to comply with
California’s greenhouse gas regulations. Emissions allowances are intangible, and the only
distinguishing characteristic is their ARB-assigned serial number.
Offsets have a story: a project location, emissions removal process, and organization
associated with their production. As of September 2014, Hermosa Beach can choose from
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 82
projects among the five ARB-approved offset protocols. Offsets from each type of project are
functionally equivalent in mitigating climate change as they are denominated in metric tonnes of
CO2-equivalent. However, each individual project can tell a different story. In choosing among
project types, Hermosa Beach should consider how stakeholders can relate to the project’s
location, the type of project, and the organization that produces the offset and receives
payment. In addition, attractive photographs of the project itself would aid in any public
education and outreach efforts the city conducts.
U.S. Forest Projects
The link between trees and carbon dioxide emissions is well-established in middle school
biology classes. Trees are tangible, beautiful, and provide a range of ecosystem services
besides converting carbon dioxide into oxygen. Projects certified under the U.S. Forest Protocol
provide for the preservation of large, contiguous forest lands in the United States, including
some locations in California. These forests will provide for attractive photographs, and the sites
could even be visited by Hermosa Beach stakeholders. The offsets are produced by non-profit
conservation organizations or private landowners.
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 83
U.S. Forest Project
Harvego Bear River Preserve Project / Photo by Placer Land Trust
Urban Forest Offsets
Urban forests, including street trees, parks, and wildlands within city limits, are highly sought -
after amenities that provide shade, mitigate the urban heat island effect, and give character to
streets and parks. Under current Air Resources Board guidance, planned tree planting and
maintenance activities within the urban forest and qualify for offsets. Few projects have used
this approach thus far, but a possible protocol update could expand the volume of offsets that
come from urban forest projects.
The Climate Action Reserve approved two Urban Forest protocols in June 2014. The Urban
Forest Management Protocol offers a programmatic approach to the updated Urban Tree
Planting protocol. The California Air Resources Board previously adopted the Climate Action
Reserve’s Urban Forest Protocol and will need to adopt the Urban Forest Management protocol
for the programmatic approach to create California Compliance Offsets. The Reserve hopes
that these new protocols facilitate implementation of more urban forest projects.
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 84
Municipalities and counties can aggregate projects within an urban area boundary, as
established by the U.S. Census Bureau. Projects must be a minimum of 50 acres. Projects are
issued credits that are for renewable 25-year periods. Projects are subject to monitoring,
reporting, and verification for 100 years to ensure permanent removal of greenhouse gases
from the atmosphere. Carbon offsets are generated annually based on the difference in
standing live carbon stocks in trees that results from an urban forest management plan (versus
the area’s baseline).
The City of Santa Monica’s Urban Forest Protocol Project was the first submitted to the Climate
Action Reserve. The 1,000 new trees planted under the City’s Urban Forest Master Plan are
estimated to produce 5,000 metric tonnes in CO2 reductions over 100 years, or an average of
roughly 50 metric tons per year. The fact that this is roughly 4% of Hermosa Beach’s emissions
from municipal operations illustrates the sheer number of trees needed to offset emissions. To
date, the Santa Monica project hasn’t produced any offsets.
Boulder estimates that its urban forest of approximately 330,000 trees sequesters 2,000 tons of
CO2 annually.
Because the annual amount of emissions sequestered from an urban forest in a 1.4 square mile
city would be low relative to the municipality’s emissions from operations, Hermosa Beach may
wish to express interest in participating in any potential future South Bay Cities Council of
Governments-wide or county-wide urban forest management protocol effort. A larger effort
could be more efficient for cities that wish to participate.
Livestock Projects
The ARB’s livestock projects involve biogas control systems to manage manure on cattle and
pig farms. Manure is processed into biogas in a digester, then typically combusted to produce
electricity and heat. Livestock projects provide a connection to the familiar topics of farms and
food, though this could be perceived as negative as many of the livestock projects are sited at
concentrated animal feeding operations. Offsets are typically produced by companies that
specialize in biogas control systems and complying with the offset protocols.
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 85
Livestock Project
New Hope Dairy Livestock Biogas Digester Project in Galt, CA / Photo American Biogas Council
Ozone Depleting Substances
Some substances which deplete the ozone layer also have a high global warming potential, as
measured in carbon dioxide equivalent. Ozone depleting substances that also have a high
global warming potential are used as refrigerants, solvents, and fire suppressants. Destroying
these substances provides both ozone protection and greenhouse gas reduction.
Chemical companies typically produce greenhouse gas offsets from the destruction of ozone
depleting substances, and photos of the project locations appear to be a chemical plant.
Mine Methane Capture
In a mine methane project, methane is combusted and used to make energy.
The ARB recently approved the Mine Methane Capture Protocol. The Climate Action Reserve
has existing projects registered in Alabama, Colorado, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
Coal mine methane projects may be challenging to explain in a public education and outreach
campaign that highlights Hermosa Beach’s actions and use of offsets. The projects may evoke
a negative association with dirty coal mining and burning coal in power plants, both
environmentally harmful activities. In addition, payments to the mining companies or
energy/environmental service companies that produce the offsets are unlikely to be viewed as
positively compared with payments to forest conservation non-profits.
Use of Greenhouse Gas Offsets: Page 86
Photos of projects depend on mine location; the project in Colorado is on a scenic
mountainside.
Mine Methane Capture Project
Vessels Coal Gas project in Colorado / photo by Vessels Coal Gas
➤
➣
➢
Hermosa Beach should prioritize U.S. Forest and Urban Forest offset projects, but may
consider other projects within an offset portfolio. Other important considerations are
whether Hermosa Beach stakeholders can invest in the same project as the City and
how the specific project would fit within the City’s outreach and education efforts.
Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 87
Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan
Performance Monitoring, Costs, Transparency, and Outreach
Performance Monitoring
In committing to neutralize greenhouse gas emissions from municipal operations, the City of
Hermosa Beach is assuming responsibility for its own emissions. It will track and neutralize its
contributions to global emissions. Thus, greenhouse gas emissions are now seen as a liability
to the City, and the City should take steps to continuously account for emissions with processes
similar to how the City accounts for cash, indebtedness, and other assets and liabilities. After
the City sets a greenhouse gas reduction target for local government operations, Hermosa
Beach should conduct an annual greenhouse gas emissions inventory within 9 months of the
close of each calendar year. Meeting this timeline necessitates that the City implement systems
to track the following at a minimum of a calendar-year resolution:
● Amount (kWh) of electricity used for each service account, by year. If electric vehicle
chargers used exclusively for municipal operations are submetered, this electricity may
be broken out into vehicle fleet.
● Volume of gasoline, diesel, natural gas, and other fuels loaded into City-owned vehicles
and equipment.
● Volume of gasoline, diesel, natural gas, and other fuels attributable to Hermosa Beach
from contracted waste, landscaping, and street sweeping services.
● Miles traveled by vehicle type for employee commutes and business travel.
● City pairs and number of City passengers for any business travel flights taken.
● Weight and composition of waste generated by the City’s municipal operations.
● Recharge volume of high-global warming potential gases into vehicle or facility air
conditioning units, fire extinguishers, or other equipment.
Performance Monitoring Tools
Much of this data can be tracked in ICLEI’s Master Data Workbook4, an Excel spreadsheet-
based tool that can be compiled by multiple individuals or shared on a networked hard drive.
Two web-based tools will assist Hermosa Beach in tracking activity data and conducting an
annual emissions inventory. These are described below.
4 ICLEI’s Master Data Workbook is recommended for Hermosa Beach’s purposes over The Climate
Registry’s Local Government Operations Protocol Activity Data Entry Workbook, developed by Juan
Matute in 2009
Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 88
ClearPath Tool for Online Greenhouse Gas Performance Monitoring
ClearPath is a web-based tool that allows local governments to perform community-scale and
government operations GHG inventories in the cloud. Multiple users can collaborate to enter
data from different departments, and the data can be exported in the common .csv format for
sharing outside of the web-based tool. ClearPath includes modules for forecasting business-as-
usual emissions changes (adjusting for state-level actions like renewable electricity and fuel
economy standards) and forecasting the effectiveness of various emissions mitigation
strategies.
ClearPath offers two tracks: a Government Track and a Community-Scale Track. Using the
Government Track, a user can create an inventory following the guidelines of the Local
Government Operations Protocol. Using ClearPath, a local government can translate its activity
data, like fuel or electricity use, into greenhouse gas emissions by using emissions factors.
ClearPath contains default emission factors, including some that are California-specific. Users
can also add their own emissions factors, for instance a utility-specific value for kg CO2e from
electricity. ClearPath allows users to compare between inventory years, tracking progress over
time. An inventory module user guide contains additional information about ClearPath’s
features.
With data tracking, emissions calculation, and forecasting in the same web-based tool, Hermosa
Beach can close the loop between climate target setting, performance monitoring, and iterative
policymaking.
Hermosa Beach has access to ICLEI ClearPath as an ICLEI member and a California Local
Government through the Statewide Energy Efficiency Collaborative California (SEEC). SEEC is
a collaboration between investor-owned gas and electric utilities, ICLEI, the Institute for Local
Government, and the Local Government Commission. The SEEC program website offers live
and recorded training materials on ClearPath and other resources.
Enterprise Energy Management Information System
In the summer of 2014, an analyst at the South Bay Environmental Service Center began using
McKinstry’s Enterprise Energy Management Information System (EEMIS), a web-based tool, to
accesses and analyze the Hermosa Beach’s account data from Southern California Edison.
This tool will be used to track changes in energy use over time, particularly those that follow
efficiency and retrofit projects. The EEMIS tool can report monthly, quarterly, and annual
consumption data, streamlined for greenhouse gas reporting and other uses.
Hermosa Beach should budget to maintain an account on the McKinstry EEMIS, approximately
$900 per year. Additionally, the City should train staff to access the data in order to monitor the
progress of energy retrofit projects, assess the City’s opportunities for power purchase
agreements, and produce annual reports for use in greenhouse gas emissions inventories.
Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 89
Municipal Climate Action Indicators
Many intermediate indicators will help the City better understand its progress versus annual
greenhouse gas emissions totals or subtotals. For instance, a draft 2012 inventory indicates
that commute emissions fell by 37.4% between 2005 and 2012. At first, this may seem to
indicate that the City achieved its goal of a 20% reduction in 2005 commute emissions by 2020.
However, the number of full-time equivalent employees (FTE) decreased 33.8% during the 2005
to 2012 period. Commute greenhouse gas emissions per FTE during that same period
decreased by only 5.3%. Indicators like metric tonnes of CO2-e per FTE can give a clearer
picture of the City’s climate action performance than can aggregate totals or subtotals. Activity
data, such as miles traveled by employees or kWh of electricity used by facility, can also
elucidate the City’s climate action position in greater detail.
The Local Government Operations Protocol and other guidance for municipal operations
recommend several indicators for municipal operations. The following indicators and metrics are
applicable to Hermosa Beach’s annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory:
Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 90
Indicators and Metrics for Municipal Climate Action Performance
Indicator Metrics What it Means
Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT)
Fleet GHG/VMT A measure of GHG intensity of each mile
traveled by the City’s vehicle fleet. As the
City’s fleet procurement policies take
effect, this metric will show progress.
Number of vehicles
(#Vehicles)
VMT/#Vehicles The utilization rate for vehicles as the City
considers shared-use fleet
Equipment Operating
Hours (EOH)
Equipment
GHG/EOH
The GHG intensity of equipment
operations
Number of Pieces of
Equipment
(#Equipment)
EOH/#Equipment GHG intensity per unit of equipment
Solid Waste Tonnage
Disposed (Waste)
Waste GHG/Waste The GHG intensity of the waste the
municipal government sends to landfills;
varies based on a landfill’s methane control
practices
Refuse & Recycling
Vehicle Service Hours
(WasteVehHours)
Waste Vehicle
GHG/
WasteVehHours
Indicates the GHG intensity of the
contractor’s refuse and recycling
operations
Kilo-watt Hours (kWh) Electricity
GHG/kWh
The GHG intensity of electricity used by
Hermosa Beach. As Hermosa Beach
begins to blend its energy procurement,
the effects will show in this metric.
Number of FTE
Employees
(#Employees)
Commute
GHG/#Employees
The GHG intensity of employee commutes.
This metric allows the City to monitor the
effectiveness of its commute reduction
program
Volume of Water
Pumped (Water)
Water Pumped
GHG/Water
The GHG intensity of water pumping at the
City’s water pumping lift stations.
Transparency
Transparency is exceedingly important in climate action. Greenhouse gases are invisible, and
the activity that leads to their emission is difficult to track. Thus, interested stakeholders must
Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 91
rely on the City’s recordkeeping of activity data, indicators, and annual emissions in order to
assess the City’s climate action progress.
Transparency is even more important when instruments such as RECs or offsets are used to
neutralize all or a portion of emissions. Most stakeholders cannot verify the off-site RECs or
offsets. When claiming offsets in its annual greenhouse gas inventory, Hermosa Beach should
list the serial numbers (or ranges) of offsets retired for the year. When using unbundled RECs
to claim renewable energy and reduce the scope 2 emissions, the City should follow guidelines
in The Climate Registry’s General Reporting Protocol and “disclose additional activity data such
as MWh consumed, purchased, generated or sold as supplemental information.“ Hermosa
Beach should also disclose the serial numbers of RECs credited to the City’s electricity
consumption.
Carbonn Cities Climate Registry
An emerging global standard for reporting municipal and community climate action provides a
venue for Hermosa Beach to register its targets, document its actions, and publish its annual
greenhouse gas inventory.
The Carbonn Cities Climate Registry is a new partnership of C40, R20, and other global groups
focused on sub-national climate action. The Carbonn registry will help local governments to
achieve transparency and accountability for their local climate actions. In reporting its targets,
inventories, and actions on Carbonn, Hermosa Beach will be on the same platform as other
cities seen as national or global climate action leaders.
In September 2014, ICLEI USA’s Resilient Cities for America Initiative named Carbonn as their
official reporting platform. As of October 2014, 465 cities are reporting to Carbonn, including
Manhattan Beach and Hawthorne. The two South Bay cities have reported their greenhouse
gas emissions targets, performance, and mitigation actions.
Verification & Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Some entities have a third-party verify their greenhouse gas inventory prior to reporting the
results. The process for verifying greenhouse gas emissions inventories is similar to auditing
corporate accounting records, and the intention is to enhance the credibility of the results.
Because the cost to verify emissions can be substantial, few local governments and other
entities contract with a third-party verifier before reporting their emissions. Credible verification
can be obtained through an ISO 14064 compliant procedure, such as through The Climate
Registry.
Hermosa Beach can increase the credibility of its municipal GHG claims by obtaining third-party
verification for a greenhouse gas inventory. However, because the cost of verification, Her mosa
Beach should only audit certain inventories (for instance, the first year it sets a carbon neutrality
Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 92
goal). As Hermosa Beach develops new systems to monitor emissions, its annual emissions
inventories will become more accurate and precise, reducing the need for third-party
verification.
Outreach and Education
Building external awareness of the city’s climate action programs necessitates an effective
public outreach and education plan. Effective implementation can be challenging - especially
because most greenhouse gas reduction efforts produce intangible resul ts. Unlike some other
air pollutants, greenhouse gases are undetectable by human senses at typical concentrations.
Furthermore, greenhouse gas reductions represent the absence of these undetectable gasses.
This creates an environmental communications challenge versus tangible efforts like cleaning
water in a river or reducing urban smog.
The City should lead its climate action messaging with the city’s goal to be a climate action
leader: that its municipal actions will show both the community and other cities what can be
possible. The City should support this message by detailing specific actions that have been
implemented, and those that are planned for the future. Visualizations of alternative fuel
vehicles or solar photovoltaic panels on City facilities can be the most salient demonstrations of
climate actions. When explaining less salient actions, the City should tie examples to actions
that that community members can take. For example:
● When explaining specific energy retrofit actions, include information on the various
options for residential and commercial energy retrofits, especially property-assessed
financing
● Connect the City’s actions to procure zero-emissions electricity with options available to
residents and business owners, especially the emerging option of Community Choice
power
● make the City’s employee commute program an example of implementing GHG
reductions in transportation sector called for in the City’s General Plan update
Tying municipal efforts to community action will also strengthen the perception of the City as a
climate action leader. As, greenhouse gas emissions from municipal operations make up only
about 1% of community-wide emissions, connecting the City’s municipal actions with other
emissions reductions will demonstrate the city’s ability to leverage its position as a climate
action leader. Outside resources, such as ICLEI’s education and outreach guidance and
reports from the Yale Project on Climate Change Communications, will help the City determine
effective messaging for its outreach and education program.
Rather than relying on a limited number of City staff to communicate the City’s climate action
program, Hermosa Beach should train municipal employees and community members to be
climate action ambassadors. By holding regular information sessions that describe the City’s
Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 93
climate action commitment, existing actions, and future plans, Hermosa Beach can empower
City employees and community members to tell the City’s story – and connect it with
community-wide actions. This training problem would follow the model popularized by An
Inconvenient Truth, the film version of a presentation Al Gore had taught thousands of others to
deliver. This model of empowering others to tell climate-related stories has showed great
success in connecting individual action with an overwhelming problem.
Information sessions specific to municipal employees could first highlight all municipal actions
and then highlight efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions reductions opportunities within an
employee’s area of responsibility. The training sessions can also highlight how some highly-
visible municipal programs (such as the employee commute reduction program and bicycles at
work) serve as examples for community-wide actions.
The City should publish regularly-updated presentations on the its website, so that
ambassadors can obtain and deliver the most up-to-date information, which stakeholders can
also access on the Carbonn Cities’ Climate Registry. A version of the climate ambassador
information session could also be delivered within the Hermosa Beach Unified School District,
combined with materials from California’s Education and the Environment Initiative.
Costs of Municipal Climate Action
After accounting for savings from projects which reduce energy cost or vehicle operating costs,
the 30-year estimated cost of recommended municipal carbon neutral programs is $59,130, or
$1,971 per year. This low cost is made possible because many of the municipal climate action
opportunities available to the City have a payback period of less than 5 years. In addition to the
projects listed above, the recommended municipal climate action programs will fund and
Employee Commute Coordinator (20% FTE Assistant), a Climate Programs Analyst (25% FTE
Analyst), and annual Greenhouse Gas Offsets required to make carbon neutral claims. The
recommended plan is cash-flow positive by 2019.
The added cost of a “first-to” position, in which the city would achieve carbon neutrality in 2017
rather than 2020, would be approximately $52,475.
Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 94
Municipal GHG Reduction Project Options - Cost Summary
Implementation Measure
Range in Cost per
MTCO2e Recommended
Electricity
Community Choice Aggregation $10 to $18 Yes
Solar Photovoltaic Projects (ASE Solar Solutions
Proposal) -$5 to $20 Yes
GSE Solutions "Project 1" -$125 to -$175 Yes
GSE Solutions "Project 2" -$225 to -$275 Yes
GSE Solutions - Hot Water, HVAC $20 to $35 Yes
Municipal Fleet
Bicycle Parking
Yes
Employee Bicycles
Yes
Mode Switching
Yes
Bicycle Fleet Program (Summary) $0 to -$200 Yes (Bundle)
EV Service Equipment
Yes
Accelerate Clean Fleet Master Plan
Yes
Fuel Switching
Yes
EV Fleet Program (Summary) -$50 to -$150 Yes (Bundle)
Employee Commutes
Employee Commute - Carpool Incentive $100 to $200 Yes
Employee Commute - EV Incentive $500 to $1,000 No
Recommended Municipal Climate Actions: Cost Details and Timeline
Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 95
Implementation Measure Cost Assigned 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
2021 to
2044 Total
Electricity
Community Choice Aggregation Additional Costs of Procurement
$0 $18,309 $14,119 $9,193 $4,501 $90,024 $136,147
Solar Photovoltaic Projects Max upfront buydown of PPA
Rate to Cost-Neutral
$30,000 0 0 0 0 0 $30,000
GSE Solutions "Project 1" Outlay and annual savings $89,262 $72,087 $54,912 -$51,524 -$51,524 -$51,524 -$51,524
-
$1,236,576
-
$1,315,673
GSE Solutions "Project 2" Outlay and annual savings
$63,029 $126,059 -$23,792 -$23,792 -$23,792 -$23,792 -$571,008 -$477,088
GSE Solutions - Hot Water, HVAC Outlay and annual savings $53,785 $107,571 -$5,056 -$5,056 -121344 $29,900
Municipal Fleet
Bicycle Parking Infrastructure at City Facilities
$7,500
$7,500
Employee Bicycles 5 regular bicycles; 5 electric-
assist bicycles
$18,500
$46,250 $64,750
Mode Switching Vehicle Operating Savings from
Car -> Bike
-$2,750 -$2,750 -$2,750 -$2,750 -$2,750 -$66,000 -$79,750
Bicycle Fleet Program (Summary)
EV Service Equipment
$50,000
$50,000
Accelerate Clean Fleet Master Plan
Additional Costs for
Procurement (versus BAU) -
$7,500 per vehicle
$100,000 $75,000 $75,000
$0 $250,000
Fuel Switching Operating Savings from $3 to $4
Gasoline -> Electricity mi/year
-$3,817 -$9,860 -$18,568 -$23,124 -$21,733 -$521,593 -$598,695
EV Fleet Program (Summary)
Employee Commutes
Carpool Incentive Add’l Costs for $50 Incentive
$1,200 $2,400 $3,600 $4,800 $6,000 $144,000 $162,000
EV Incentive Costs for $125 Incentive
$7,500 $15,000 $22,500 $30,000 $37,500 $900,000 $1,012,500
Employee Commute Coordinator -
Staffing Additional Costs for Incentive $20,000 $21,000 $22,050 $23,153 $24,310 583443 $693,956
Climate Programs
Staffing - Analyst Additional Cost of Managing All
Climate Programs $30,000 $31,500 $33,075 $34,729 $36,465 729303.75 $895,073
Total Costs
Total Cost of All Projects
$89,262 $142,616 $424,104 $114,068 $158,781 -$34,371 -$33,579 -$923,500 -$151,880
Estimated Advance from Equipment Replacement Fund $142,026 $142,026 $142,026
$426,077
Outlay Before Offsets, Net of Advance -$52,764 $591 $282,079 $114,068 $158,781 -$34,371 -$33,579 -$923,500 -$577,957
CARB (High Quality) GHG Offsets
2021 - 2044 costs assume
further reductions in gross GHG
emissions $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,442 $490,609 $511,051
Total Cost After Offsets -$52,764 $591 $282,079 $114,068 $158,441 -$34,837 -$13,736 -$447,279 $59,130
Recommended Municipal Climate Actions: Cost Details and Timeline
Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 96
Begins Duration 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q
Electricity
Community Choice Aggregation 1Q2015 8
Solar PV Procurement 3Q2015 6
GSE Solutions "Project 1"1Q2014 12
GSE Solutions "Project 2"3Q2015 8
GSE Solutions - Hot Water, HVAC 3Q2017 6
Municipal High Efficiency Procurement Policy 1Q2014 ongoing
Municipal Fleet
Municipal Facility - Bicycle Parking 4Q2014 1
Bike Barn @ Work 1Q2016 1
Municipal Facility - EV Service Equip.3Q2015 4
Electric Vehicle Procurement 1Q2016 10
NEV Procurement 2Q2016
Employee Commute
Carpool Incentive 1Q2016 ongoing
EV Incentive 1Q2016 ongoing
Municipal Service Contracts
Amendment with Athens Services
Other
Purchase Offsets 1Q2017 ongoing
Climate & Commute Programs Staffing 1Q2016 ongoing
2019 20202016
implementation period
Implementation Measures
Implementation Period 2015 2017 2018
active
Performance Monitoring, Costs, & Transparency: Page 97
Revenues for Climate Action
Climate Action leaders are often expected to “put their money where their goals are” in order to
fund climate action measures and programs. For instance, Boulder’s Climate Action Plan tax
generates about $1.8 million per year for the City. Voters renewed that measure in 2012.
One possible source of dedicated, local funds for climate action is Hermosa Beach’s Utility User
Tax, which currently generates approximately $2.5 million per year. At current prices for
California Emissions Allowances ($11.50), the community’s 134,000 metric tonnes of CO2-e
would cost about $1.54 million to offset. This represents an approximately 61% i ncrease above
existing rates of 6% on electricity, gas, and water and 5.5% on communications services,
bringing the total Utility User Tax would be 10%, comparable to Santa Monica’s. Utility User
Tax rates in California range from 1% to 11%, except in Arcata, which levies a 45% tax on
residential customers that use greater than 600% of the baseline electricity usage. Currently, it
appears that Albany is the only California city looking to use the Utility User Tax to fund climate
action.
Hermosa Beach could try an alternate approach to funding aggressive reductions in community-
wide emissions. The City could declare its interest in implementing innovative demonstration
projects and programs in order to achieve aggressive reductions in community-wide
greenhouse gas emissions, provided they are available at no additional expense to the City.
The City’s national-leading commitment to neutralize emissions from government operations
could attract attention from companies looking for such an opportunity. However, as more cities
dedicate funding to climate action, Hermosa Beach may lose out on some promising
demonstration projects to cities that can dedicate some local funding to assisting these
companies.
Hermosa Beach will likely find itself in a more competitive position for state and federal grants
as a result of its aggressive climate commitment. The state and federal government have a
vested interest in the success of leaders, so that they may lead the path for others to follow. If
Hermosa Beach maintains a climate leadership position into the future, it will likely find success
in attracting government grants and government-sponsored pilot projects.
City of Hermosa Beach
GHG Inventory, Forecasting,
Target-Setting Report for an
Energy Efficiency Climate
Action Plan
January 2015
Prepared for:
Prepared by:
3570 Carmel Mountain Road, Suite 300
San Diego, California 92130
Funded by:
Local Government Strategic Plan Strategies Program
Under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission
Contents i
Contents
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................................................ iii
Key Findings ................................................................................................................................................. iv
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1
GHG Emissions Inventories ........................................................................................................................... 2
Emissions Reporting ............................................................................................................................... 2
Emissions Sectors ...................................................................................................................... 2
Calculation Methodology .......................................................................................................... 4
Community Emissions ............................................................................................................................ 4
2005—2012 Emissions Summary .............................................................................................. 5
2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Inventories ................................................................................... 6
Energy ........................................................................................................................................ 9
Municipal Emissions ............................................................................................................................. 11
2005—2012 Emissions Summary ............................................................................................ 11
2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Inventories ................................................................................. 13
Energy ...................................................................................................................................... 15
Inventory Forecasts ..................................................................................................................................... 17
Business-as-Usual Forecasts ................................................................................................................. 17
Community Business-as-Usual Forecast .................................................................................. 18
Municipal Business-as-Usual Forecast .................................................................................... 19
Adjusted Business-as-Usual Forecasts ................................................................................................. 19
Community Adjusted Business-as-Usual Forecast .................................................................. 20
Municipal Adjusted Business-as-Usual Forecast ..................................................................... 21
Reduction Targets ....................................................................................................................................... 22
Recommended Community Targets ..................................................................................................... 22
Recommended Municipal Targets ........................................................................................................ 23
Conclusions and Next Steps ........................................................................................................................ 25
References .................................................................................................................................................. 26
Appendix A: Glossary of Terms
Appendix B: Methodology
ii Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Tables
Table 1. Key Terms in the Report .................................................................................................................. 1
Table 2. GHGs Analyzed in the Inventories .................................................................................................. 2
Table 3. Community-Wide GHG Emissions by Sector for 2005 and 2012 .................................................... 6
Table 4. Community GHG Emissions for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 ........................................................ 7
Table 5. Activity Data used in 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Community Inventories ................................... 8
Table 6. Demographic Data for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 ....................................................................... 9
Table 7. Activity Data and GHG Emissions of Energy in 2005 and 2012 ....................................................... 9
Table 8. Municipal GHG Emissions by Sector for 2005 and 2012 .............................................................. 12
Table 9. Municipal GHG Emissions for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 .......................................................... 13
Table 10. Activity Data used in 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Municipal Inventories .................................. 14
Table 11. Activity Data and GHG Emissions of Energy in 2005 and 2012 ................................................... 15
Table 12. Growth Factors for 2012, 2020, and 2035 .................................................................................. 18
Table 13. Community BAU Forecast ........................................................................................................... 18
Table 14. Municipal BAU Forecast .............................................................................................................. 19
Table 15. Community Adjusted BAU Emissions .......................................................................................... 21
Table 16. Municipal Adjusted BAU Emissions ............................................................................................. 21
Table 17. State-Aligned GHG Reduction Targets ........................................................................................ 22
Table 18. State-Aligned Municipal GHG Reduction Targets ....................................................................... 23
Figures
Figure 1. Community-Wide GHG Emissions by Sector for 2005 and 2012 ................................................... 5
Figure 2. Community GHG Emissions for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 ........................................................ 6
Figure 3. GHG Emissions for Community Electricity and Natural Gas, by Sector ....................................... 10
Figure 4. Municipal GHG Emissions by Sector for 2005 and 2012 .............................................................. 12
Figure 5. Municipal GHG Emissions for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 ......................................................... 13
Figure 6. GHG Emissions for Municipal Electricity and Natural Gas, by Sector .......................................... 16
Figure 7. Community Emissions Inventories, Projections, and Targets ...................................................... 23
Figure 8. Municipal Emissions Inventories, Projections, and Targets ......................................................... 24
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations iii
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
AB Assembly Bill
ADC Alternative Daily Cover
BAU Business-as-Usual
CAFE Corporate Average Fuel Economy
CH4 Methane
CARB California Air Resources Board
CIWMB California Integrated Waste Management Board
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CO2e Carbon Dioxide Equivalents
EECAP Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan
EO Executive Order
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GWP Global Warming Potential
IEAP International Local Government GHG Emissions Analysis Protocol
IFT Inventories, Long-Term Forecasts, and Target-Setting
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
JWPCP Joint Water Pollution Control Plant
kWh Kilowatt-hour
LCFS Low Carbon Fuel Standard
LGOP Local Government Operations Protocol
MT Metric Tons
NDN Nitrification/denitrification
N2O Nitrous Oxide
RPS Renewable Portfolio Standard
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
SBCCOG South Bay Cities Council of Governments
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCE Southern California Edison
SCG Southern California Gas Company
SEEC Statewide Energy Efficiency Collaborative
iv Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Key Findings
Community
The City of Hermosa Beach decreased emissions 7.7% from 2005 to 2012, from 137,160 MT
CO2e to 126,611 MT CO2e.
On-Road Transportation, Commercial Energy, Solid Waste, Water, and Off-Road Sources sector
emissions decreased while Residential Energy and Wastewater sectors increased emissions from
2005 to 2012.
Energy-related emissions account for about 40% of the total community emissions.
Under the Adjusted Business-as-Usual (BAU) forecast, emissions will be 111,690 MT CO2e in
2020 and 94,162 MT CO2e in 2035. These emissions levels are 19% lower in 2020 than 2005 and
31% lower than 2005 by 2035.
The City should choose a reduction target that is feasible and ambitious. The State recommends
a 15% reduction below 2005 levels by 2020, which would be achieved under the Adjusted BAU
scenario.
To continue reductions consistent with the State’s long-term emissions reduction goal of
lowering emissions 80% below 1990 levels by 2050, the City would need to reduce emissions in
2035 by 24,210 MT CO2e from an Adjusted BAU forecast. This is a 24% reduction from the
Adjusted BAU emissions level and would achieve a 49% reduction from 2005 levels.
Municipal
Municipal emissions have decreased 9% from 2005 to 2012, from 1,501MT CO2e to 1,372 MT
CO2e.
Emissions in all sectors decreased between 2005 and 2012 except for the Vehicle Fleet &
Equipment and SCE-Owned Outdoor Lights.
Municipal energy use accounts for approximately 1% of all emissions.
Under the Adjusted BAU forecast, emissions will be 1,751 MT CO2e in 2020 and 1,872 MT CO2e
in 2035. These emissions levels are 17% higher in 2020 than 2005 and 25% higher than 2005 by
2035.
The City would need to reduce emissions by 1,751 MT CO2e from the 2020 Adjusted BAU
emissions level to meet its carbon neutrality goal by 2020.
Introduction 1
Introduction
The Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Inventories, Long-Term Forecasts, and Target-Setting (IFT) Report contains
the first steps toward the City of Hermosa Beach (City) identifying energy-efficiency measures in an
Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan (EECAP). The inventories describe historic energy use and GHG
emissions and the forecasts describe projected future emissions in the City. The target-setting section
describes GHG reduction recommendations that are consistent with State goals and may assist the City
in establishing local GHG reduction targets. The inventories and recommended reduction targets will
help the City in the next step of the EECAP, which is to identify energy efficiency and GHG reduction
measures that are relevant, meaningful, and feasible.
Specifically, the IFT Report includes (words and phrases in bold are described in Table 1):
Historic GHG emissions in community inventories and municipal inventories for 2005, 2007,
2010, and 2012;
Future GHG emissions for 2020 and 2035 under a business-as-usual forecast scenario and
adjusted business-as-usual forecast scenario; and
Recommended GHG reduction targets for 2020 and 2035.
Table 1. Key Terms in the Report1
Term Definition
Adjusted business-as-usual
A GHG forecast scenario that accounts for known policies and regulations that will
affect future emissions. Generally, these are state and federal initiatives that will
reduce emissions from the business-as-usual scenario.
Baseline year The inventory year used for setting targets and comparing future inventories
against.
Business-as-usual
A GHG forecast scenario that assumes no change in policy affecting emissions since
the most recent inventory. Changes in emissions are driven primarily through
changes in demographics.
Community Inventory GHG emissions that result from the activities by residents and businesses in the city.
An inventory reports emissions that occur over a single calendar year.
Emission factors The GHG-intensity of an activity.
Municipal Inventory
GHG emissions that result from the activities performed as part of the government
operations in the city and are a subset of the community inventory. An inventory
reports emissions that occur over a single calendar year.
Reduction targets
GHG emissions levels not to be exceeded by a specific date. Local reduction targets
are often informed by state recommendations and different targets may be
established for different years.
Sector A subset of the emissions inventory classified by a logical grouping such as
economic or municipal-specific category.
1 A glossary of terms is also included as Appendix A.
2 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
GHG Emissions Inventories
GHG emissions inventories are the foundation of planning for future reductions. Establishing an existing
inventory of emissions helps to identify and categorize the major sources of emissions currently being
produced. In this report, four years of historic inventories are presented to show not only the major
sources of emissions in the City, but also how those sources vary over time. For both the community and
municipal inventories, the years 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 are presented. The 2005 inventory (for
both community and municipal operations) is considered the baseline year. A baseline year is
established as a starting point against which other inventories may be compared and targets may be set,
and is generally the earliest year with a full emissions inventory. The most recent inventory (2012) has
the most relevant data for planning purposes, while the interim years (2007 and 2010) provide context
and may help identify trends or anomalies.
Emissions Reporting
The primary GHGs from the community and municipal operations are from carbon dioxide (CO2),
methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O). Because each of these gases has a different capacity for
trapping heat in the atmosphere, known as its global warming potential (GWP), a method of reporting is
needed to be able to compare gases in the same terms. As a result, emissions are reported in carbon
dioxide equivalents, or CO2e, with each GHG normalized and calculated relative to CO2 using its GWP.
Table 2 describes the GHGs analyzed in this report, their symbol, GWP, and primary community sources
of emissions. While N2O has the highest GWP and may be considered the most dangerous on a per-
molecule basis, CO2 is by far the most prevalent, accounting for 88% of statewide emissions in 2005
(CARB 2011).
Table 2. GHGs Analyzed in the Inventories
Greenhouse Gas Symbol Global Warming
Potential Primary Community Sources
Carbon Dioxide CO2 1 Fossil fuel combustion
Methane CH4 25 Fossil fuel combustion, landfills,
wastewater treatment
Nitrous Oxide N2O 298 Fossil fuel combustion, wastewater
treatment
Source: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, 2007.
Emissions Sectors
The inventories identify the major sources of GHGs emissions caused by activities in sectors that are
specific to community or municipal activities. A sector is a subset of the economy, society, or municipal
operations whose components share similar characteristics. An emissions sector can also contain
subsectors that provide more specificity about the source of emissions (e.g., natural gas and electricity
are subsectors of the energy sector).
GHG Emissions Inventories 3
As mentioned above, inventories were completed for the community and municipal operations.
Because the majority of municipal activities occur within the boundaries of the City and therefore
contribute to the overall emissions of the community, both inventories are interconnected, with the
municipal inventory considered a subset of the community inventory. As a result, municipal emissions
are included in numbers reported for the community. The municipal inventory is separated to highlight
areas of emissions that the City has more direct control over and to identify where they can begin to set
examples for the community on how reduction strategies can be implemented.
The following subsections describe the sectors used in the community and municipal inventories. It is
important to note that both inventories capture similar types of information but may be categorized
differently. For example, energy is reported in both the community and municipal inventory, but
community level energy emissions are reported as “Residential” and “Non-residential”, whereas
municipal energy emissions are more logically reported as “Buildings & Facilities” and “Streetlights”.2
Community Sectors
The community inventory is categorized by sectors based on the sector’s ability to be affected through
regional and local programs, incentives, zoning, and other policies. The City’s community inventories
were divided into the following sectors:
Energy in the Community Inventory is further broken down into two sectors:
o Commercial/Industrial Energy includes emissions from electricity and natural gas
consumption in non-residential buildings and facilities (including outdoor lighting) in the
City.
o Residential Energy includes emissions from electricity and natural gas consumption in
residential buildings in the City.
On-road Transportation includes emissions from vehicle fuel use in trips wholly within the City
(in-boundary) and trips that either originate or end in the City (cross-boundary). Emissions from
in-boundary trips are fully accounted for in the inventory, whereas only half of the emissions
from cross-boundary trips are accounted for. Trips that pass-through the City, (such as on State
Route 1) are not accounted for in the inventory because the City has little or no control of these
emissions. As a result, this methodology reflects only trips or parts of trips within City borders
that the City has the ability to affect.
Solid Waste includes emissions from waste that is generated in the community and sent to
landfills.
Water includes emissions from the electricity used to source, treat, and deliver imported water
in the community that is not accounted for in the community utility data.
Wastewater includes emissions from treating wastewater generated in the community.
2 Streetlights are further categorized as SCE-owned or City-owned as described later.
4 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Off-road Sources include emissions from operating equipment for construction, commercial,
light industrial and agricultural activities; lawn and garden equipment; and recreational vehicles
such as all-terrain vehicles.
Municipal Sectors
Sources of municipal emissions are divided into the following sectors:
Energy in the municipal inventory is further broken down into four sectors:
o Buildings and Facilities includes energy use by the government, including electricity and
natural gas.
o SCE-owned Outdoor Lighting includes energy for streetlights on fixtures owned by SCE and
outdoor lighting.
o City-owned Outdoor Lighting includes energy for streetlights on fixtures owned by the City,
traffic control signals, and outdoor lighting.
o Water Pumping & Irrigation includes energy for water pumping and irrigation.
Vehicle Fleet & Equipment includes emissions from vehicles owned or operated by the
government or contracted by the City for services such as street cleaning. It also includes
equipment, such as emergency generators.
Employee Commute includes emissions from fuel use in vehicle trips by municipal employees
commuting to and from work in the City.
Solid Waste includes emissions from waste generated by municipal employees or at municipally
owned facilities.
Calculation Methodology
GHG emissions were calculated using activity data available (e.g., kilowatt-hours of electricity) for each
sector and protocols for converting activity data to emissions output using relevant emission factors.
Emission factors relate the activity to GHG emissions and may vary by year (e.g., for electricity) and
often are not affected by local actions or behavior, unlike activity data. The U.S. Community Protocol for
Accounting and Reporting Greenhouse Gas Emissions (ICLEI 2012) and the Local Government Operations
Protocol for the Quantification and Reporting of GHG Emissions Inventories (LGOP) (CARB 2010) were
the primary protocols used for developing the community and municipal inventories, respectively.
Activity data are reported in the community and municipal emissions subsections below, and emission
factors are detailed in Appendix B.
Community Emissions
The community inventory includes the GHG emissions that result from activities within City boundaries.
This section presents the findings of the community inventory for four years: 2005 (baseline year), 2007,
2010, and 2012. It also provides more specific detail and findings on the energy sectors, which will form
the basis of the reduction targets and reduction measures the City identifies in the EECAP.
GHG Emissions Inventories 5
2005—2012 Emissions Summary
The City of Hermosa Beach reduced emissions 7.7% from 2005 to 2012, from 137,160 MT CO2e
to 126,611 MT CO2e.
On-Road Transportation, Commercial Energy, Solid Waste, Water, and Off-Road Sources
sector emissions decreased while Residential Energy and Wastewater sectors increased
emissions from 2005 to 2012.
As shown in Figure 1 and Table 3, the On-Road Transportation sector was the largest contributor to
emissions in both 2005 (54%) and 2012 (54%) by producing 73,567 MT CO2e in 2005 and 68,235 MT
CO2e in 2012. This change represents a 7.2% decrease in emissions from 2005 to 2012. Residential
energy is the second-largest contributor to emissions, accounting for 23% of emissions in 2005 and 27%
in 2012. This change represents a 4.7% increase from 2005 to 2012, from 32,293 MT CO2e to 33,808 MT
CO2e. The proportion of emissions from the Commercial sector decreased 12.7% from 2005 to 2012,
from 20,280 MT CO2e to 17,830 MT CO2e. Solid waste comprised 4% of the total (6,015 MT CO2e) in
2005, but accounted for 3% of the total (3,334 MT CO2e) in 2012. Water, Wastewater, and Off-road
sources made up the remaining emissions in each year. Water and Off-Road Transportation emissions
declined from 2005 to 2012; however, Wastewater sources increased 13.5% (from 52 to 59 MT CO2e) in
the same period.
Figure 1. Community-Wide GHG Emissions by Sector for 2005 and 2012
54%
15%
23%
4% 3% <1%
1%
2005
54%
14%
27%
3%
2%
<1% <1%
2012
On-Road Transportation Commercial Energy
Residential Energy Solid Waste
Water Wastewater
Off-Road Sources
6 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Table 3. Community-Wide GHG Emissions by Sector for 2005 and 2012
Sector 2005
(MT CO2e)
2012
(MT CO2e)
% Change
2005 to 2012
On-Road Transportation 73,567 68,235 -7.2%
Residential Energy 32,293 33,808 4.7%
Commercial Energy 20,280 17,830 -12.1%
Solid Waste 6,015 3,334 -44.6%
Water 4,065 2,600 -36.0%
Off-Road Sources 888 745 -16.1%
Wastewater 52 59 13.5%
Total 137,160 126,611 -7.7%
2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Inventories
Figure 2 and Table 4 show the GHG emissions by sector for all inventory years. Emissions are variable
among the inventory years, and may reflect changes in the economy, weather, and programs
implemented to reduce emissions. The table also lists the percentage of each sector relative to total
emissions and shows that the proportion of each sector does not vary greatly by year.
Figure 2. Community GHG Emissions for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012
-
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
2005 2007 2010 2012MT CO2e Off-Road Sources
Wastewater
Water
Solid Waste
Residential Energy
Commercial Energy
On-Road
Transportation
GHG Emissions Inventories 7
Table 4. Community GHG Emissions for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012
Sector 2005
(MT CO2e)
% of
Total
2007
(MT CO2e)
% of
Total
2010
(MT CO2e)
% of
Total
2012
(MT CO2e)
% of
Total
On-road
Transportation 73,567 54% 71,863 54% 70,277 55% 68,235 54%
Residential Energy 32,293 24% 31,964 24% 32,700 26% 33,808 27%
Commercial Energy 20,280 15% 19,792 15% 18,372 14% 17,830 14%
Solid Waste 6,015 4% 4,584 3% 3,510 3% 3,334 3%
Water 4,065 3% 3,942 3% 2,552 2% 2,600 2%
Off-Road Sources 888 1% 588 <1% 419 <1% 745 1%
Wastewater 52 <1% 35 <1% 59 <1% 59 <1%
Total 137,160 132,768 127,889 126,611
% Change from
2005 -- -3.2% -6.8% -7.7%
Activity data can provide more insight into behavioral changes in the community, as these data are not
affected by emission factors. Table 5 summarizes activity data for each sector and subsector. The activity
data show that residential electricity, natural gas (residential and non-residential), wastewater,
industrial off-road sources, and light commercial off-road sources increased from 2005 to 2012, while
on-road transportation, commercial electricity, solid waste, water, recycled water, and off-road sources
(lawn & garden, construction, recreation, and agriculture) decreased from 2005 to 2012. Wastewater
and Off-road emissions use indicator data to attribute county-level emissions to the City and the
indicator data are also shown in Table 5.
Demographic data also help provide perspective to changes in emissions over time. Table 6 shows the
number of households, jobs, population, and service population (jobs + population) for each inventory
year. Energy emissions in particular often reflect trends in demographic data. For example, the slight
increase in population and households between 2005 and 2012 may explain some of the increase in
Residential Energy emissions.
8 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Table 5. Activity Data used in 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Community Inventories
Sector 2005 2007 2010 2012 % Change
2005 to 2012
On-road Transportation
Total Vehicle Miles Traveled 140,684,101 138,727,165 139,197,605 138,350,955 -1.7%
Residential Energy
Electricity (kWh) 47,843,215 49,976,195 49,906,427 49,778,450 4.0%
Natural Gas (therms) 3,339,783 3,305,637 3,448,010 3,364,392 0.7%
Commercial Energy
Electricity (kWh) 51,741,467 52,130,513 48,545,739 41,191,832 -20.4%
Natural Gas (therms) 857,687 900,024 827,116 875,986 2.1%
Solid Waste
Landfilled (tons) 24,578 18,490 14,230 13,511 -45.0%
ADC (tons) 1 246 180 50 48 -80.7%
Water and Wastewater
Water (MG) 760.2 760.2 687.7 700.3 -7.9%
Recycled Water (MG) 30.9 30.9 26.4 27.7 -10.3%
Wastewater (City portion of
countywide residents) 0.20% 0.20% 0.20% 0.20% 0.5%
Off-road sources2 (% of LA County emissions attributed to the City)
Lawn & Garden (% Households) 0.30% 0.29% 0.29% 0.29% -1.7%
Construction (% Building
permits) 0.32% 0.20% 0.13% 0.24% -25.7%
Industrial (% Manufacturing
Jobs) 0.03% 0.03% 0.03% 0.03% 4.3%
Light Commercial (% Other
jobs) 0.17% 0.17% 0.17% 0.18% 5.9%
Recreation (Population
weighted by income) 0.36% 0.36% 0.35% 0.34% -6.3%
Agriculture (% Ag. Jobs) 0.10% 0.11% 0.06% 0.08% -17.6%
1 ADC is Alternative Daily Cover, which is green waste (grass, leaves, and branches) that is used to cover landfill emissions. They are
reported separately by CalRecycle and therefore shown separately here.
2 Off-road emissions are available at the county level through CARB’s OFFROAD model. Emissions attributable to the City were derived
using indicator data related to the off-road source. For example, the percentage of households in the City compared to the county was
used to attribute the same percentage of lawn & garden equipment emissions to the City. See Appendix B for more methodology
details.
GHG Emissions Inventories 9
Table 6. Demographic Data for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012
2005 2007 2010 2012 % Change
2005-2012
Service Population (Population + Jobs) 26,199 26,421 26,173 26,419 0.8%
Population 19,340 19,174 19,477 19,574 1.2%
Households 9,507 9,457 9,550 9,548 0.4%
Jobs 6,859 7,247 6,696 6,845 -0.2%
Energy
The EECAP ultimately will focus on increasing energy efficiency and reducing GHG gases from energy;
therefore, it is important for the City to understand its current energy consumption to make informed
decisions for reducing energy-related emissions. Energy use consists of electricity and natural gas.
Emissions from Commercial/Industrial and Residential energy use account for about 40% of the total
community emissions in 2005 and 2012. Table 7 shows the breakdown in activity (kWh or therms) and
GHG emissions by sector and energy source.
Table 7. Activity Data and GHG Emissions of Energy in 2005 and 2012
Sector
2005 2012
% Change in
Activity
2005-2012
% Change in
Emissions
2005-2012
Activity
(kWh or
therms)
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Activity
(kWh or
therms)
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Commercial/ Industrial
Electricity 51,741,467 15,719 41,191,832 13,172 -20.4% -16.2%
Natural Gas 857,687 4,561 875,986 4,658 2.1% 2.1%
Residential
Electricity 47,843,215 14,534 49,778,450 15,918 4.0% 9.5%
Natural Gas 3,339,783 17,759 3,364,392 17,890 0.7% 0.7%
Total (MT CO2e) 52,573 51,638 -1.8%
10 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Commercial electricity use decreased 20.4%
between 2005 and 2012; emissions decreased by
more than 16%. Residential electricity use
increased by about 4% but emissions increased by
more than 9%. These changes are due to the
emission factor used for electricity for 2005 and
2012. Emission factors convert activity data into
GHG emissions and electricity emission factors
vary annually based on how electricity is
generated by the electricity provider (i.e., the
amount of renewables, natural gas, coal, etc.). In
2005, Southern California Edison (SCE) generated
electricity that resulted in an emission factor of 669.7 CO2e. In 2012, SCE’s electricity generation resulted
in an emission factor of 705.0 CO2e. Therefore, a kilowatt-hour of electricity used in 2012 emitted more
GHGs than a kilowatt-hour of electricity used in 2005. Future emissions could increase or decrease
based on changes to SCE’s emission factors, which the City cannot directly affect, or through changes in
usage, which can be affected by changes in local policy, outreach, or incentive programs.
Unlike electricity, the emission factor for natural gas is estimated on a national basis and remains fairly
constant over time. Therefore, the natural gas GHG emissions follow the same trend as usage. In
Hermosa Beach, Commercial/Industrial natural gas consumption (therms) decreased by 2.1% from 2005
to 2012; therefore the emissions also declined 2.1%. Residential natural gas therms used and GHG
emissions declined nearly 0.7% from 2005 to 2012. Figure 3 shows the trend in electricity and natural
gas emissions from 2005 to 2012 for the Commercial/Industrial and Residential sectors.
Electricity-Related Emissions
All emissions are comprised of activity data and
the emission factor, or GHG-intensity, of that
activity. For electricity, the activity data are the
kilowatt-hours (kWh) used by the city’s residents
and businesses and the energy intensity is based
on the sources of power that Southern California
Edison uses to generate electricity. Changes to
either component can affect the GHG emissions
from electricity in the City.
-
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
Electricity Natural Gas Electricity Natural Gas
Commercial ResidentialMT CO2e 2005 2012
Figure 3. GHG Emissions for Community Electricity and Natural Gas, by Sector
GHG Emissions Inventories 11
Municipal Emissions
As described earlier, a municipal GHG emissions inventory is a subset of the community inventory. The
municipal inventory includes emissions from activities conducted as part of government operations in
the City. While emissions from government operations are normally a fraction of the overall community
emissions, the City has the most direct control over municipal emissions and the City can demonstrate
leadership in the community by adopting and implementing energy and GHG reduction strategies. This
section presents the findings of the municipal inventory for 2005 (the baseline year), 2007, 2010, and
2012. It also provides more specific detail and findings on the energy sectors, which will form the basis
of the reduction measures the City identifies in the EECAP.
2005—2012 Emissions Summary
Municipal emissions have decreased nearly 9% from 2005 to 2012, from 1,501 MT CO2e to
1,372 MT CO2e.
The sector with the greatest reductions was Employee Commute, which decreased 130 MT
CO2e between 2005 and 2012.
Emissions from municipal operations account for 1% of community emissions.
The City’s Employee Commute is the sector with the largest percentage of emissions in 2005 (23%) and
decreased to the third-largest contributor in 2012 (16%) as emissions from this sector decreased 37%
over the period (Figure 4). The second largest-emitting sector for 2005 and 2012 was Buildings &
Facilities, accounting for 20% of emissions in 2005 and 22% of emissions in 2012 (increasing from 301
MT CO2e to 305 MT CO2e). The Fleet & Equipment sector contributed 227 MT CO2e (15% of total
emissions) in 2005 and increased by 44% 2012 (to 328 MT CO2e, or 24% of total emissions), making this
sector the largest emissions sector in 2012. Emissions from Solid Waste declined 25% over the period
(from 215 to 162 MT CO2e). Emissions from SCE-owned Outdoor Lights increased 4% from 2005 to 2012,
while City-owned Outdoor Lights emissions decreased by 19% from 2005 to 2012. The smallest sector,
Water Pumping & Irrigation, decreased emissions from 5 MT CO2e in 2005 to less than 1 MT CO2e
between 2005 and 2012. The 2005 and 2012 emissions and changes are detailed in Table 8.
12 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Table 8. Municipal GHG Emissions by Sector for 2005 and 2012
Sector 2005
(MT CO2e)
2012
(MT CO2e)
% Change
2005 to 2012
Employee Commute 348 218 -37%
Buildings & Facilities 301 305 1%
Outdoor Lights—City-Owned 264 213 -19%
Fleet & Equipment 227 328 44%
Solid Waste 215 162 -25%
Outdoor Lights—SCE-Owned 141 146 4%
Water Pumping & Irrigation 5.0 0.6 -87%
Total 1,501 1,372 -8.6%
Note: City-Owned Outdoor Lights includes streetlights, traffic signals, and area lighting. SCE-Owned Outdoor Lights includes
streetlights and outdoor lighting.
20%
15%
23%
14%
10%
18%
<1%
2005
22%
24%
16%
12%
11%
15% <1%
Buildings & Facilities Fleet & Equipment
Employee Commute Solid Waste
Outdoor Lights—SCE-Owned Outdoor Lights—City-Owned
Water Pumping & Irrigation
2012
Figure 4. Municipal GHG Emissions by Sector for 2005 and 2012
GHG Emissions Inventories 13
2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Inventories
Figure 5 and Table 9 show the municipal GHG emissions by sector for all four inventory years. Emissions
peaked in 2007 (1,541 MT CO2e) and were the lowest in 2010 (1,340 MT CO2e).
Figure 5. Municipal GHG Emissions for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012
Table 9. Municipal GHG Emissions for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012
Sector
2005
(MT
CO2e)
% of
Total
2007
(MT
CO2e)
% of
Total
2010
(MT
CO2e)
% of
Total
2012
(MT
CO2e)
% of
Total
Employee Commute 348 23% 333 22% 274 20% 218 16%
Buildings & Facilities 301 20% 333 22% 276 21% 305 22%
Outdoor Lights—City-
Owned 264 18% 258 17% 185 14% 213 16%
Fleet & Equipment 227 15% 270 18% 320 24% 328 24%
Solid Waste 215 14% 213 14% 162 12% 162 12%
Outdoor lights—SCE-
Owned 141 9% 134 9% 122 9% 146 11%
Water Pumping &
Irrigation 5.0 0% 0.49 0% 0.55 0% 0.64 0%
Total 1,501
1,541
1,340
1,372
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
2005 2007 2010 2012MT CO2e Water Pumping & Irrigation
Outdoor Lights—SCE-Owned
Solid Waste
Fleet & Equipment
Outdoor Lights—City-Owned
Buildings & Facilities
Employee Commute
14 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Table 10 summarizes activity data for each sector and subsector. City-Owned Fleet showed significant
increases in compressed natural gas (CNG) and diesel fuel used, which reflects the increase in Fleet &
Equipment emissions. The significant decrease in Employee Commute reflects the change in City
employees from 2005 to 2012, which decreased 34%.
Table 10. Activity Data used in 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Municipal Inventories
Sector 2005 2007 2010 2012 % Change
2005 to 2012
Buildings & Facilities
Electricity (kWh) 895,746 932,207 883,858 915,327 2%
Natural Gas (therms)1 5,383 11,977 4,621 2,542 -53%
Outdoor Lights
City-Owned Electricity (kWh) 868,589 895,841 643,360 664,636 -23%
SCE-Owned Electricity (kWh) 464,752 466,608 424,794 455,210 -2%
Fleet & Equipment
City-Owned Fleet
Gasoline (gallons) 12,665 17,406 20,481 20,341 61%
Diesel (gallons) 2,584 2,584 4,121 5,502 113%
LPG (gallons) - - 36 23 NA
CNG (standard cubic feet) 13,377 13,377 81,114 98,658 638%
Contracted2
Gasoline (gallons) 3,640 3,640 3,640 3,640 0%
Diesel (gallons) 2,057 2,057 2,057 2,057 0%
LPG (gallons) 5,127 5,127 5,127 5,127 0%
Employee Commute
Gasoline (gallons) 794,170 760,056 634,526 506,797 -36%
Diesel (gallons) 26,784 35,852 25,110 20,055 -25%
# Full Time Employee
Equivalents 186 184 154 123 -34%
Solid Waste2
Generated Waste (tons) 666 660 660 660 -1%
Water Pumping & Irrigation
Electricity (kWh) 17,033 1,712 1,907 1,999 -88%
1 Contracted fuel use was not available for 2010 and 2012. Data from 2007 were used.
2 Solid Waste data for 2010 and 2012 assumed 2007 values.
GHG Emissions Inventories 15
Energy
As with the community emissions, the EECAP will focus on increasing energy efficiency and reducing
GHG gases from energy within municipal operations. The City has more direct control over energy-
related emissions than other sectors, such as employee commute. Municipal energy use includes
Buildings & Facilities, SCE-owned Outdoor Lighting, City-owned Outdoor Lighting, and Water Pumping &
Irrigation. Energy accounted for 47% of total emissions in 2005 and 48% in 2012. While both electricity
and natural gas are used for Building & Facilities, Outdoor Lighting and Water Pumping & Irrigation only
use electricity. Emissions from energy declined 7% from 2005 to 2012; electricity-based emissions
declined almost 5% and natural gas related emissions decreased 52% (Table 11). As with community
energy, municipal emissions use variable electricity emission factors and constant natural gas emission
factors.
Table 11. Activity Data and GHG Emissions of Energy in 2005 and 2012
Sector
2005 2012 % Change
in Activity
2005-2012
% Change in
Emissions
2005-2012
Activity (kWh
or Therms)
Emissions
(MT CO2e) Activity (kWh) Emissions
(MT CO2e)
B&F (kWh) 895,746 272 915,327 291 2% 7%
Outdoor Lighting—
City (kWh) 868,589 264 664,636 213 -23% -19%
Outdoor Lighting—
SCE (kWh) 464,752 141 455,210 146 -2% 4%
Water Pumping &
Irrigation (kWh) 17,033 5 1,999 0.64 -88% -87%
B&F (therms) 5,383 29 2,542 14 -53% -52%
Total 2,251,503 711 2,039,714 665 -9% -7%
Note: B&F is Buildings and Facilities.
16 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Figure 6 shows the trend in electricity and natural gas emissions from 2005 to 2012 for the municipal
energy sectors.
Note: B&F is Buildings and Facilities.
Figure 6. GHG Emissions for Municipal Electricity and Natural Gas, by Sector
-
50
100
150
200
250
300
B&F (Electricity)Outdoor Lighting—
City
Outdoor Lighting—
SCE
B&F (Nat Gas)Water Pumping &
IrrigationMT CO2e 2005 2012
Inventory Forecasts 17
Inventory Forecasts
GHG emissions are forecast using two scenarios: a Business-as-Usual (BAU) and an Adjusted BAU
scenario. The BAU scenario describes emissions based on projected growth in population and
employment and does not consider policies that will reduce emissions in the future (that is, the policies
in place in 2012 are assumed to remain constant through 2035). The Adjusted BAU scenario describes
emissions based on projected growth and considers policies that will achieve GHG reductions in the
future. Policies, described in detail below, include State-adopted or approved legislation that will affect
future emissions. By evaluating the two scenarios, the City can see the effect that existing policies may
have on future emissions and be better able to determine how local measures can provide additional
reductions. Two future years are forecasted for each scenario: 2020 and 2035. The 2020 forecast year is
consistent with the goals identified in Assembly Bill (AB) 32, which identifies a statewide GHG reduction
target by 2020. The 2035 forecast year will allow the City to develop long-term strategies to continue
GHG reductions beyond 2020.
Business-as-Usual Forecasts
The BAU forecasts estimate future emissions using current (2012) consumption patterns and emission
factors with the anticipated growth in the City. Anticipated growth is estimated using data from
regional planning scenarios developed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG),
the City, and other relevant sources (Table 12). The most relevant growth factors are used to project
emissions by sector. For example, future Residential Energy emissions were developed using current
energy use per household (from the 2012 inventory) and the anticipated number of households in the
future. Actual energy use is a function of several variables, not only the number of households;
however, this approach is supported by current protocols and best practices within the State and
provides a consistent approach to forecasting. Compound annual growth rates were developed using
the growth projections from 2012 to 2020 and from 2021 to 2035, as shown Table 12.
In general, the City is expecting modest growth to 2020 and 2035 as population and jobs are expected to
increase. SCAG is projecting fewer vehicle miles traveled from 2012 to 2020 despite population and job
growth, but that trend is reversed after 2020, when vehicle miles traveled will again increase. Due to the
relatively low growth, the City does not anticipate major staffing changes in its government services.
18 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Table 12. Growth Factors for 2012, 2020, and 2035
Sector Demographic
Indicator 2012 2020 2035 2012-2020
CAGR1
2020-2035
CAGR1
Transportation Vehicle Miles
Traveled 138,350,955 126,238,272 129,742,671 -1.14% 0.18%
Solid Waste,
Water,
Wastewater, Off-
Road Sources
Service Population
(Population +
Jobs)
26,419 26,900 27,400 0.23% 0.12%
NA2 Population 19,574 19,600 19,700 0.02% 0.03%
Residential
Energy Households 9,548 9,600 9,600 0.07% 0.00%
Commercial/
Industrial Energy Jobs 6,845 7,300 7,700 0.81% 0.36%
Municipal Jobs Municipal
Emissions3
106 F/T
34 P/T
137 F/T
60 P/T
146 F/T
65 P/T 3.9% 0.45%
Source: SCAG 2012.
F/T: Full-time employees; P/T: Part-time employees
1 Compound annual growth rate.
2 Not Applicable. Population data are shown for informational purposes but are not used for forecasting any sector.
3 The number of jobs in the City is used as an indicator for all municipal operation emissions.
Community Business-as-Usual Forecast
BAU community emissions are expected to decrease 8.1% from baseline levels by 2020 and
5.8% by 2035.
The City’s BAU emissions in 2020 are estimated to be 125,982 MT CO2e, or an 8.1% decrease from
baseline (2005) emissions. By 2035, emissions are estimated to decrease 5.8% from the baseline level to
129,157 MT CO2e (Table 13).
Table 13. Community BAU Forecast
Sector 2005
(MT CO2e)
2012
(MT CO2e)
2020
(MT CO2e)
% Change
2012-2020
2035
(MT CO2e)
%Change
2012-2035
On-Road Transportation 73,567 68,235 66,150 -3% 67,986 0%
Residential Energy 32,293 33,808 33,969 0% 33,969 0%
Commercial Energy 20,280 17,830 18,930 6% 19,967 12%
Solid Waste 6,015 3,334 3,391 2% 3,454 4%
Water 4,065 2,600 2,645 2% 2,694 4%
Off-Road Sources 888 745 837 12% 1,026 38%
Wastewater 52 59 60 2% 61 3%
Total 137,160 126,611 125,982 0% 129,157 2%
% Change from 2005 -7.7% -8.1%
-5.8%
Inventory Forecasts 19
Municipal Business-as-Usual Forecast
BAU municipal emissions are expected to be 20% higher than baseline levels in 2020 and 28%
higher than baseline levels in 2035.
The City is anticipating significant growth in city employees by 2020 or 2035 from current (2012) levels—
36% more full-time equivalent employees in 2020 compared with 2012, and 45% more employees in
2035 compared with 2012. Therefore, the activity data for municipal services is also expected to
increase relative to 2012.
Table 14. Municipal BAU Forecast
2005
(MT CO2e)
2012
(MT CO2e)
2020
(MT CO2e)
% Change
2012-2020
2035
(MT CO2e)
% Change
2012-2035
Buildings & Facilities 301 305 400 31% 428 40%
Employee Commute 348 218 286 31% 306 40%
Solid Waste 215 162 213 31% 227 40%
Outdoor Lighting 405 359 471 31% 504 40%
Vehicle Fleet 227 328 430 31% 460 40%
Water Pumping & Irrigation 5.0 0.64 1 56% 1 56%
Total 1,501 1372 1801 31% 1926 40%
% Change from 2005 -9% 20% 28%
Adjusted Business-as-Usual Forecasts
State legislation has been approved and/or adopted that will reduce GHG emissions in the City. These
policies do not require additional local action, but should be accounted for in the City’s emissions
forecasts to provide a more accurate picture of future emissions and the level of local action needed to
reduce emissions to levels consistent with State recommendations. This forecast is called the Adjusted
BAU forecast. The measures are described briefly below.
Low Carbon Fuel Standard. The Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) was developed as a result of Executive
Order S-1-07, which mandates that the carbon intensity of transportation fuels in California are lowered
10% by 2020. The State is currently implementing this standard, which is being phased in and will
achieve full implementation in 2020.
Assembly Bill (AB) 1493 and Advanced Clean Cars. AB 1493 directed CARB to adopt GHG standards for
motor vehicles through model year 2015 that would result in reductions in GHG emissions by up to 25%
in 2030. In addition, the State’s Advanced Clean Cars program includes additional components that will
further reduce GHG emissions statewide, including more stringent fuel efficiency standards for model
years 2017—2025 and support infrastructure for the commercialization of zero-emission vehicles. CARB
20 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
anticipates additional GHG reductions of 3% by 2020, 27% by 2035, and 33% by 20503. These are also
known as “Pavley I” and “Pavley II” regulations.
California Building Code Title 24. California’s building efficiency standards are updated regularly to
incorporate new energy efficiency technologies. The code was most recently updated in 2013 and went
into effect for new development in 2014. For projects implemented after January 1, 2014, the California
Energy Commission estimates that the 2013 Title 24 energy efficiency standards will reduce
consumption by an estimated 25% for residential buildings and 30% for commercial buildings, relative to
the 2008 standards. These percentage savings relate to heating, cooling, lighting, and water heating
only; therefore, these percentage savings were applied to the estimated percentage of energy use by
Title 24.
Renewable Portfolio Standard. The Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requires energy providers to
derive 33% of their electricity from qualified renewable sources. This is anticipated to lower emission
factors (i.e., fewer GHG emissions per kilowatt-hour used) statewide. Therefore, reductions from RPS
are taken for energy embedded in water, which uses energy sources throughout the state to move from
the water source area to the City. However, no credit was taken for this measure for the SCE service
region (i.e., for residential and commercial electricity used in the City supplied by SCE). Analysis of SCE’s
current portfolio and the sources needed to replace the nuclear generation that has been taken out of
service has revealed great uncertainty in how SCE’s emission factors may change over time. Therefore,
the emission factor used in the 2012 inventory and the BAU forecast was also used in the Adjusted BAU
forecast.
Senate Bill X7-7. California’s SB X7-7 requires water suppliers to reduce urban per capita water
consumption 20% from a baseline level by 2020. The City is supplied by California Water Service and the
reductions in GHG emissions from SB X7-7 were calculated by applying the reduction goals established
by California Water Service to the City’s population in 2020 and 2035.
Community Adjusted Business-as-Usual Forecast
Emissions are expected to decrease under the Adjusted BAU forecast and will be 19% lower in
2020 than 2005 and 31% lower than 2005 levels by 2035.
The City’s Adjusted BAU emissions in 2020 are estimated to be 111,690 MT CO2e in 2020 and 94,162 MT
CO2e in 2035 (Table 15). This change represents an 18.6% reduction from 2005 by 2020 and 31%
reduction by 2035. Due to the stringent State vehicle standards, the emissions from the Transportation
sector are expected to decrease significantly over time, while the proportion of emissions from
Residential and Non-residential Energy will increase. Emissions from Solid Waste are expected to
increase while emissions from Water and Wastewater will remain steady over time, but all account for
less than 10% of total emissions.
3 CARB Advanced Clean Cars Summary Sheet
Inventory Forecasts 21
Table 15. Community Adjusted BAU Emissions
Sector 2005
(MT CO2e)
2012
(MT CO2e)
2020
(MT CO2e)
2020 % of
Total
2035
(MT CO2e)
2035 % of
Total
Transportation &
Mobile Sources 74,455 68,980 53,857 49% 35,533 38%
Non-Residential Energy 20,280 17,830 18,742 17% 19,564 21%
Residential Energy 32,293 33,808 33,953 30% 33,953 36%
Solid Waste 6,015 3,334 3,391 3% 3,454 4%
Water & Wastewater 4,117 2,659 1,747 2% 1,658 2%
Total 137,160 126,611 111,690 100% 94,162 100%
% Change from 2005 -8% -19% -31%
Municipal Adjusted Business-as-Usual Forecast
Emissions are expected to increase under the Adjusted BAU forecast and are estimated to be
17% higher in 2020 and 25% higher in 2035 relative to 2005 levels.
The City will need to reduce emissions by 475 MT CO2e in 2020 from the forecasted level to
meet a state-aligned target of 15% below 2005 levels.
The City’s Municipal Adjusted BAU emissions in 2020 are estimated to be 1,751 MT CO2e, which is 17%
above the 2005 baseline level (Table 16). By 2035, the level of reductions is anticipated to be 25% above
2005 levels, or 1,872 MT CO2e. The Adjusted BAU emissions are slightly lower than the BAU emissions
due to the Low Carbon Fuel Standard measure described earlier. The Low Carbon Fuel Standard would
lower the carbon intensity of fuels used in both the City’s Vehicle Fleet and Employee Commute sectors.
Table 16. Municipal Adjusted BAU Emissions
Sector 2005
(MT CO2e)
2012
(MT CO2e)
2020
(MT CO2e)
2020 % of
Total
2035
(MT CO2e)
2035 % of
Total
Buildings & Facilities 301 305 400 23% 428 23%
Employee Commute 348 218 266 15% 284 15%
Solid Waste 215 162 213 12% 227 12%
Outdoor Lighting 405 359 471 27% 504 27%
Vehicle Fleet 227 328 400 23% 428 23%
Water Pumping & Irrigation 5 0.64 0.64 <1% 0.64 <1%
Total 1,501 1,373 1,751 100% 1,872 100%
% Change from 2005 -9% 17% 25%
22 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Reduction Targets
The State has set goals for reducing GHG emissions by 2020 and 2050 through AB 32 and Executive
Order (EO) S-3-05, respectively. The State has also provided guidance to local jurisdictions as “essential
partners” in achieving the State’s goals by identifying a 2020 recommended reduction goal. That goal,
stated in the AB 32 Scoping Plan, was for local governments to achieve a 15% reduction below 2005
levels by 2020, which aligns with the State’s goal of not exceeding 1990 emissions levels by 20204. The
State’s long term target is to emit no more than 20% of 1990 levels by 2050 (or, a reduction of 80%
below 1990 levels by 2050). The State has not provided an interim target, nor has it provided guidance
to local governments beyond the 2020 emissions target recommendations. It is however clear that the
issue of climate change will not end in 2020 and continued reductions should be achieved to keep the
State on a path toward the 2050 goal. A straight-line projection from the 2020 to 2050 goals would
result in a reduction goal of 49% below 2005 levels by 2035 midpoint.
Ultimately, the City will determine the level of reductions that it can and should achieve. The
recommended targets provided below are guidance based on consistency with the State’s goals.
Recommended Community Targets
In 2020, the City will meet the reduction target through existing efforts. In 2035, the City would need to
reduce 24,210 MT CO2e emissions below the Adjusted BAU scenario to meet the State-aligned target
(Table 17 and Figure 7).
Table 17. State-Aligned GHG Reduction Targets
Sector 2005 2012 2020 2035
BAU Emissions (MT CO2e) 137,160 126,611 125,982 129,157
Adjusted BAU Emissions (MT CO2e) 137,160 126,611 111,690 94,162
State-Aligned Target(% change from 2005) -15% -49%
State-Aligned Target (% change from 2012) -8% -45%
State-Aligned Emissions Goal (MT CO2e) 116,586 69,952
Reductions from Adjusted BAU needed to meet the
Target (MT CO2e) Target Met 24,210
4 In an analysis, the State concluded that a 15% reduction in emissions from 2005 levels by 2020 would be
equivalent to achieving 1990 emissions levels.
Reduction Targets 23
Municipal Targets
In 2010, the Hermosa Beach City Council declared its goal to become carbon neutral. The City is hoping
to achieve this goal by 2020. Without this goal, the City’s emissions are anticipated to be 1,751 MT CO2e
in 2020 and 1,872 MT CO2e in 2035. Therefore, the City must reduce emissions by 1,751 from the
Adjusted BAU forecast to meet the 2020 goal and maintain this level in the future (Table 18 and Figure
8).
Table 18. State-Aligned Municipal GHG Reduction Targets
2005 2012 2020 2035
BAU Emissions (MT CO2e) 1,501 1,372 1,801 1,926
Adjusted BAU Emissions (MT CO2e) 1,501 1,372 1,751 1,872
Carbon Neutrality Target (% Reduction from 2005) -100% -100%
Carbon Neutrality Emissions (MT CO2e) 0 0
Reductions from Adjusted BAU needed to meet the Target
(MT CO2e) 1,751 1,872
-
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035MT CO2e Water & Wastewater
Solid Waste
Commercial Energy
Residential Energy
Transportation & Mobile
Sources
15% below 2005
49% below 2005
Path to 2035 from 2020 ABAU
(-3.1%/yr)
Figure 7. Community Emissions Inventories, Projections, and Targets
24 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Figure 8. Municipal Emissions Inventories, Projections, and Targets
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035MT CO2e Water Pumping &
Irrigation
Solid Waste
Buildings & Facilities
Outdoor Lighting
Employee Commute
Vehicle Fleet
Path to 2020 from 2012
Conclusions and Next Steps 25
Conclusions and Next Steps
This Report presents the City’s community and municipal inventories, forecasts, and recommended
reduction targets. It is the foundation of the EECAP and provides the City a first look at what will be
needed to meet emissions reductions that are aligned with the State and to mitigate the City’s impacts
on climate change. This Report also helps to guide the City in determining feasible energy efficiency
reduction opportunities by detailing energy-related emissions, including electricity and natural gas from
Residential and Non-residential sectors.
The next steps in the EECAP process are to review the information provided in this Report and to
determine preliminary GHG reduction targets for the community and municipal operations. The South
Bay Cities Council of Governments will also begin to work with the City to identify local and subregional
energy efficiency measures that could be implemented to reach the City’s emissions targets.
26 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
References
Association of Environmental Professionals. 2013. The California Supplement to the United States
Community-Wide Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Protocol.
California Air Resources Board. 2010. Local Government Operations Protocol For the quantification and
reporting of greenhouse gas emissions inventories version 1.1.
California Air Resources Board. 2011. California Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory: 2000-2009.
ICLEI 2012. U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions version
1.0.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (IPCC) 1996. Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis.
Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change. Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L.
Miller (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
Appendix A: Glossary of Terms
Adjusted Business-as-Usual: A GHG forecast scenario that accounts for known policies and regulations
that will affect future emissions. Generally, these are state and federal initiatives that will reduce
emissions from the business-as-usual scenario.
Baseline Year: The inventory year used for setting targets and comparing future inventories against.
Business-as-Usual (BAU): A GHG forecast scenario used for the estimation of greenhouse gas emissions
at a future date based on current technologies and regulatory requirements and in the absence of other
reduction strategies.
Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CO2e): This is a common unit for normalizing greenhouse gases with
different levels of heat trapping potential. For carbon dioxide itself, emissions in tons of CO2 and tons of
CO2e are the same, whereas one ton of nitrous oxide emissions equates to 298 tons of CO2e and one ton
of methane equates to 25 tons of CO2e. The values are based on the gases’ global warming potentials.
Community Inventory: GHG emissions that result from the activities by residents and businesses in the
city. An inventory reports emissions that occur over a single calendar year.
Emissions Factor: A coefficient used to convert activity data into greenhouse gas emissions. The factor is
a measure of the greenhouse gas intensity of an activity, such as the amount of CO2 in one kilowatt-hour
of electricity.
Global Warming Potential (GWP): The relative effectiveness of a molecule of a greenhouse gas at
trapping heat compared with one molecule of CO2.
Metric Ton (MT): Common international measurement for the quantity of greenhouse gas emissions. A
metric ton is equal to 2205 lbs. or 1.1 short tons.
Municipal Inventory: GHG emissions that result from the activities performed as part of the government
operations in the city and are a subset of the community inventory. An inventory reports emissions that
occur over a single calendar year.
Reduction targets: GHG emissions levels not to be exceeded by a specific date. Reduction targets are
often informed by state recommendations and different targets may be established for different years.
Sector: A subset of the emissions inventory classified by a logical grouping such as economic or
municipal-specific category.
Appendix B: Methodology
This appendix provides a detailed description of the data sources, emission factors, policies, and
assumptions used to develop the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventories, forecasts under a
business-as-usual (BAU) scenario, forecasts under an Adjusted BAU scenario, and the recommended
GHG reduction targets.
Protocols
The GHG inventories for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 were calculated using tools and guidance
documents developed or supported by government agencies. Calculation protocols have been
developed to ensure consistency among community and municipal inventories. Specifically, the U.S.
Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Community Protocol)
(ICLEI 2012) and the California Supplement (AEP 2013) were used for the community inventories and the
Local Government Operations Protocol (LGOP) was used for the municipal inventories (CARB 2010).
These protocols often have multiple calculation methods for a single emission source depending on the
data available. There are two broad approaches for calculating emissions: “bottom -up” and “top-down”.
A bottom-up approach relies on end-use data, such as the city-level electricity usage. A top-down
approach relies on aggregated data that is allocated to the city based on population, employment, or
other relevant indicator. Bottom-up calculations were performed whenever possible to provide the
most detailed and likely accurate picture of emissions within a jurisdiction; however, when detailed data
were not available, other appropriate methods were used and are described in this appendix. Data were
also calculated and managed to best fit the GHG inventory and planning software tool used for this
project, called ClearPath. ClearPath was developed by the Statewide Energy Efficiency Collaborative
(SEEC) which is a partnership between several statewide agencies, utilities, and non-profits to assist
cities and counties in climate mitigation planning. ClearPath is further described at californiaseec.org. In
addition, a South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG) User’s Guide is being developed as part
of this project to help cities and SBCCOG to maintain the data and provide for consistent reporting of
emissions over time.
Global Warming Potential Factors
The inventories include the three GHGs most relevant to community and municipal emissions: CO2, CH4,
and N2O. Each GHG differs in its ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere based on their molecular
properties and expected lifetime in the atmosphere, and it is useful to describe emissions in one unit of
measurement. That unit of measurement is a CO2-equivalent, or CO2e and Global Warming Potential
(GWP) factors are used to standardize emissions from various GHGs. GWP factors, developed by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), represent the heat-trapping ability of each GHG
relative to that of CO2. For example, the GWP factor of CH4 is 25 because one metric ton (MT) of CH4 has
25 times the heat-trapping capacity as one MT CO2 (over a 100-year period). IPCC periodically updates
the GWP factors of GHGs based on new science and updated background mixing ratios of CO2. CO2
always has a GWP factor of 1 and the other GHGs are calculated relative to CO2. The California Air
Resources Board (CARB) recently updated their GWP factors to align with the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment
Report, as shown in Table B-1. GWP factors are unitless. Emissions in the inventories are reported in
units of CO2e.
B-2 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Table B-1. Global Warming Potentials
CO2 CH4 N2O
GWP 1 25 298
Source: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, 2007.
Activity Data
Activity data is the end-use consumption amount of a sector, such as kilowatt hours of electricity,
therms of natural gas, and vehicle miles traveled for on-road transportation. In estimating the City’s
historic GHG emissions, activity data at the City level were obtained when possible (a “bottom -up”
approach). When not available, other data sources were used, generally at the county level (a “top-
down” approach). Municipal data for 2005 and 2007 were obtained from the City’s previous inventory
report. Other data were provided by the sources as identified Table B-12.
TableB-12. Activity Data Sources
Data Data Source Notes
Community Electricity Southern California Edison
Municipal Electricity Southern California Edison Maintained by SBCCOG
Community Natural Gas Southern California Gas Company
Municipal Natural Gas Southern California Gas Company
Community Water California Water Service
Vehicle Miles Traveled Southern California Association of
Governments (SCAG)
Origin-destination approach,
described below
Demographic Data SCAG
Vehicle Fleet City
Employee Commute City
Off-Road Emissions OFFROAD Model County-level data
Waste CalRecycle
Origin-Destination VMT
For the community inventory, activity data (vehicle miles traveled) were based on an origin-destination
approach used by the State in developing emissions target for metropolitan planning organizations
under SB 375. This approach has also been the typical approach used in estimating emission within a
city. This approach accounts for:
Half of the emissions where one endpoint is in the City, for example either the origin or
destination of the trip.
All of the emissions where the trip begins and ends within the City.
None of the emissions that are “pass-through”; that is, a trip passes through the City but does
not begin or end within its boundary.
This approach is used to account for trips or portions of trips that the city may have some control over.
B-3 Appendix B: Methodology
Community Activity Data
Community activity data are shown in Table B-13, except for off-road emissions, which are shown in
Table B-14 for Los Angeles County.
Table B-13. Activity Data used in 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Community Inventories
Sector 2005 2007 2010 2012 % Change
2005 to 2012
On-road Transportation
Total Vehicle Miles Traveled 140,684,101 138,727,165 139,197,605 138,350,955 -1.7%
Residential Energy
Electricity (kWh) 47,843,215 49,976,195 49,906,427 49,778,450 4.0%
Natural Gas (therms) 3,339,783 3,305,637 3,448,010 3,364,392 0.7%
Commercial Energy
Electricity (kWh) 51,741,467 52,130,513 48,545,739 41,191,832 -20.4%
Natural Gas (therms) 857,687 900,024 827,116 875,986 2.1%
Solid Waste
Landfilled (tons) 24,578 18,490 14,230 13,511 -45.0%
ADC (tons) 1 246 180 50 48 -80.7%
Water and Wastewater
Water (MG) 760.2 760.2 687.7 700.3 -7.9%
Recycled Water (MG) 30.9 30.9 26.4 27.7 -10.3%
Wastewater (City portion of
countywide residents) 0.20% 0.20% 0.20% 0.20% 0.5%
Off-road sources2 (% of LA County emissions attributed to the City)
Lawn & Garden (% Households) 0.30% 0.29% 0.29% 0.29% -1.7%
Construction (% Building
permits) 0.32% 0.20% 0.13% 0.24% -25.7%
Industrial (% Manufacturing
jobs) 0.03% 0.03% 0.03% 0.03% 4.3%
Light Commercial (% Other jobs) 0.17% 0.17% 0.17% 0.18% 5.9%
Recreation (Population weighted
by income) 0.36% 0.36% 0.35% 0.34% -6.3%
Agriculture (% Ag. Jobs) 0.10% 0.11% 0.06% 0.08% -17.6%
B-4 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Table B-14. Emissions from Off-road Categories for Los Angeles County
Off-road Class GHG
Type
2005
(MT CO2e /yr)
2007
(MT CO2e /yr)
2010
(MT CO2e /yr)
2012
(MT CO2e /yr)
Agricultural Equipment
CO2 921.79 910.27 893.24 882.09
CH4 0.19 0.17 0.14 0.12
N2O 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Construction and Mining
Equipment
CO2 268,646.23 277,541.76 290,911.26 299,875.79
CH4 34.12 31.44 28.24 26.28
N2O 0.22 0.24 0.25 0.26
Industrial Equipment
CO2 8,099.90 8,562.29 9,255.58 9,870.65
CH4 7.16 6.2 4.46 3.89
N2O 0.69 0.63 0.56 0.55
Lawn and Garden Equipment
CO2 2,581.13 2,737.30 2,968.71 3,215.02
CH4 4.98 4.87 4.76 4.96
N2O 2.01 2.01 2.01 2.13
Light Commercial Equipment
CO2 5,300.36 5,572.36 5,979.92 6,387.77
CH4 2.83 2.54 2.18 2.05
N2O 0.91 0.97 1.02 1.07
Recreational Equipment
CO2 286.54 309.8 343.68 369.04
CH4 2.14 2.32 2.58 2.77
N2O 0.52 0.57 0.64 0.68
Municipal Activity Data
Municipal activity data are shown in Table B-15.
Employee Commute
Data for Employee Commute in ClearPath are entered as gasoline or diesel. Annual vehicle miles
traveled is entered as is the percent of miles traveled by passenger cars, light trucks, and heavy trucks.
The City conducted a ridership survey in 2013 through SurveyMonkey.com and presented the results in
a 2014 report titled “The City of Hermosa Beach Employee Commute Survey: 2013 & Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Reduction Strategies”. 108 employees completed the survey, representing 76% of employees.
The results were summarized and extrapolated to the total number of City employees in 2010 and 2012.
Employee commute vehicle miles traveled by fuel type for 2005 and 2007 were taken from the City’s
previous GHG inventories. The number of employees for 2010 was assumed to be the same as in 2012.
B-5 Appendix B: Methodology
Table B-15. Activity Data used in 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 Municipal Inventories
Sector 2005 2007 2010 2012 % Change
2005 to 2012
Buildings & Facilities
Electricity (kWh) 895,746 932,207 883,858 915,327 2%
Natural Gas (therms)1 5,383 11,977 4,621 2,542 -53%
Outdoor Lights
City-Owned Electricity (kWh) 868,589 895,841 643,360 664,636 -23%
SCE-Owned Electricity (kWh) 464,752 466,608 424,794 455,210 -2%
Fleet & Equipment
City-Owned Fleet
Gasoline (gallons) 12,665 17,406 20,481 20,341 61%
Diesel (gallons) 2,584 2,584 4,121 5,502 113%
LPG (gallons) - - 36 23 NA
CNG (standard cubic feet) 13,377 13,377 81,114 98,658 638%
Contracted2
Gasoline (gallons) 3,640 3,640 3,640 3,640 0%
Diesel (gallons) 2,057 2,057 2,057 2,057 0%
LPG (gallons) 5,127 5,127 5,127 5,127 0%
Employee Commute
Gasoline (gallons) 794,170 760,056 634,526 506,797 -36%
Diesel (gallons) 26,784 35,852 25,110 20,055 -25%
# Full Time Employee Equivalents 186 184 154 123 -34%
Solid Waste2
Generated Waste (tons) 666 660 660 660 -1%
Water Pumping & Irrigation
Electricity (kWh) 17,033 1,712 1,907 1,999 -88%
1 Contracted fuel use was not available for 2010 and 2012. Data from 2007 were used.
2 Solid Waste data for 2010 and 2012 assumed 2007 values.
Emission Factors
Emissions factors are used to convert activity data to GHG emissions. An emission factor is defined as
the average emission rate of a given GHG for a given source, relative to units of activity. By definition, an
emission factor is related to activity data. The emission factors used in the inventories are described by
sector below.
B-6 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Electricity
California utilities report the average CO2 content per output of electricity on an intermittent basis. The
CO2-intensity of electricity varies by utility and year, due to changes in supply, renewable generation,
and other factors. The community and municipal operations use electricity provided by SCE except for
embedded energy in water, which travels throughout the state and therefore utilizes electricity from
multiple utilities (and are shown under the Water Sector).
Southern California Edison
SCE reported CO2 factors for 2005 and 2007 through the Climate Registry, and a CO2e factor for 2012 in
their 2012 Corporate Responsibility & Sustainability Report. When an emission factor is unknown for a
certain year, it is standard to use the most recently-reported historic factor until (and if) there is an
updated factor. There is no published SCE emission factor for 2010; therefore the factor for 2007 was
used for SCE electricity-related emissions calculations in 2010 (Table B-2).
Table B-2. Southern California Edison Electricity Emission Factors
Year CO2 CH4 N2O Proxy Year Data Source
2005 665.72 0.03 0.011 NA CO2: Climate Registry.
CH4 and N2O: U.S. Community Protocol
2007 630.89 0.029 0.010 NA CO2: Climate Registry.
CH4 and N2O: U.S. Community Protocol
2010 630.89 0.029 0.010 2007 CO2: Climate Registry.
CH4 and N2O: U.S. Community Protocol
2012 7051 NA NA NA 2012 Corporate Responsibility &
Sustainability Report
NA: Not Applicable.
1 The 2012 factor was reported as CO2e; therefore, there are no CH4 and N2O factors.
Natural Gas Combustion
Emission factors for natural gas do not vary greatly over time or by supplier. Therefore, emission factors
are U.S. averages as listed in the Community Protocol and are applied for all years (TableB-4).
Table B-4. Natural Gas Emission Factors
CO2 CH4 N2O Data Source
kg /MMBtu 53.02 0.005 0.0001 U.S. Community Protocol
Transportation and Mobile Sources
EMFAC Model
CO2 emission factors for transportation and mobile sources are calculated using the State-developed
Emissions Factor (EMFAC) model, which can be downloaded at http://www.arb.ca.gov/emfac/.
Emissions are available at the county level and emission factors were developed and applied to vehicle
miles traveled specific to each inventory year. Data are aggregated as annual emissions for all vehicle
B-7 Appendix B: Methodology
model years and speeds, but separated by vehicle category. Vehicle categories include light-duty autos,
light-duty trucks, medium-duty vehicles, heavy-duty trucks, and motorcycles.1 These categorizations are
used to develop an emissions factor for gasoline and diesel vehicles. Emission factors were developed
using total CO2 exhaust, which includes emissions from vehicles in motion, idling, and ignition. While
emissions from idling and ignitions are not directly related to mileage, they were included so that
reductions from measures that may decrease idling could be accounted for in future inventories.
On-Road Transportation
Emissions were converted to emission factors as grams of CO2 per mile for gasoline and diesel vehicle
using EMFAC and a 3-step process (for each inventory year):
1. Calculate the vehicle-class average fuel efficiency (miles/gallon) using EMFAC vehicle miles
traveled and gallons of fuel consumed for Los Angeles County;
2. Calculate the vehicle-class average CO2 emission factor using EMFAC CO2 emissions2 and gallons
of fuel consumed for Los Angeles County;
3. Calculate the average grams CO2/mile traveled factor weighted by vehicle class miles traveled
for Los Angeles County.
EMFAC does not provide emissions for CH4 and N2O; therefore, factors from the Community Protocol
were used (Table B-5).
Table B-5. Fleet-Average Emission Factors
Gasoline On Road Average Factor
(grams/mile)
Diesel On Road Average Factor
(grams/mile)
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2 CH4 N2O
2005 466.062 0.030 0.034 1329.797 0.001 0.001
2007 464.019 0.028 0.029 1331.634 0.001 0.001
2010 458.638 0.028 0.029 1280.045 0.001 0.001
2012 442.657 0.028 0.029 1302.653 0.001 0.001
Employee Commute
Emissions from employee commute in the municipal operations are calculated using annual vehicle
miles traveled for gasoline and diesel. CO2 emissions are estimated using a default emission factor of
8.78 and 10.21 kg/gallon for gasoline and diesel, respectively3 and fuel economy, which is based on
EMFAC outputs for each inventory year and vehicle class. Vehicle miles traveled are converted to CH4
1 Vehicle categories may use either EMFAC2007 or EMFAC2011 categorizations and result in the same data for the
purposes of these inventories; EMFAC2007 categories were used here EMFAC2011 further disaggregates medium
heavy-duty vehicles and heavy heavy-duty vehicles into 29 vehicle categories. This level of detail is not needed for
these inventories. More information on vehicle categories is available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/vehicle-
categories.xlsx.
2 For 2010 and 2012, the emissions accounting for the effects of existing policies (Pavley and Low Carbon Fuel
Standard) were used. These standards did not exist in 2005 and 2007.
3 Information from ClearPath developers e-mail dated June 19, 2014.
B-8 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
and N2O emissions using emission factors from the Community Protocol. Table B-6 shows the miles per
gallon and grams (CH4 and N2O) per mile used to estimate emissions from employee commute by
vehicle class.
Vehicle Fleet
Vehicle fleet consists of City-owned and contracted vehicles used to perform City services. Vehicle Fleet
requires input of gallons of fuel used by fuel type to estimate CO2 emissions. Vehicle miles traveled are
used to estimate CH4 and N2O. The factors used for the City are shown in Table B-6.
Table B-6. Employee Commute and Vehicle Fleet Emission Factors
2005 2007 2010 2012
Gasoline
Passenger Vehicle
MPG 21.700 21.875 22.027 22.064
g CH4/mi 0.030 0.028 0.028 0.028
g N2O/mi 0.034 0.029 0.029 0.029
Light Truck
MPG 16.575 16.666 16.795 16.823
g CH4/mi 0.035 0.031 0.031 0.031
g N2O/mi 0.049 0.043 0.043 0.043
Heavy Truck
MPG 12.754 12.806 12.854 12.856
g CH4/mi 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033
g N2O/mi 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Diesel
Passenger Vehicle
MPG 27.558 27.662 29.006 29.889
g CH4/mi 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001
g N2O/mi 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001
Light Truck
MPG 27.032 27.251 27.705 28.498
g CH4/mi 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001
g N2O/mi 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001
Heavy Truck
MPG 17.343 17.588 18.797 18.858
g CH4/mi 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005
g N2O/mi 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005
Note: MPG is miles per gallon and is derived from EMFAC at the county level. CH4 and N2O emission factors are from the
Community Protocol; Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck emission factors have data for 2005 and later; Heavy Truck only
have 2010 data.
Off-Road
Off-road emissions include emissions from agriculture, construction, industrial, lawn and garden, light
commercial, and recreational equipment. Annual emissions of CO2, CH4, and N2O are available at the
county level from the State’s OFFROAD model. To estimate values for each city, relevant indicator data
are used to estimate the proportion of county-level emissions attributable to the city. Table B-7 lists the
B-9 Appendix B: Methodology
indicator used to estimate the City’s portion of emissions for each category and Table B-8 shows City-
specific data. City- and county-level indicator data were obtained from SCAG.
Table B-7. Off-road Emissions Indicators
Category Indicator
Agriculture Equipment Agriculture Jobs
Construction Equipment Building Permits Issued
Industrial Equipment Manufacturing Jobs
Lawn and Garden Equipment Households
Light Commercial Equipment Non- Manufacturing or Agriculture Jobs
Recreational Equipment Population, Weighted by Median Income
Table B-8. Off-road Emissions Indicator Data
Ag. Jobs Building
Permits
Mfg.
Jobs Households Other
Jobs1 Population Income
($)
2005
City 3.786 1 136 2,884 3,646 8,058 123,702
County 13,562 25,623 461,099 3,178,736 4,045,922 9,816,200 48,606
% 0.03% 0.00% 0.03% 0.09% 0.09% 0.21%
2007
City 4.002 59 144 2,902 3,854 7,939 130,825
County 13,562 20,303 461,099 3,224,053 4,045,922 9,780,800 51,439
% 0.03% 0.29% 0.03% 0.09% 0.10% 0.21%
2010
City 3.69 2 114 3,100 3,572 8,064 142,286
County 10,598 7,466 362,157 3,454,093 3,758,244 9,818,605 56,000
% 0.03% 0.03% 0.03% 0.09% 0.10% 0.21%
2012
City 3 3 116 3,100 3,660 8,097 117,305
County 10,798 18,926 369,005 3,454,093 3,829,313 9,889,632 53,880
% 0.03% 0.02% 0.03% 0.09% 0.10% 0.18%
Note: Some percentages may appear off due to rounding. Ag. = Agriculture. Mfg. = Manufacturing.
1 Other indicates non-manufacturing and non-agricultural.
Water
Emissions from water are indirect. Water requires energy to move from its source to final treatment and
the energy for most of these processes is not captured in local utility data (i.e., the portion that is used
in a home or business and therefore contained in the owner’s utility bill). This portion is termed the
“embedded energy” in water and particularly for southern California, the energy embedded in water is
high and should be accounted for in a community inventory. The California Energy Commission (CEC)
developed a report, titled Refining Estimates for Water-Related Energy Use in California, which
estimates the energy required to supply, convey, distribute, and treat water in northern and southern
California. Recycled water is less energy-intensive because it does not require the supply and
conveyance energy. Outdoor water infiltrates into the ground and therefore does not have the
B-10 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
wastewater energy treatment component. Therefore, the emission factors are adjusted to account for
the proportion of recycled and outdoor water. The amount of water used for indoor or outdoor use was
not available at the City level; however, the 2010 Los Angeles Department of Water & Power, Urban
Water Management Plan states that 61% of water is for indoor use for the City of Los Angeles. The
water usage is assumed to be similar for the South Bay sub-region. Therefore, the embedded energy in a
million gallon (MG) of water in the City is estimated in Table B-9 using the CEC report and estimated
indoor vs. outdoor water usage in the region.
Table B-9. Energy Embedded in Water
Conventional1 (kWh/MG) Recycled (kWh/MG)
Supply and Convey 9,727 --
Treatment 111 111
Distribution 1,272 1,272
Wastewater Treatment 1,911 1,911
Total 13,022 3,294
South Bay Factor 12,275.71 2,548.71
1 From CEC’s 2006 Refining Estimates for Water-Related Energy Use in California, for Indoor water use in
southern California.
Statewide Average Electricity
For energy embedded in water, a statewide average emission factor is applied because water in the
South Bay sub-region is supplied from various regions in the State (Table B-3). Similar to SCE data,
statewide emission factors are not available for each inventory year. For 2010 and 2012, the 2009
statewide emission factors were used as the proxy year.
Table B-3. California Statewide Electricity Emission Factors
Year CO2 CH4 N2O Proxy Year Data Source
2005 948.28 0.03 0.011 NA U.S. Community Protocol
2007 919.64 0.029 0.010 NA U.S. Community Protocol
2010 658.68 0.029 0.006 2009 U.S. Community Protocol
2012 658.68 0.029 0.006 2009 U.S. Community Protocol
NA: Not Applicable.
Wastewater
The emissions for wastewater include the CH4 and N2O emissions from processing which consist of three
sources: stationary, process, and fugitive emissions.
Stationary emissions are derived from combustion of digester gas at a centralized treatment facility. The
City is served by the Los Angeles County Sanitation District’s Joint Water Pollution Control Plant
(JWPCP). JWPCP is a centralized treatment facility that uses an anaerobic digester process and does not
employ a formal nitrification/denitrification (N/DN) system. Detailed information regarding the amount
of digester gas produces was not available, so an alternative method using City population information
B-11 Appendix B: Methodology
was used. Default factors from the Community Protocol were applied to estimate CH4 and N2O emissions
for stationary emissions. Although CO2 emissions are also produced, the fuel source is considered a
biofuel, and the resulting CO2 emissions are considered “biogenic” and are not reported4.
Process emissions include N2O emissions as a result of N/DN processes at the treatment facility. All
wastewater facilities have emissions from N/DN—some facilities have a formal N/DN process, which
would result in greater N/DN emissions, but for the JWPCP, N/DN emissions are solely a result of natural
processes. The recommended approach to estimating these emissions is through the population served
and default factors listed in the Community Protocol. In an advanced, centralized treatment facility,
stationary and process emissions are relatively small compared to fugitive emissions. The Community
Protocol, and likewise ClearPath, recommends multiplying the population-derived emissions by 1.25 to
account for commercial and industrial discharges to the system. Regions without any commercial and
industrial sources should use a factor of 1.0. Because the City is largely residential, a factor of 1.0 was
applied to these emissions.
Fugitive emissions occur from inflow (septic systems) and effluent discharge. JWPCP reports facility-
wide effluent, and effluent nitrogen content, which are factors used in estimating fugitive emissions
(Table B-10). The City’s portion was determined by estimating the proportion of the population served
by JWPCP. The ClearPath tool requires the daily N load in kg N per day. This is calculated using the
factors listed in Table B-9 and the Community Protocol Equation WW.12:
Daily N Load for the City (kg N/day) = Effluent X Effluent Nitrogen Content X gallons/liter
X City Population/Service Population,
Where Effluent is the facility-wide discharge in millions of gallons per day (MGD), Effluent Nitrogen
Content is the average nitrogen content per volume (mg/L), and gallons/liter is a conversion factor
(3.79). The Daily N Load entered into ClearPath was adjusted by a factor of 0.5 to account for the
difference in emission factors for direct ocean discharge and stream/river discharge. In ClearPath, ocean
discharge is not an option; however, the emissions are estimated to be ½ of those from discharge to a
stream or river (see Community Protocol Appendix F). Therefore, the Daily N Load was adjusted by 0.5
to account for this difference.
Table B-10. Los Angeles County Joint Water Pollution Control Plant Data Used in Wastewater
Fugitive Emissions
2005 2007 2010 2012
Effluent (MGD) 403a 296b 237c 264d
Effluent Nitrogen content (mg/L) 40a 36.7b 39.7 e 41.1d
a Default assumption based on influent.
b 2008 annual report data.
c 2011 annual report data.
d 2013 annual report data.
e Based on communication with Los Angeles County Sanitation District for 2009.
4 Emissions from digester gas combustion are automatically calculated in ClearPath when population is entered.
B-12 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Solid Waste
Emissions from solid waste are primarily in the form of fugitive emissions of methane from
decomposition. Emission factors are derived from the Community Protocol, based on the type of waste
disposed. The State conducts a Waste Characterization Study (Study) every 4 to 6 years to determine the
amount of waste attributable to each waste type. The Study is conducted at the State level by economic
sector; therefore, community-level characterizations are not available. For the community inventory,
the overall composition of California’s disposed waste stream was used to convert total tons into waste
types (Table B-11). For the municipal inventory, the characterization for public administration was used
(Table B-11). In addition to community-generated waste, some diverted green waste is used as landfill
cover rather than importing landfill cover from other regions. This green waste is known as alternative
daily cover (ADC) and is reported by CalRecycle for each community. The ADC characterization was
determined through communication with the developers of ClearPath and does not vary by year or
community. The emission factor to determine methane generation varies if the landfill operates a
methane flare or generates electricity from methane capture. The Community Protocol recommends
using an average factor of 75% recovery from landfill gas, although some landfills with have much higher
gas recovery systems, and other landfills do not have any. Carbon dioxide generated by decomposition
of waste in landfills is not considered anthropogenic because it would be produced through the natural
decomposition process regardless of its disposition in the landfill. Nitrous oxide is not a by-product of
decomposition and therefore no fugitive emissions of nitrous oxide are anticipated from this source. The
waste characterizations and emission factors used to estimate emissions from solid waste are provided
in Table B-11. The “Category in in the 2004 and 2008 Studies” detail which Study categories make up the
ClearPath Category.
Table B-11. Waste Characterization and Emission Factors for Solid Waste
ClearPath
Category
Category in 2004 and
2008 Studies
Alternative
Daily Cover1
2004
Study2
2008
Study3
Public
Administration
Emission
Factor1
Newspaper Newspaper 0% 2.2% 1.3% 5.5% 0.043
Office Paper
White/Colored Ledger Paper
+ Other Office Paper + Other
Miscellaneous Paper
0% 5.4% 4.9% 13% 0.203
Cardboard Uncoated Corrugated
Cardboard + Paper Bags 0% 6.7% 5.2% 5.1% 0.120
Magazine/ Third
Class Mail
Magazines and Catalogs +
Remainder/ Composite Paper 0% 6.5% 5.9% 15.4% 0.049
Food Scraps Food 0% 14.6% 15.5% 9.8% 0.078
Grass Leaves and Grass 30% 2.1% 1.9% 8.05% 0.038
Leaves Leaves and Grass 40% 2.1% 1.9% 8.05% 0.013
Lumber Branches and Stumps +
Prunings and Trimmings 0% 9.6% 14.5% 0.1% 0.062
Branches Lumber 30% 2.6% 3.3% 5% 0.062
1 Breakdown from ClearPath Developers via e-mail dated June 19, 2014. Used for all inventory years.
2 2004 Waste Characterization Study for California, Overall Waste Stream. Used for 2005 inventory. Does not total 100% as not all waste is
organic.
3 2008 Waste Characterization Study for California, Overall Waste Stream Used for 2007, 2010, 2012 inventories. Does not total 100% as not all
waste is organic.
B-13 Appendix B: Methodology
Forecasts
The forecasts are an estimate of what emissions in the City may be in 2020 and 2035. The forecasts were
developed using standard methodologies under two scenarios: Business-as-Usual (BAU) and Adjusted
BAU.
Business-as-Usual Forecasts
The BAU scenario uses current (2012) consumption patterns and predicted growth in the City in the
absence of state and federal legislation that would reduce future emissions. The growth assumptions
are those estimated by SCAG in their 2012 Regional Transportation Plan and are applied to emissions
sectors based on their relevance. For example, future Residential Energy emissions were developed
using current energy use per household (from the 2012 inventory) and the anticipated number of
households in the future. Table B-16 shows the growth factors used to project emissions in the City.
Adjusted Business-as-Usual Forecasts
The Adjusted BAU scenario also uses growth estimates for the City, also accounts for legislation that will
reduce emissions in the future, regardless of City actions. Table B-17 summarizes the legislation that will
reduce the City’s emissions in the future and which sectors the legislation applies to.
TableB-16. Emissions Sectors and Demographic Growth Indicators
Sector Demographic Indicator
Residential Energy Households
Commercial/ Industrial Energy Jobs
Solid Waste, Water, Wastewater, Aviation, Off-Road Sources Service Population (Population + Jobs)
Transportation Vehicle Miles Traveled, modeled by SCAG
Municipal Jobs Municipal Emissions1
SCAG: Southern California Association of Governments
1 The number of jobs in the City is used as an indicator for all municipal operation emissions except Aviation, which is forecast consistent with
the community forecast (by change in service population).
Table B-17. Legislation Applied to Adjusted BAU Forecasts
Legislation Description Emissions Sector Affected
Low Carbon Fuel
Standard
Reduce carbon intensity of transportation fuels
10% by 2020.
On-road Transportation, Employee
Commute, Vehicle Fleet
AB 1493 and
Advanced Clean Cars
Implement GHG standards for passenger vehicles,
implement zero-emission vehicle program, support
clean fuels outlet regulation.
On-road Transportation
California Building
Code Title 24
Improved energy efficiency standards for new
residential and non-residential construction.
Residential Energy, Non-residential
Energy
Renewable Portfolio
Standard1
Provide 33% of electricity from renewable sources
by 2020. Water
Senate Bill X7-7 Reduce urban per capita water consumption 20%
by 2020. Water
1 Potential GHG reductions from this legislation were not applied to the electricity in SCE’s service territory due to the uncertainty in SCE’s
generation sources after the closure of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station.
B-14 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Low Carbon Fuel Standard, AB 1493, and Advanced Clean Cars
Changes in on-road emissions in Los Angeles County were modeled using EMFAC, which models both
the emissions with and without Low Carbon Fuel Standard and Pavley I. Additional modeling was
conducted to estimate the change in emissions due to Advanced Clean Cars. The rate of reductions from
on-road transportation measures through 2020 was assumed to be 0.0344% per year for gasoline and
0.0106% per year for diesel. After 2020, the rate of reductions was assumed to be 0.03452% per year for
gasoline and 0.0251% per year for diesel.
California Building Code Title 24
Title 24 updates will raise the minimum energy efficiency standards for new buildings, thereby
decreasing the expected energy consumption of future development in the City. Under the adjusted
BAU scenario, it was assumed that the 2013 Title 24 standards that went into effect in 2014 will make
new residential and non-residential buildings more efficient than they would be under the 2008 Title 24
standards for new residential buildings. The energy savings were estimated using analyses developed by
the California Energy Commission and the applied to the expected new development in the City to 2020
and 2035. The rate of reductions was applied to the City’s 2012 energy use (kWh or therms) per
household (for Residential energy) or per job (for Commercial energy). Savings were applied to new
development anticipated in the City. Detailed energy savings assumptions are below.
Residential
Residential electricity is estimated to be 32.6% lower under the new standards.5 This percentage savings
is relative to heating, cooling, lighting and water heating only and do not include other appliances,
outdoor lighting that is not attached to buildings, plug loads, or other energy uses. Electricity
consumption due to heating, cooling, lighting, and water heating accounts for 34% of total household
electricity use.6 Therefore, the percentage of total residential electricity that will be reduced as a result
of the 2013 Title 24 standards is 11.1%.
Residential natural gas savings were estimated 5.8% lower under the new standards. Again, this
percentage savings pertains only to the energy sources affected by Title 24 Standards. Natural gas
consumption due to space and water heating accounts for 86% of total household natural gas use.7
Therefore, the percentage of total residential natural gas that will be reduced as a result of the 2013
Title 24 standards is 5.0%.
Commercial
Commercial Electricity savings were estimated to be 21.8% lower under the new standards. Title 24-
related measures would impact 77.2% of total electricity use in commercial buildings8; therefore, 16.8%
reduction in electricity consumption may be expected in new commercial development.
5 CEC Impact Analysis, California’s 2013 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, July 2013. CEC-400-2013-008.
6 CEC 2009 California Residential Appliance Saturation Appliance Study, October 2010. CEC -200-2010-004.
7 CEC 2009 California Residential Appliance Saturation Appliance Study, October 2010. CEC -200-2010-004.
8 CEC 2006. California Commercial End-Use Survey. March 2006. CEC-400-2006-005.
B-15 Appendix B: Methodology
Natural gas savings were estimated to be 16.8% under the new standards compared to the previous
standards. Heating and cooling account for 69.7% of natural gas consumption in commercial facilities;
therefore, 11.7% reduction in natural gas consumption may be expected from 2013 Title 24 standards
applied to new commercial development.
Renewable Portfolio Standard
The Renewable Portfolio Standard will be fully implemented in 2020. The level of implementation varies
by utility; however, ICLEI estimates that the average statewide level of implementation is 5% per year,
compounded annually. As noted in the Report, this reduction is only taken for electricity used in the
transport and treatment of water, which moves throughout the State. The reduction is not taken for
electricity wholly within SCE’s territory.
Senate Bill X7-7
SB X7-7 will be implemented by individual water districts. For the City’s water provider, California Water
Service Company, the level of implementation was estimated using an annualized reduction rate from
the Company’s baseline water consumption rate (141 gallons per capita per day, GPCD) to the target
water consumption rate (126 GPCD).
Target Setting
The state-aligned targets are provided to assist the City in determining appro priate emission reduction
goals. Recommended targets are based on existing California climate change legislation and State
guidance relevant to establishing a GHG reduction target. While State goals are based on a 1990
baseline year, the City’s baseline year is 2005. Therefore, the reduction targets are expressed as a
percent reduction below 2005 levels. Targets are recommended for 2020 to align with AB 32 and 2035,
which is a midpoint between the 2020 goal and the State’s long-term 2050 goal. Planning beyond 2035
is considered speculative, as legislation and technology may change significantly before 2050. While it is
important for continued reductions well beyond 2035, no local targets are recommended at this time.
Table B-18 provides a summary of the State’s goals and the State’s guidance to local governments
regarding GHG reduction targets. This guidance applies to and communitywide emissions reductions
efforts. The City has adopted a carbon neutrality goal for municipal operations by 2020.
Table B-18. Summary of State Reduction Targets and Guidance on Local Government Targets
Aligned with State Targets
2020 Interim Year Between
2020-2050 2050
State Targets
(AB 32 and EO S-3-05) 1990 levels NA 80% below 1990
levels
State Guidance on Local Government
Targets (AB 32) Scoping Plan
Recommended Target and Attorney
General’s Office Guidance
15% below
2005-2008 levels
Demonstrate a trajectory
toward statewide 2050 levels
(e.g., 49% below 2005 levels
by 2035)
NA
B-16 Inventory, Forecasting, and Target-Setting Report – City of Hermosa Beach
Table B-19 demonstrates how the local targets are aligned with State targets.
Table B-19. Comparison of 1990 Baseline Targets vs. 2005 Baseline Targets
Target Year Percent below
1990 Emission Levels
Percent below
2005 Emission Levels
2020 0.0% 15.0%
2021 2.7% 17.3%
2022 5.3% 19.5%
2023 8.0% 21.8%
2024 10.7% 24.1%
2025 13.3% 26.3%
2026 16.0% 28.6%
2027 18.7% 30.9%
2028 21.3% 33.1%
2029 24.0% 35.4%
2030 26.7% 37.7%
2031 29.3% 39.9%
2032 32.0% 42.2%
2033 34.7% 44.5%
2034 37.3% 46.7%
2035 40.0% 49.0%
Page 1 of 157 15-698821-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
RESOLUTION NO. 15-698821-XXXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA
BEACH ESTABLISHING RULES FOR THE CONDUCT OF CITY
COUNCIL MEETINGS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
The following rules of order and decorum for the conduct of City Council meetings are
hereby adopted:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
SECTION 1. SCOPE 3
SECTION 2. MEETINGS
2.1 Regular Meetings 3
2.2 Special Meetings 3
2.3 Special Emergency Meetings 34
2.4 Closed Sessions 34
2.5 Quorum 4
2.6 Adjourned Meetings 4
2.7 Recording of Meetings 5
SECTION 3. POSTING OF NOTICE AND AGENDA
3.1 Posting of Notice and Agenda 45
3.2 Location of Posting 45
3.3 Posting for Regular meetings 45
3.4 Posting for Special meetings 45
3.5 Affidavit of Posting 45
SECTION 4. AGENDA - CONTENTS
4.1 Description of Matters 56
4.2 Availability of Agenda 56
4.3 Limitations of Actions by Agenda 56
4.4 Submittal of Written Materials by the Public 56
SECTION 5. ORDER OF BUSINESS
5.1 Commencement of Meeting 57
5.2 Order of Business 67
a.I. Call to Order 67
b.II. Pledge of Allegiance 67
c.III. Roll Call 67
d.IV. Report of Closed Session 67
V. Announcements – Upcoming City Events
67
Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.63", Numbered + Level: 1 +
Numbering Style: I, II, III, … + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Right
+ Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Page 2 of 157 15-698821-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
e.VI. Approval of Agenda 7
VII. Proclamations/Presentations
68
f.VIII. City Manager Report 8
IX. Public Participation 68
g.X. City Manager Comments 8
XI. Consent Calendar 68
XII. Items Removed from the Consent Calendar for Separate 8
h. Discussion
i.XIII. Public Hearings 68
j. Excluded Consent Calendar 6
k.XIV. Municipal Matters
78
l. City Manager's Report 7
m. Councilmember Comments 7
n.XV. Other Matters from City CouncilFuture Agenda Items
78
o.XVI. Adjournment 79
SECTION 6. PUBLIC COMMENT
6.1 Public Comment 79
6.2 Limitations 79
6.3 Procedure 79
6.4 Written communications to Council 7
SECTION 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7.1 Time for consideration 89
7.2 Continuance of Hearings 810
7.3 Conduct of Hearings 810
7.4 Evidence 911
7.5 Definition of "Ex Parte" Communication 911
SECTION 8. PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCT OF MEETINGS
8.1 Robert's Rules 911
8.2 Motions 911
8.3 Voting 1012
8.4 Adjournment 1012
SECTION 9. DECORUM
9.1 Rules for City Councilmembers 1012
a. Role of the Presiding Officer 1012
b. Communication with Councilmembers 1012
9.2 Communication with Members of the Public Addressing 1013
the Council
9.3 Rules for City Staff 1113
a. Decorum 1113
b. Roles of the City Manager 1113
Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.63", Numbered + Level: 1 +
Numbering Style: I, II, III, … + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Right
+ Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.63", Numbered + Level: 1 +
Numbering Style: I, II, III, … + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Right
+ Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.63", Numbered + Level: 1 +
Numbering Style: I, II, III, … + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Right
+ Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.88", No bullets or numbering
Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.63", Numbered + Level: 1 +
Numbering Style: I, II, III, … + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Right
+ Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"
Page 3 of 157 15-698821-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
9.4 Rules for the Public 1113
a. Members of the Audience 1113
b. Persons Addressing the City Council 1113
9.5 Enforcement 1114
SECTION 1. SCOPE.
1.1 This Resolution shall establish the procedures for the conduct of all meetings of
the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach. The purpose of this Resolution is to provide
that the City Council's meeting procedures will be consistent with the Brown Act (Government
Code Section 54950 et seq.) and establish procedures that will be convenient for the public and
contribute to the orderly conduct of the City's business. The procedures herein are in addition
to, and not in place of, applicable ordinances and statutes, and in the event of conflict between
this Resolution and applicable ordinances or statutes, the latter shall govern.
SECTION 2. MEETINGS.
2.1 Regular Meetings. Pursuant to the authority set forth in Municipal Code section
2.04.010, the City Council shall conduct its Regular meetings on the 2nd and 4th Tuesdays of
each month. The Regular meetings of the City Council shall commence at 6:00 p.m. Only
Closed Sessions (and public comment associated therewith) and Study Sessions may be held
between 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. (and no other public agenda items) unless a Regular meeting
is adjourned to or a Special meeting called for that time. No Closed Session or Study Session
will be held during that hour unless the posted agenda of that evening's Regular meeting
indicates that such session will take place; in the absence of such notification in the agenda,
the Regular meeting shall commence at the hour of 7:00 p.m. Regular meetings shall be
conducted in the location set forth in Municipal Code section 2.04.020. Closed Sessions shall
be conducted in the location identified in the agenda.
2.2 Special Meetings. A Special meeting may be called at any time by the Presiding
Officer or by any three members of the City Council. Written notice of any such meeting must
be given to all members of the City Council and to all newspapers, radio and television stations,
or other public media of general Hermosa Beach coverage who have submitted a written
Page 4 of 157 15-698821-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
request to the City Clerk for such notification. Such notice may be given either personally or
by mail, but must be received at least 24 hours before the time set for the Special meeting. The
call and notice shall specify the time and place of the Special meeting and the business to be
transacted. Such notice is not necessary for any member who submits a written waiver of notice to
the City Clerk at or before the time set for the meeting or for any member who is actually present at
the special meeting.
2.3 Emergency Meetings. An emergency meeting may be called by the Presiding
Officer or by a majority of the City Council where there exists:
a. a work stoppage, crippling disaster or other activity which severely
impairs public health, safety or both, as determined by the City Council; or
b. such other circumstances specified by State law as authorizing the
conduct of an emergency meeting. Any special emergency meeting shall be called, noticed and
conducted in accordance with procedure set forth in State law.
2.4 Closed Sessions. The City Council may hold Closed Sessions during a Regular
or Special meeting, or at any time otherwise authorized by law, to consider or hear any matter
which it is authorized by State law to hear or consider in Closed Session. During Closed
Session, the City Council may exclude any person or persons which it is authorized by State
law to exclude from a Closed Session. The City Manager shall keep a record of action taken
and the vote thereon. The City Attorney shall make such reports as are required by the Brown
Act.
2.5 Quorum. Three members of the City Council shall constitute a quorum and shall
be sufficient to transact business. If fewer than three Councilmembers appear at a Regular
meeting, any member, or if all members are absent, the City Clerk shall adjourn the meeting to
a stated day and hour. All Council actions require the affirmative votes of a majority of the
quorum, with the exception of those actions required by State law to have a specific minimum
number of votes.
2.6 Adjourned Meetings. The City Council may adjourn any Regular, Adjourned
Regular, Special or Adjourned Special meeting to a time and place specified in the order of
adjournment. If a quorum is not present, less than a quorum may so adjourn. If all members
are absent from any Regular or Adjourned Regular meeting, the City Clerk may declare the
meeting adjourned to a stated time and place and shall cause a written notice of the
Page 5 of 157 15-698821-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
adjournment to be delivered personally to each Councilmember. A copy of the order or notice
of adjournment shall be conspicuously posted on or near the door of the place where the Regular,
Adjourned Regular, Special or Adjourned Special meeting was held, within twenty-four (24) hours
after the time of adjournment. When a Regular or Adjourned Regular meeting is adjourned as
provided herein, the resulting Adjourned Regular meeting shall be a Regular meeting for all
purposes. When an order of adjournment of any meeting fails to state the hour at which the
Adjourned meeting is to be held, it shall be held at the hour specified for Regular meetings.
2.7 Recording of Meetings. All open and public meetings of the City Council shall be
cablecast and webcast live or videorecorded for airing on the City's government channel and
viewing on the City's website. In that event that technical difficulties beyond the City's control
prevent the cablecasting, webcasting and/or recording of a meeting, the City Council may in its
discretion decide whether or not to proceed with the meeting.
SECTION 3. POSTING NOTICE AND AGENDA.
3.1 Posting of Notice and Agenda. For every Regular meeting, the City Clerk or his/her
designee shall post an agenda containing a brief description of all of the items of business to be
discussed at the meeting. For every Special meeting, the City Clerk or designee shall post a notice
of the meeting, specifying the time and place at which the meeting will be held, and an agenda
containing a brief description of all the items of business to be discussed at the meeting. The notice
and agenda for a Special meeting may be combined in a single document.
3.2 Location of Posting. The notice and agenda shall be posted in a place to which the
public has unrestricted access during at least normal business hours and where the notice and agenda
are not likely to be removed or obscured by other posted material. Specifically, the notice and
agenda shall be posted at the places indicated below, and/or at such other locations(s) as the
City Clerk may designate: City Hall, the Police Station, and the City library. The agenda shall
also be posted on the City's website.
3.3 Posting for Regular Meetings. For any Regular meeting of the City Council, the
notice and agenda shall be posted no later than seventy-two (72) hours prior to the time set for the
meeting.
Page 6 of 157 15-698821-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
3.4 Posting for Special Meetings. For any Special meeting of the City Council, the
notice and agenda shall be posted no later than twenty-four (24) hours prior to the time set for the
meeting.
3.5 Affidavit of Posting. Immediately following the posting of the notice and agenda,
the City Clerk or designee shall complete an Affidavit of Posting, in a form developed by the City
Clerk. The Affidavit of Posting shall indicate the time of the posting, the location(s) of the posting,
and shall be signed under penalty of perjury. The City Clerk shall retain all such affidavits, together
with a copy of each notice and agenda so posted, in his or her files. The affidavit notice and agenda
shall be retained at least two (2) years subsequent to the date of posting, and pursuant to Government
Code Section 34090, shall not be destroyed by the City Clerk thereafter without the written consent
of the City Attorney.
SECTION 4. AGENDA - CONTENTS.
4.1 Description of Matters. All items of business to be discussed at a meeting of the City
Council shall be briefly described on the agenda. The description should contain sufficient detail so
that a person otherwise unaware could determine the general nature or subject matter of the item by
reading the agenda. Closed Session agenda items shall be described with particularity to the extent
feasible without compromising the confidentiality of the Closed Session.
4.2 Availability of Agenda. The agenda of each Regular meeting shall be made available
to the public not later than the Friday preceding the Council meeting.
4.3 Limitation of Actions by Agenda. No action shall be taken by the City Council on
any item not appearing on a posted agenda, subject only to the exceptions listed below:
a. Upon a majority determination that an "emergency situation," as defined by
State law, exists.
b. Upon a determination by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the members present, or
if less than two-thirds of the members are present, by unanimous vote, that there is a need to take
immediate action and that the need to take action came to the attention of the City subsequent to the
agenda posting. If the City Council makes a determination pursuant to this subsection, the minutes
of the meeting at which the determination is made shall reflect what circumstances gave rise to the
need to take action after the agenda was posted.
Page 7 of 157 15-698821-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
c. Where the item upon which action is to be taken was included on a properly
posted agenda for a prior meeting of the City Council occurring not more than five (5) calendar days
prior to the date of the meeting at which action is to be taken, and at the prior meeting the item was
continued to the meeting at which action is being taken.
4.4 Submittal of Written Materials by the Public. Written materials pertaining to matters
listed on the agenda of a Regular City Council meeting must be submitted by noon of the Tuesday
before the meeting in order to be included in the agenda packet. However, written materials received
after that deadline will nonetheless be posted under the relevant agenda item on the City's website
at the same time as they are distributed to the City Council and provided to the City Council and the
public at the meeting. Written correspondence of a general nature addressed to the City Council will
be handled in accordance with section 6.4.
SECTION 5. ORDER OF BUSINESS.
5.1 Commencement of Meeting. In the event that the posted agenda calls for a Closed
Session, the Mayor or the City Attorney shall announce the intention of the City Council to recess
into a Closed Session and shall state the basis therefore. Public comment shall be taken on the
Closed Session agenda.
At the time set for each Regular meeting, the Councilmembers, City Manager, City Attorney
and City Clerk shall take their regular places in the Council Chamber. The Presiding Officer shall
call the meeting to order and the business of the Council shall be taken up for consideration and
disposition in the order set forth in Section 5.2 except that with the consent of a majority of the
Council, items may be taken up out of order.
5.2 Order of Business. The order of business at meetings of the City Council shall be as
follows, in accordance with the procedures specified below:
aI. CALL TO ORDER
The Presiding Officer shall call the meeting to order.
bII. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Presiding Officer shall designate a person to lead the Pledge of Allegiance.
cIII. ROLL CALL
Page 8 of 157 15-698821-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
The City Clerk shall call the roll of the Councilmembers and the names of those
present shall be entered on the minutes. The order of roll call shall be alphabetical with the Mayor
Pro Tempore called fourth and the Mayor called last.
dIV. REPORT OF CLOSED SESSION
The Mayor or the City Attorney shall announce the basis for the Closed Session and
those actions taken as are required to be reported by the Brown Act.
eV. ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmembers may make any announcements regarding upcoming City and
community events at this time.
VI. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The City Council may change the order in which it takes up items on this agenda, remove and/or
continue agenda items and pull items from the consent calendar for separate consideration.
fVII. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS
This time is reserved for the reading and awarding of proclamations and
commendations for members of the community, service organizations and others that have merited
recognition by the Council. In addition, visiting dignitaries may be introduced at this time.
VIII. CITY MANAGER REPORT
The City Manager and staff may provide brief reports on pending City business.
gIX. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Oral and written comments from members of the public are accepted here as set forth
in Section 6, herein. All comments from members of the public relative to Consent Calendar items
must be heard at this time unless a Councilmember agrees to remove a Consent Calendar item at
the request of a member of the public made at this time.
X. CITY COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
Councilmembers may briefly respond to public comments, may ask a question for clarification or
make brief announcement or report on his or her own activities or meetings attended.
hXI. CONSENT CALENDAR
Items of a routine nature may be approved by the City Council in a single motion
by adoption of the Consent Calendar. The approval of the Consent Calendar shall signify the
approval of each matter or recommendation included therein.
Formatted: Indent: First line: 0"
Formatted: Indent: First line: 0"
Page 9 of 157 15-698821-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
XII. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR
SEPARATE DISCUSSION
Items removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion shall be heard at this time.
iXIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
The Council shall conduct all public hearings as set forth in Section 7.
j. EXCLUDED CONSENT CALENDAR
Items removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion shall be heard at this time.
kXIV. MUNICIPAL MATTERS
The Council shall take up all matters of new and old business.
l. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
This section is set aside for the City Manager to update the Council on important
items initiated by staff or previously requested by the City Council.
m. COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
This portion of the meeting shall be set aside for general comments, reports of
meeting attendance, requests of staff, and/or other issues of concern from members of the City
Council, and brief responses to audience comments. No extensive discussion of these comments is
permitted.
nXV. OTHER MATTERS FROM CITY COUNCILFUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Direction from the City Council to place items of business on a future agenda shall
be given at this time by a majority of the Council. No discussion, action or public comments shall
be taken at this time.
oXVI. ADJOURNMENT
SECTION 6. PUBLIC COMMENT.
6.1 Public Comment. During the Public Participation section of the agenda, any
member of the public may address the City Council on items appearing on the Consent Calendar.
Comments concerning other items on the agenda will be heard at the time the item is considered
during the course of the meeting; however, they may be offered at this time if the member of the
public cannot be in attendance later in the evening.
Members of the public may also comment upon any other items of interest that are within
the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council at this time. Any Councilmember may request
Formatted: Font color: Red
Page 10 of 157 15-698821-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
that matters addressed under Public Participation be placed for action on a subsequent agenda;
however, no action shall be taken on items not appropriately placed on the agenda except in a
situation as described in Section 4.3.
6.2 Limitations. The public comment period shall be limited to no more than three (3)
minutes for each speaker, unless the Presiding Officer determines that good cause exists to extend
the time and doing so will not be arbitrary or unfair. The Presiding Officer also may allow additional
time for the spokesperson of a group if doing so will limit the number of persons speaking and avoid
repetitious presentations.
6.3 Procedure. Upon addressing the City Council, each speaker may choose to state his
or her name and city of residence and then identify the subject or subjects upon which he or she
intends to speak. Speakers shall address their comments or questions to the City Council as a whole,
and not to any particular Council or staff member or to the audience.
6.4 Written Communication to Council. Persons who wish to address an issue to the
City Council for the official record may submit written material to the Council in lieu of or in
addition to speaking under the Public Participation section of the meeting. Such written
correspondence must be delivered to the City Clerk by noon of the Tuesday one week before the
Regular Council meeting in order to be included on the agenda.
SECTION 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS.
Matters which are required to be heard in a noticed public hearing shall be conducted in the
following manner:
7.1 Time for consideration. Matters noticed as public hearings shall commence no
earlier than the time specified in the notice of hearing, or as soon thereafter as is reasonably possible,
and shall continue until the same has been completed or until other disposition of the matter has
been made.
7.2 Continuance of Hearings. Any public hearing being held or noticed or ordered to be
held by the City Council may, by order or notice of continuance, be continued or re-continued to
any subsequent meeting in the manner provided for under Section 2.6.
7.3 Conduct of Hearings. When a matter for public hearing comes before the City
Council, the Presiding Officer shall open the public hearing and:
a. Call for a report on noticing from the City Clerk.
Page 11 of 157 15-698821-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
b. Call for a report on written communications received by the City pertaining
to the item being heard.
c. With respect to quasi-judicial matters, request that each Councilmember
report on any ex parte communications, as defined in Section 7.5.
d. Request that staff present the staff report and any other relevant evidence.
Presentation of the staff report prior to the formal opening of the public hearing shall not prevent its
consideration as evidence. Any such evidence shall be made a part of the record of the public
hearing.
e. The Presiding Officer shall then recognize the proponents or appellants in the
case, who shall be permitted ten (10) minutes to present evidence related to the matter under
consideration.
f. The Presiding Officer shall then recognize members of the public. No person
may speak without first being recognized by the Presiding Officer. Members of the City Council
who wish to ask questions of the speakers or each other during the public hearing may do so.
Members should be mindful that the purpose of the public hearing is to obtain testimony, and not to
debate the merits of the item under consideration. Members should avoid debate and expressions of
personal opinion until after the close of the public testimony portion of the public hearing. The
Presiding Officer shall conduct the hearing in such a manner as to afford due process to all affected
persons. Comments from the public shall be limited to three (3) minutes per speaker for public
hearings, unless the City Council affirmatively decides otherwise.
g. Following public comments, the proponents or appellants may present a
wrap-up or rebuttal statement, not to exceed five (5) minutes in length.
h. The Presiding Officer shall then close the public testimony portion of the
public hearing.Councilmembers may still, however, ask questions of staff or members of the public.
Upon conclusion of Council deliberations and immediately prior to a motion, the Presiding Officer
shall formally close the public hearing. Upon formally closing the public hearing, no additional
public testimony shall be solicited or received without reopening the hearing. The hearing may not
be reopened unless it is determined that no one in the audience has left the room since closure of
the hearing. In the event the Presiding Officer is unable to make that finding, the hearing may not
be reopened unless it is renoticed for a future meeting.
i. The City Council shall then take action.
Page 12 of 157 15-698821-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
7.4 Written Evidence. All persons interested in the matter being heard by the City
Council shall be entitled to submit written evidence of any kind. All such evidence presented shall
be retained by the City Clerk as part of the Clerk's record.
7.5. Definition of "Ex Parte" Communication. "Ex parte communication" shall mean any
oral or written communication between a member of the Council and any person, which meets all
of the following requirements: (i) it is directed toward the merit or outcome of a quasi-judicial matter
within the Council's jurisdiction; (ii) an application, recommendation or appeal on the matter has
been submitted to the Council; (iii) the communication imparts substantive factual information
which constitutes the basis of or otherwise influences the Councilmember's deliberation or decision
on the matter; (iv) the information is not included in the staff report or other written materials
contained in the agenda of the meeting at which the matter is to be heard or otherwise on the official
record of the proceeding on the matter; and (v) the communication does not occur in a public
meeting as defined in the Ralph M. Brown Act (California Government Code Section 54950, et
seq.).
SECTION 8. PROCEDURES FOR THE CONDUCT OF MEETINGS.
8.1 Robert's Rosenberg's Rules. Unless otherwise specified in this Resolution or by
other ordinance or resolution, meetings of the City Council will be conducted to the extent
practicable in accordance with the most recently revised edition of Robert's Rosenberg's Rules of
Order published by the League of California Cities. In the event of any conflict between Robert's
Rosenberg's Rules and this Resolution, the Municipal Code or of State law, the latter three sources
of authority shall govern.
8.2 Motions. The Mayor or any member of the Council may bring a properly agendized
matter of business before the Council by making a motion. Before the matter can be considered or
debated it must be seconded. Once the motion has been properly made and seconded, the Presiding
Officer shall open the matter for debate offering the first opportunity to debate to the moving party
and, thereafter, to any Councilmember properly recognized by the Presiding Officer. Debate shall
be closed upon consent of a majority of the City Council. Once the matter has been fully debated
and the Presiding Officer calls for a vote, no further debate will be allowed, unless the Council
overrules the Presiding Officer by a majority vote. A motion that results in a tie vote does not pass.
Page 13 of 157 15-698821-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
8.3 Voting. Every Councilmember should vote unless disqualified by reason of a
financial or common law conflict of interest. A Councilmember may change his or her vote prior to
the time that the Presiding Officer or City Clerk announces the outcome of the vote on the motion,
and not after.
8.4 Adjournment. The City Council shall adjourn each Regular meeting by 10:30 p.m.
unless a majority of the members present vote to extend the adjournment time. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, any item of business commenced prior to 10:30 p.m. may be completed without the
necessity of an adjournment extension vote. Upon adjournment, those items of business not
completed shall be continued to the next Regular City Council meeting unless the Council schedules
the items for an Adjourned meeting to take place prior to the next meeting.
SECTION 9. DECORUM.
9.1 Rules for City Councilmembers. Members of the City Council shall conduct
themselves in an orderly and businesslike manner to ensure that the business of the City shall be
attended to efficiently and thoroughly and to ensure that the integrity of the deliberative process of
the City Council is maintained at all times. Members of the Council shall maintain a polite,
respectful and courteous manner when addressing one another, City staff and members of the public
during meetings.
a. Role of the Presiding Officer. The Presiding Officer of the City Council,
who shall be the Mayor, or in the Mayor's absence the Mayor Pro Tempore, or in their absence any
other member designated by the City Council, shall be responsible for maintaining the order and
decorum of meetings. It shall be the duty of the Presiding Officer to ensure that the rules of operation
and decorum contained herein are observed. The Presiding Officer shall maintain control of
communication between Councilmembers and between the Council, staff and the public.
b. Communication with Councilmembers.
1) Councilmembers should request the floor of the Presiding Officer
before speaking.
2) A Councilmember who is speaking shall attempt to avoid repetition
and shall endeavor to limit his or her comments to the subject matter at hand. Councilmembers
should endeavor to express their views without engaging in lengthy debates.
Page 14 of 157 15-698821-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
3) When one Councilmember is speaking, other Councilmembers shall
not interrupt or otherwise disturb the speaker.
9.2 Communication with Members of the Public Addressing the Council.
a. Councilmembers may, after requesting the floor of the Presiding Officer,
question a person addressing the Council at the conclusion of the person's comments or upon
expiration of the person's time to speak.
b. Councilmembers shall not engage the person addressing the Council in a
dialogue with the City Council or City staff, but shall confine communication to a question and
answer format.
c. If a member of the audience has addressed the Council on matters which are
not on the agenda, Councilmembers shall refrain from extended discussions of the matter. If a
Councilmember so wishes, the Councilmember may, during the Councilmember Comments or
Other Matters portion of the meeting, direct the City Manager to place the matter on the next agenda.
9.3 Rules for City Staff.
a. Decorum. City staff shall not engage in public dialogue or debate with
members of the public during public meetings. When addressed by the Council, staff shall respond
in a polite and respectful manner.
b. Role of the City Manager. The City Manager's duties during City Council
meetings include keeping a record of concerns raised by the Council regarding staff matters
and directions for future staff action.
9.4 Rules for the Public.
a. Members of the Audience. Members of the audience shall not engage in
disorderly or boisterous conduct, including the utterance of loud, threatening or abusive language,
whistling, stamping of feet or other acts which disturb, disrupt, impede or otherwise render the
orderly conduct of the City Council meeting infeasible. A member of the audience repeatedly or
continuously engaging in any such conduct shall, at the discretion of the Presiding Officer or a
majority of the City Council, be subject to ejection from that meeting.
b. Persons Addressing the City Council.
1) Any person wishing to speak shall approach the speaker podium when
called upon by the Presiding Officer.
Page 15 of 157 15-698821-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
2) No person shall address the City Council without first being
recognized by the Presiding Officer.
3) Each person addressing the City Council shall do so in an orderly
manner and shall not make repetitious, slanderous or irrelevant remarks, or engage in any other
disorderly conduct which disrupts, disturbs or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of the Council
meetings. Any person who so disrupts the meeting may, at the discretion of the Presiding Officer or
a majority of the City Council, be subject to ejection from that meeting.
4) Persons addressing the City Council shall adhere to the time limit
established for public comment and conclude their comments when requested to do so by the
Presiding Officer.
9.5 Enforcement.
a. Upon a violation of the rules of order and decorum established in Section 9.4
of this resolution, the procedure to enforce the rules is as follows:
1) Warning. The Presiding Officer shall request that a person who is
violating the rules of decorum cease such conduct. If after receiving a warning from the Presiding
Officer, the person persists in the violation, the Presiding Officer shall order the person to leave the
City Council meeting. If the person does not leave the meeting, the Presiding Officer may order any
law enforcement officer who is on duty at the City Council meeting as sergeant-at-arms to remove
the person from the City Council chambers.
2) Removal. Any law enforcement officer who is serving as sergeant-
at-arms at the City Council meeting shall carry out the orders and instructions given by the Presiding
Officer for the purpose of maintaining order and decorum. Upon instruction of the Presiding Officer,
it shall be the duty of the sergeant-at-arms to remove from the City Council meeting any person
who is disturbing the proceedings of the City Council.
3) Resisting Removal. Any person who resists removal by the sergeant-
at-arms may be charged with any applicable ordinance or law.
4) Motion to Enforce. If the Presiding Officer of the City Council fails
to enforce the rules of order and decorum set forth above, any member of the City Council may
move to require the Presiding Officer to do so, and an affirmative vote of a majority of the City
Council shall require the Presiding Officer to do so. If the Presiding Officer fails to carry out the
will of the majority of the City Council, the majority may designate another member of the City
Page 16 of 157 15-698821-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
Council to act as Presiding Officer for the purpose of enforcing the rules of order and decorum
established above.
5) Clearing the Room. If a meeting of the City Council is disturbed or
disrupted in such a manner as to make infeasible or improbable the restoration of order, the Presiding
Officer or a majority of the City Council may exercise the authority granted in the California
Government Code Section 54957.9 by ordering the meeting room cleared and continuing in session
in the manner authorized by Section 54957.9 of the Government Code. Members of the press shall
be permitted to remain unless they have participated in the disruption.
SECTION 10. Resolution No. 12-678715-6988 is hereby rescinded.
SECTION 11. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution,
shall enter the same in the book of original Resolutions of said city; and shall make a minute of the
passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council at which the
Same is passed and adopted.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 286th day of JulyNovember, 202115.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Interim City Clerk Susan Morrow City Attorney Michael
Jenkins
Page 1 of 15 21-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
RESOLUTION NO. 21-XXXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA
BEACH ESTABLISHING RULES FOR THE CONDUCT OF CITY
COUNCIL MEETINGS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
The following rules of order and decorum for the conduct of City Council meetings are
hereby adopted:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
SECTION 1. SCOPE 3
SECTION 2. MEETINGS
2.1 Regular Meetings 3
2.2 Special Meetings 3
2.3 Special Emergency Meetings 4
2.4 Closed Sessions 4
2.5 Quorum 4
2.6 Adjourned Meetings 4
2.7 Recording of Meetings 5
SECTION 3. POSTING OF NOTICE AND AGENDA
3.1 Posting of Notice and Agenda 5
3.2 Location of Posting 5
3.3 Posting for Regular meetings 5
3.4 Posting for Special meetings 5
3.5 Affidavit of Posting 5
SECTION 4. AGENDA - CONTENTS
4.1 Description of Matters 6
4.2 Availability of Agenda 6
4.3 Limitations of Actions by Agenda 6
4.4 Submittal of Written Materials by the Public 6
SECTION 5. ORDER OF BUSINESS
5.1 Commencement of Meeting 7
5.2 Order of Business 7
I. Call to Order 7
II. Pledge of Allegiance 7
III. Roll Call 7
IV. Report of Closed Session 7
V. Announcements – Upcoming City Events 7
VI. Approval of Agenda 7
Page 2 of 15 21-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
VII. Proclamations/Presentations 8
VIII. City Manager Report 8
IX. Public Participation 8
X. City Manager Comments 8
XI. Consent Calendar 8
XII. Items Removed from the Consent Calendar for Separate 8
Discussion
XIII. Public Hearings 8
XIV. Municipal Matters 8
XV. Future Agenda Items 8
XVI. Adjournment 9
SECTION 6. PUBLIC COMMENT
6.1 Public Comment 9
6.2 Limitations 9
6.3 Procedure 9
SECTION 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7.1 Time for consideration 9
7.2 Continuance of Hearings 10
7.3 Conduct of Hearings 10
7.4 Evidence 11
7.5 Definition of "Ex Parte" Communication 11
SECTION 8. PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCT OF MEETINGS
8.1 Robert's Rules 11
8.2 Motions 11
8.3 Voting 12
8.4 Adjournment 12
SECTION 9. DECORUM
9.1 Rules for City Councilmembers 12
a. Role of the Presiding Officer 12
b. Communication with Councilmembers 12
9.2 Communication with Members of the Public Addressing 13
the Council
9.3 Rules for City Staff 13
a. Decorum 13
b. Roles of the City Manager 13
9.4 Rules for the Public 13
a. Members of the Audience 13
b. Persons Addressing the City Council 13
9.5 Enforcement 14
Page 3 of 15 21-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
SECTION 1. SCOPE.
1.1 This Resolution shall establish the procedures for the conduct of all meetings of
the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach. The purpose of this Resolution is to provide
that the City Council's meeting procedures will be consistent with the Brown Act (Government
Code Section 54950 et seq.) and establish procedures that will be convenient for the public and
contribute to the orderly conduct of the City's business. The procedures herein are in addition
to, and not in place of, applicable ordinances and statutes, and in the event of conflict between
this Resolution and applicable ordinances or statutes, the latter shall govern.
SECTION 2. MEETINGS.
2.1 Regular Meetings. Pursuant to the authority set forth in Municipal Code section
2.04.010, the City Council shall conduct its Regular meetings on the 2nd and 4th Tuesdays of
each month. The Regular meetings of the City Council shall commence at 6:00 p.m. Only
Closed Sessions (and public comment associated therewith) and Study Sessions may be held
between 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. (and no other public agenda items) unless a Regular meeting
is adjourned to or a Special meeting called for that time. No Closed Session or Study Session
will be held during that hour unless the posted agenda of that evening's Regular meeting
indicates that such session will take place; in the absence of such notification in the agenda,
the Regular meeting shall commence at the hour of 7:00 p.m. Regular meetings shall be
conducted in the location set forth in Municipal Code section 2.04.020. Closed Sessions shall
be conducted in the location identified in the agenda.
2.2 Special Meetings. A Special meeting may be called at any time by the Presiding
Officer or by any three members of the City Council. Written notice of any such meeting must
be given to all members of the City Council and to all newspapers, radio and television stations,
or other public media of general Hermosa Beach coverage who have submitted a written
request to the City Clerk for such notification. Such notice may be given either personally or
by mail, but must be received at least 24 hours before the time set for the Special meeting. The
call and notice shall specify the time and place of the Special meeting and the business to be
transacted. Such notice is not necessary for any member who submits a written waiver of notice to
the City Clerk at or before the time set for the meeting or for any member who is actually present at
the special meeting.
Page 4 of 15 21-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
2.3 Emergency Meetings. An emergency meeting may be called by the Presiding
Officer or by a majority of the City Council where there exists:
a. a work stoppage, crippling disaster or other activity which severely
impairs public health, safety or both, as determined by the City Council; or
b. such other circumstances specified by State law as authorizing the
conduct of an emergency meeting. Any special emergency meeting shall be called, noticed and
conducted in accordance with procedure set forth in State law.
2.4 Closed Sessions. The City Council may hold Closed Sessions during a Regular
or Special meeting, or at any time otherwise authorized by law, to consider or hear any matter
which it is authorized by State law to hear or consider in Closed Session. During Closed
Session, the City Council may exclude any person or persons which it is authorized by State
law to exclude from a Closed Session. The City Manager shall keep a record of action taken
and the vote thereon. The City Attorney shall make such reports as are required by the Brown
Act.
2.5 Quorum. Three members of the City Council shall constitute a quorum and shall
be sufficient to transact business. If fewer than three Councilmembers appear at a Regular
meeting, any member, or if all members are absent, the City Clerk shall adjourn the meeting to
a stated day and hour. All Council actions require the affirmative votes of a majority of the
quorum, with the exception of those actions required by State law to have a specific minimum
number of votes.
2.6 Adjourned Meetings. The City Council may adjourn any Regular, Adjourned
Regular, Special or Adjourned Special meeting to a time and place specified in the order of
adjournment. If a quorum is not present, less than a quorum may so adjourn. If all members
are absent from any Regular or Adjourned Regular meeting, the City Clerk may declare the
meeting adjourned to a stated time and place and shall cause a written notice of the
adjournment to be delivered personally to each Councilmember. A copy of the order or notice
of adjournment shall be conspicuously posted on or near the door of the place where the Regular,
Adjourned Regular, Special or Adjourned Special meeting was held, within twenty-four (24) hours
after the time of adjournment. When a Regular or Adjourned Regular meeting is adjourned as
provided herein, the resulting Adjourned Regular meeting shall be a Regular meeting for all
Page 5 of 15 21-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
purposes. When an order of adjournment of any meeting fails to state the hour at which the
Adjourned meeting is to be held, it shall be held at the hour specified for Regular meetings.
2.7 Recording of Meetings. All open and public meetings of the City Council shall be
cablecast and webcast live or videorecorded for airing on the City's government channel and
viewing on the City's website. In that event that technical difficulties beyond the City's control
prevent the cablecasting, webcasting and/or recording of a meeting, the City Council may in its
discretion decide whether or not to proceed with the meeting.
SECTION 3. POSTING NOTICE AND AGENDA.
3.1 Posting of Notice and Agenda. For every Regular meeting, the City Clerk or his/her
designee shall post an agenda containing a brief description of all of the items of business to be
discussed at the meeting. For every Special meeting, the City Clerk or designee shall post a notice
of the meeting, specifying the time and place at which the meeting will be held, and an agenda
containing a brief description of all the items of business to be discussed at the meeting. The notice
and agenda for a Special meeting may be combined in a single document.
3.2 Location of Posting. The notice and agenda shall be posted in a place to which the
public has unrestricted access during at least normal business hours and where the notice and agenda
are not likely to be removed or obscured by other posted material. Specifically, the notice and
agenda shall be posted at the places indicated below, and/or at such other locations(s) as the
City Clerk may designate: City Hall, the Police Station, and the City library. The agenda shall
also be posted on the City's website.
3.3 Posting for Regular Meetings. For any Regular meeting of the City Council, the
notice and agenda shall be posted no later than seventy-two (72) hours prior to the time set for the
meeting.
3.4 Posting for Special Meetings. For any Special meeting of the City Council, the
notice and agenda shall be posted no later than twenty-four (24) hours prior to the time set for the
meeting.
3.5 Affidavit of Posting. Immediately following the posting of the notice and agenda,
the City Clerk or designee shall complete an Affidavit of Posting, in a form developed by the City
Clerk. The Affidavit of Posting shall indicate the time of the posting, the location(s) of the posting,
and shall be signed under penalty of perjury. The City Clerk shall retain all such affidavits, together
Page 6 of 15 21-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
with a copy of each notice and agenda so posted, in his or her files. The affidavit notice and agenda
shall be retained at least two (2) years subsequent to the date of posting, and pursuant to Government
Code Section 34090, shall not be destroyed by the City Clerk thereafter without the written consent
of the City Attorney.
SECTION 4. AGENDA - CONTENTS.
4.1 Description of Matters. All items of business to be discussed at a meeting of the City
Council shall be briefly described on the agenda. The description should contain sufficient detail so
that a person otherwise unaware could determine the general nature or subject matter of the item by
reading the agenda. Closed Session agenda items shall be described with particularity to the extent
feasible without compromising the confidentiality of the Closed Session.
4.2 Availability of Agenda. The agenda of each Regular meeting shall be made available
to the public not later than the Friday preceding the Council meeting.
4.3 Limitation of Actions by Agenda. No action shall be taken by the City Council on
any item not appearing on a posted agenda, subject only to the exceptions listed below:
a. Upon a majority determination that an "emergency situation," as defined by
State law, exists.
b. Upon a determination by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the members present, or
if less than two-thirds of the members are present, by unanimous vote, that there is a need to take
immediate action and that the need to take action came to the attention of the City subsequent to the
agenda posting. If the City Council makes a determination pursuant to this subsection, the minutes
of the meeting at which the determination is made shall reflect what circumstances gave rise to the
need to take action after the agenda was posted.
c. Where the item upon which action is to be taken was included on a properly
posted agenda for a prior meeting of the City Council occurring not more than five (5) calendar days
prior to the date of the meeting at which action is to be taken, and at the prior meeting the item was
continued to the meeting at which action is being taken.
4.4 Submittal of Written Materials by the Public. Written materials pertaining to matters
listed on the agenda of a Regular City Council meeting must be submitted by noon of the Tuesday
before the meeting in order to be included in the agenda packet. However, written materials received
after that deadline will nonetheless be posted under the relevant agenda item on the City's website
Page 7 of 15 21-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
at the same time as they are distributed to the City Council and provided to the City Council and the
public at the meeting.
SECTION 5. ORDER OF BUSINESS.
5.1 Commencement of Meeting. In the event that the posted agenda calls for a Closed
Session, the Mayor or the City Attorney shall announce the intention of the City Council to recess
into a Closed Session and shall state the basis therefore. Public comment shall be taken on the
Closed Session agenda.
At the time set for each Regular meeting, the Councilmembers, City Manager, City Attorney
and City Clerk shall take their regular places in the Council Chamber. The Presiding Officer shall
call the meeting to order and the business of the Council shall be taken up for consideration and
disposition in the order set forth in Section 5.2 except that with the consent of a majority of the
Council, items may be taken up out of order.
5.2 Order of Business. The order of business at meetings of the City Council shall be as
follows, in accordance with the procedures specified below:
I. CALL TO ORDER
The Presiding Officer shall call the meeting to order.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Presiding Officer shall designate a person to lead the Pledge of Allegiance.
III. ROLL CALL
The City Clerk shall call the roll of the Councilmembers and the names of those
present shall be entered on the minutes. The order of roll call shall be alphabetical with the Mayor
Pro Tempore called fourth and the Mayor called last.
IV. REPORT OF CLOSED SESSION
The Mayor or the City Attorney shall announce the basis for the Closed Session and
those actions taken as are required to be reported by the Brown Act.
V. ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmembers may make any announcements regarding upcoming City and
community events at this time.
VI. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Page 8 of 15 21-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
The City Council may change the order in which it takes up items on this agenda, remove and/or
continue agenda items and pull items from the consent calendar for separate consideration.
VII. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS
This time is reserved for the reading and awarding of proclamations and
commendations for members of the community, service organizations and others that have merited
recognition by the Council. In addition, visiting dignitaries may be introduced at this time.
VIII. CITY MANAGER REPORT
The City Manager and staff may provide brief reports on pending City business.
IX. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Oral comments from members of the public are accepted here as set forth in Section
6, herein. All comments from members of the public relative to Consent Calendar items must be
heard at this time unless a Councilmember agrees to remove a Consent Calendar item at the request
of a member of the public made at this time.
X. CITY COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
Councilmembers may briefly respond to public comments, may ask a question for clarification or
make brief announcement or report on his or her own activities or meetings attended.
XI. CONSENT CALENDAR
Items of a routine nature may be approved by the City Council in a single motion
by adoption of the Consent Calendar. The approval of the Consent Calendar shall signify the
approval of each matter or recommendation included therein.
XII. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR
SEPARATE DISCUSSION
Items removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion shall be heard at this time.
XIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
The Council shall conduct all public hearings as set forth in Section 7.
XIV. MUNICIPAL MATTERS
The Council shall take up all matters of new and old business.
XV. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Direction from the City Council to place items of business on a future agenda shall
be given at this time by a majority of the Council. No discussion, action or public comments shall
be taken at this time.
Page 9 of 15 21-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
XVI. ADJOURNMENT
SECTION 6. PUBLIC COMMENT.
6.1 Public Comment. During the Public Participation section of the agenda, any
member of the public may address the City Council on items appearing on the Consent Calendar.
Comments concerning other items on the agenda will be heard at the time the item is considered
during the course of the meeting; however, they may be offered at this time if the member of the
public cannot be in attendance later in the evening.
Members of the public may also comment upon any other items of interest that are within
the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council at this time. Any Councilmember may request
that matters addressed under Public Participation be placed for action on a subsequent agenda;
however, no action shall be taken on items not appropriately placed on the agenda except in a
situation as described in Section 4.3.
6.2 Limitations. The public comment period shall be limited to no more than three (3)
minutes for each speaker, unless the Presiding Officer determines that good cause exists to extend
the time and doing so will not be arbitrary or unfair. The Presiding Officer also may allow additional
time for the spokesperson of a group if doing so will limit the number of persons speaking and avoid
repetitious presentations.
6.3 Procedure. Upon addressing the City Council, each speaker may choose to state his
or her name and city of residence and then identify the subject or subjects upon which he or she
intends to speak. Speakers shall address their comments or questions to the City Council as a whole,
and not to any particular Council or staff member or to the audience.
SECTION 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS.
Matters which are required to be heard in a noticed public hearing shall be conducted in the
following manner:
7.1 Time for consideration. Matters noticed as public hearings shall commence no
earlier than the time specified in the notice of hearing, or as soon thereafter as is reasonably possible,
and shall continue until the same has been completed or until other disposition of the matter has
been made.
Page 10 of 15 21-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
7.2 Continuance of Hearings. Any public hearing being held or noticed or ordered to be
held by the City Council may, by order or notice of continuance, be continued or re-continued to
any subsequent meeting in the manner provided for under Section 2.6.
7.3 Conduct of Hearings. When a matter for public hearing comes before the City
Council, the Presiding Officer shall open the public hearing and:
a. Call for a report on noticing from the City Clerk.
b. Call for a report on written communications received by the City pertaining
to the item being heard.
c. With respect to quasi-judicial matters, request that each Councilmember
report on any ex parte communications, as defined in Section 7.5.
d. Request that staff present the staff report and any other relevant evidence.
Presentation of the staff report prior to the formal opening of the public hearing shall not prevent its
consideration as evidence. Any such evidence shall be made a part of the record of the public
hearing.
e. The Presiding Officer shall then recognize the proponents or appellants in the
case, who shall be permitted ten (10) minutes to present evidence related to the matter under
consideration.
f. The Presiding Officer shall then recognize members of the public. No person
may speak without first being recognized by the Presiding Officer. Members of the City Council
who wish to ask questions of the speakers or each other during the public hearing may do so.
Members should be mindful that the purpose of the public hearing is to obtain testimony, and not to
debate the merits of the item under consideration. Members should avoid debate and expressions of
personal opinion until after the close of the public testimony portion of the public hearing. The
Presiding Officer shall conduct the hearing in such a manner as to afford due process to all affected
persons. Comments from the public shall be limited to three (3) minutes per speaker for public
hearings, unless the City Council affirmatively decides otherwise.
g. Following public comments, the proponents or appellants may present a
wrap-up or rebuttal statement, not to exceed five (5) minutes in length.
h. The Presiding Officer shall then close the public testimony portion of the
public hearing.Councilmembers may still, however, ask questions of staff or members of the public.
Upon conclusion of Council deliberations and immediately prior to a motion, the Presiding Officer
Page 11 of 15 21-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
shall formally close the public hearing. Upon formally closing the public hearing, no additional
public testimony shall be solicited or received without reopening the hearing. The hearing may not
be reopened unless it is determined that no one in the audience has left the room since closure of
the hearing. In the event the Presiding Officer is unable to make that finding, the hearing may not
be reopened unless it is renoticed for a future meeting.
i. The City Council shall then take action.
7.4 Written Evidence. All persons interested in the matter being heard by the City
Council shall be entitled to submit written evidence of any kind. All such evidence presented shall
be retained by the City Clerk as part of the Clerk's record.
7.5. Definition of "Ex Parte" Communication. "Ex parte communication" shall mean any
oral or written communication between a member of the Council and any person, which meets all
of the following requirements: (i) it is directed toward the merit or outcome of a quasi-judicial matter
within the Council's jurisdiction; (ii) an application, recommendation or appeal on the matter has
been submitted to the Council; (iii) the communication imparts substantive factual information
which constitutes the basis of or otherwise influences the Councilmember's deliberation or decision
on the matter; (iv) the information is not included in the staff report or other written materials
contained in the agenda of the meeting at which the matter is to be heard or otherwise on the official
record of the proceeding on the matter; and (v) the communication does not occur in a public
meeting as defined in the Ralph M. Brown Act (California Government Code Section 54950, et
seq.).
SECTION 8. PROCEDURES FOR THE CONDUCT OF MEETINGS.
8.1 Rosenberg's Rules. Unless otherwise specified in this Resolution or by other
ordinance or resolution, meetings of the City Council will be conducted to the extent practicable in
accordance with the most recently revised edition of Rosenberg's Rules of Order published by the
League of California Cities. In the event of any conflict between Rosenberg's Rules and this
Resolution, the Municipal Code or of State law, the latter three sources of authority shall govern.
8.2 Motions. The Mayor or any member of the Council may bring a properly agendized
matter of business before the Council by making a motion. Before the matter can be considered or
debated it must be seconded. Once the motion has been properly made and seconded, the Presiding
Officer shall open the matter for debate offering the first opportunity to debate to the moving party
Page 12 of 15 21-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
and, thereafter, to any Councilmember properly recognized by the Presiding Officer. Debate shall
be closed upon consent of a majority of the City Council. Once the matter has been fully debated
and the Presiding Officer calls for a vote, no further debate will be allowed, unless the Council
overrules the Presiding Officer by a majority vote. A motion that results in a tie vote does not pass.
8.3 Voting. Every Councilmember should vote unless disqualified by reason of a
financial or common law conflict of interest. A Councilmember may change his or her vote prior to
the time that the Presiding Officer or City Clerk announces the outcome of the vote on the mot ion,
and not after.
8.4 Adjournment. The City Council shall adjourn each Regular meeting by 10:30 p.m.
unless a majority of the members present vote to extend the adjournment time. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, any item of business commenced prior to 10:30 p.m. may be completed without the
necessity of an adjournment extension vote. Upon adjournment, those items of business not
completed shall be continued to the next Regular City Council meeting unless the Council schedules
the items for an Adjourned meeting to take place prior to the next meeting.
SECTION 9. DECORUM.
9.1 Rules for City Councilmembers. Members of the City Council shall conduct
themselves in an orderly and businesslike manner to ensure that the business of the City shall be
attended to efficiently and thoroughly and to ensure that the integrity of the deliberative process of
the City Council is maintained at all times. Members of the Council shall maintain a polite,
respectful and courteous manner when addressing one another, City staff and members of the public
during meetings.
a. Role of the Presiding Officer. The Presiding Officer of the City Council,
who shall be the Mayor, or in the Mayor's absence the Mayor Pro Tempore, or in their absence any
other member designated by the City Council, shall be responsible for maintaining the order and
decorum of meetings. It shall be the duty of the Presiding Officer to ensure that the rules of operation
and decorum contained herein are observed. The Presiding Officer shall maintain control of
communication between Councilmembers and between the Council, staff and the public.
b. Communication with Councilmembers.
1) Councilmembers should request the floor of the Presiding Officer
before speaking.
Page 13 of 15 21-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
2) A Councilmember who is speaking shall attempt to avoid repetition
and shall endeavor to limit his or her comments to the subject matter at hand. Councilmembers
should endeavor to express their views without engaging in lengthy debates.
3) When one Councilmember is speaking, other Councilmembers shall
not interrupt or otherwise disturb the speaker.
9.2 Communication with Members of the Public Addressing the Council.
a. Councilmembers may, after requesting the floor of the Presiding Officer,
question a person addressing the Council at the conclusion of the person's comments or upon
expiration of the person's time to speak.
b. Councilmembers shall not engage the person addressing the Council in a
dialogue with the City Council or City staff, but shall confine communication to a question and
answer format.
c. If a member of the audience has addressed the Council on matters which are
not on the agenda, Councilmembers shall refrain from extended discussions of the matter. If a
Councilmember so wishes, the Councilmember may, during the Councilmember Comments or
Other Matters portion of the meeting, direct the City Manager to place the matter on the next agenda.
9.3 Rules for City Staff.
a. Decorum. City staff shall not engage in public dialogue or debate with
members of the public during public meetings. When addressed by the Council, staff shall respond
in a polite and respectful manner.
b. Role of the City Manager. The City Manager's duties during City Council
meetings include keeping a record of concerns raised by the Coun cil regarding staff matters
and directions for future staff action.
9.4 Rules for the Public.
a. Members of the Audience. Members of the audience shall not engage in
disorderly or boisterous conduct, including the utterance of loud, threatening or abusive language,
whistling, stamping of feet or other acts which disturb, disrupt, impede or otherwise render the
orderly conduct of the City Council meeting infeasible. A member of the audience repeatedly or
continuously engaging in any such conduct shall, at the discretion of the Presiding Officer or a
majority of the City Council, be subject to ejection from that meeting.
b. Persons Addressing the City Council.
Page 14 of 15 21-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
1) Any person wishing to speak shall approach the speaker podium when
called upon by the Presiding Officer.
2) No person shall address the City Council without first being
recognized by the Presiding Officer.
3) Each person addressing the City Council shall do so in an orderly
manner and shall not make repetitious, slanderous or irrelevant remarks, or engage in any other
disorderly conduct which disrupts, disturbs or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of the Council
meetings. Any person who so disrupts the meeting may, at the discretion of the Presiding Officer or
a majority of the City Council, be subject to ejection from that meeting.
4) Persons addressing the City Council shall adhere to the time limit
established for public comment and conclude their comments when requested to do so by the
Presiding Officer.
9.5 Enforcement.
a. Upon a violation of the rules of order and decorum established in Section 9.4
of this resolution, the procedure to enforce the rules is as follows:
1) Warning. The Presiding Officer shall request that a person who is
violating the rules of decorum cease such conduct. If after receiving a warning from the Presiding
Officer, the person persists in the violation, the Presiding Officer shall order the person to leave the
City Council meeting. If the person does not leave the meeting, the Presiding Officer may order any
law enforcement officer who is on duty at the City Council meeting as sergeant -at-arms to remove
the person from the City Council chambers.
2) Removal. Any law enforcement officer who is serving as sergeant-
at-arms at the City Council meeting shall carry out the orders and instructions given by the Presiding
Officer for the purpose of maintaining order and decorum. Upon instruction of the Presiding Officer,
it shall be the duty of the sergeant-at-arms to remove from the City Council meeting any person
who is disturbing the proceedings of the City Council.
3) Resisting Removal. Any person who resists removal by the sergeant-
at-arms may be charged with any applicable ordinance or law.
4) Motion to Enforce. If the Presiding Officer of the City Council fails
to enforce the rules of order and decorum set forth above, any member of the City Council may
move to require the Presiding Officer to do so, and an affirmative vote of a majority of the City
Page 15 of 15 21-XXXX
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
Council shall require the Presiding Officer to do so. If the Presiding Officer fails to carry out the
will of the majority of the City Council, the majority may designate another member of the City
Council to act as Presiding Officer for the purpose of enforcing the rules of order and decorum
established above.
5) Clearing the Room. If a meeting of the City Council is disturbed or
disrupted in such a manner as to make infeasible or improbable the restoration of order, the Presiding
Officer or a majority of the City Council may exercise the authority granted in the California
Government Code Section 54957.9 by ordering the meeting room cleared and continuing in session
in the manner authorized by Section 54957.9 of the Government Code. Members of the press shall
be permitted to remain unless they have participated in the disruption.
SECTION 10. Resolution No. 15-6988 is hereby rescinded.
SECTION 11. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution,
shall enter the same in the book of original Resolutions of said city; and shall make a minute of the
passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council at which the
Same is passed and adopted.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of November, 2021.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Interim City Clerk Susan Morrow City Attorney Michael Jenkins
HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL DISASTER RESPONSE QUICK REFERENCE
In a major emergency or disaster, the Mayor and City Councilmembers and Standby Officers must be
ready to attend emergency sessions to ratify and approve necessary disaster legislation and to work
with the City’s Public Information Officer to provide consistent and accurate information to the com-
munity.
Before a Disaster
Update your personal/family emergency plans
Maintain emergency supply kits at your home, office and in your car
Mitigate hazards in your home and office
Know your neighbors
During a Disaster
The City Manager is the Director of Emergency Services
Controls and directs the City’s emergency response and recovery
Represents the City in all dealings with public or private agencies
Line of Succession
• City Manager
• Deputy City Manager
• Police Chief
• Finance Director
• Community Development Director
• Public Works Director
Director of Emergency Services City Council Authorization
Proclaim local emergency Ratify within seven (14) days
Renew every thirty (30) days
Terminate by resolution when warranted
Request Governor to proclaim State of Emer-
gency
Approve request
*Governor may proclaim State of Emergency
without City’s request
Issue rules and regulations for the protection of
life and property
Promulgate orders and regulations necessary
for the protection of life and property
Mayor and City Councilmembers: Roles and Responsibilities
Your job is to do what you do on a day-to-day basis, provide direction, policy, funding and the face of
the community.
1. Understand the situation
2. Attend Emergency City Council sessions
3. Ratify and approve necessary disaster legislation
4. Implement “One Voice” communication strategies set forth by the EOC PIO
Key Responsibilities
Respond to activation and reporting instructions provided via Alert South Bay: Hermosa Alerts
• If communication systems are down, report to Hermosa 5-0 Senior Center at the Community
Center
Receive briefing from EOC Director and EOC PIO
Participate in emergency City Council sessions
Issue/ratify/renew local emergency proclamation, which:
• Proclaims an emergency or major disaster
• Is a prerequisite for requesting State and Federal assistance
• Authorizes issuance of orders and regulations to protect life and property
• Activates pre-established local emergency provisions such as special purchasing or contracting
• Authorizes undertaking of extraordinary police powers
• Provides limited immunity for emergency actions of public employees and governing bodies
Implement “One Voice” communication strategies set forth by the EOC PIO
Establish communication with Councilmembers from neighboring jurisdictions
Standby Officers (per California Government Code Sections 8636 and 8640 and Hermosa Beach
Municipal Code Chapter 2.56.100)
To provide for continuance of the legislative and executive departments of the City during an
emergency, City Council has the power to appoint standby officers.
Required Training
By preparing for crises beforehand you will be ready to communicate effectively and provide the leader-
ship your public and your responders are looking for as the crisis unfolds. National Incident Manage-
ment System (NIMS) and Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) compliance requires
that local elected officials also be trained in NIMS, SEMS and ICS (Incident Command System).
Take the following training
• IS 700.a (required): online at www.fema.gov/training
• IS 100.b (required): online at www.fema.gov/training
• ICS 402 (required) : in person
• G606 (required): online at www.csti.org
For record keeping purposes please forward your certificates of completion to
bvillanueva@hermosabeach.gov
The City of Hermosa Beach Emergency Operations Plan available at:
https://www.hermosabeach.gov/our -government/city-manager/emergency-preparedness/links-notifications-apps
From: noreply@granicusideas.com <noreply@granicusideas.com>
Sent: Friday, November 5, 2021 5:17 PM
To: Ann Yang <anny@hermosabch.org>; City Council <citycouncil@hermosabeach.gov>; Suja Lowenthal
<suja@hermosabeach.gov>; Angela Crespi <acrespi@hermosabch.org>
Subject: New eComment for City Council Special Meeting: City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel
- Pacific Room (8am-2pm)
New eComment for City Council Special Meeting:
City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel -
Pacific Room (8am-2pm)
Carolyn Petty submitted a new eComment.
Meeting: City Council Special Meeting: City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel - Pacific
Room (8am-2pm)
Item: X. CITY COUNCIL MEETING RULES (City Attorney Mike Jenkins - 12:00 P.M.) Consider
proposed revisions to Council meeting rules to conform them to the new Council agenda format
and to delete "written communications" unrelated to any agenda item. A redline of the meeting
rules with the recommended changes is attached.
eComment: It is completely inappropriate for this council to stop attaching written
communications to the agenda, and it is shocking that you just won't give up on this one. First it
was Suja wanting to do this, ostensibly because she wants to be front and center, then does not
like the associated critiques. Now Mike is covering for Suja - and the Mike Jenkins I knew what
have never, ever done this. It is shocking that a city attorney would propose this - it is not his job.
Why is this council even permitting this to be a discussion? Your job is to listen to the
community. If you do not want to do that, you should not serve in this capacity. Your job is to
accept input - and allow others to express themselves. Of course people should be able to
comment on items NOT on the agenda. How else can they make their voices heard publicly? Not
everyone is comfortable at the podium. If you do not permit written comments to be attached to
the agenda, you are shutting down your community's voice. This would have been unthinkable
with any other council. But now that you have become so entrenched with Stacey and Justin
running the show, you think you can literally do whatever you want - be it paying a million dollar
settlement and hiding the payout in a check register, or continuing to blame the downtown
businesses for everything that happens in Hermosa Beach. All of us who watch what is going on,
knew this was coming back. It is time to shut this down for good.
From: noreply@granicusideas.com <noreply@granicusideas.com>
Sent: Friday, November 5, 2021 7:14 PM
To: Ann Yang <anny@hermosabch.org>; City Council <citycouncil@hermosabeach.gov>; Suja Lowenthal
<suja@hermosabeach.gov>; Angela Crespi <acrespi@hermosabch.org>
Subject: New eComment for City Council Special Meeting: City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel
- Pacific Room (8am-2pm)
New eComment for City Council Special Meeting:
City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel -
Pacific Room (8am-2pm)
Kent allen submitted a new eComment.
Meeting: City Council Special Meeting: City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel - Pacific
Room (8am-2pm)
Item: X. CITY COUNCIL MEETING RULES (City Attorney Mike Jenkins - 12:00 P.M.) Consider
proposed revisions to Council meeting rules to conform them to the new Council agenda format
and to delete "written communications" unrelated to any agenda item. A redline of the meeting
rules with the recommended changes is attached.
eComment: It is very disturbing that Justin and Suja are once again bringing up this matter after
it was previously stopped. This is not communist China. Justin and Suja are not dictators.
Stopping people from providing written comminution is just wrong.
From: noreply@granicusideas.com <noreply@granicusideas.com>
Sent: Friday, November 5, 2021 8:42 PM
To: Ann Yang <anny@hermosabch.org>; City Council <citycouncil@hermosabeach.gov>; Suja Lowenthal
<suja@hermosabeach.gov>; Angela Crespi <acrespi@hermosabch.org>
Subject: New eComment for City Council Special Meeting: City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel
- Pacific Room (8am-2pm)
New eComment for City Council Special Meeting:
City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel -
Pacific Room (8am-2pm)
Matt McCool submitted a new eComment.
Meeting: City Council Special Meeting: City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel - Pacific
Room (8am-2pm)
Item: XI. BRIEF OVERVIEW OF HERMOSA BEACH EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND
RESPONSE ROLES OF COUNCIL AND STAFF (1:00 P.M.)
eComment: Dear City Council: As a former Emergency Preparedness Advisory Commissioner
for the City of Hermosa Beach, I continuously advise people, you must be your own emergency
manager. Make a plan, and build a kit. City Emergency Management is for the City government
to function in the event of an emergency. I tell people, you will be on your own, and you need to
be prepared. Also, I am an advocate that emergency preparedness should include firearms. If
you purchase a firearm, become proficient using it, or do not buy one. I recommend a shotgun
over a pistol or rifle for protection in the event of an emergency. Remember May 31, 2020? The
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors proclaimed the existence of a local emergency, and
imposed a County-wide curfew. How prepared were you? Could you protect life and property?
So the most recent emergency for the residents was not about a food and water supply, but it
was about a supply of ammunition. Semper Vigilans! Matt McCool
From: noreply@granicusideas.com <noreply@granicusideas.com>
Sent: Friday, November 5, 2021 3:19 PM
To: Ann Yang <anny@hermosabch.org>; City Council <citycouncil@hermosabeach.gov>; Suja Lowenthal
<suja@hermosabeach.gov>; Angela Crespi <acrespi@hermosabch.org>
Subject: New eComment for City Council Special Meeting: City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel
- Pacific Room (8am-2pm)
New eComment for City Council Special Meeting:
City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel -
Pacific Room (8am-2pm)
Ryan Tucker submitted a new eComment.
Meeting: City Council Special Meeting: City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel - Pacific
Room (8am-2pm)
Item: X. CITY COUNCIL MEETING RULES (City Attorney Mike Jenkins - 12:00 P.M.) Consider
proposed revisions to Council meeting rules to conform them to the new Council agenda format
and to delete "written communications" unrelated to any agenda item. A redline of the meeting
rules with the recommended changes is attached.
eComment: Government shouldn't be hindering communication from the public. General
communication or otherwise. And for what to streamline the agenda? That's a pretty weak
excuse. If it's too much for Suja to handle have her new deputy do it.
From: noreply@granicusideas.com <noreply@granicusideas.com>
Sent: Friday, November 5, 2021 6:32 PM
To: Ann Yang <anny@hermosabch.org>; City Council <citycouncil@hermosabeach.gov>; Suja Lowenthal
<suja@hermosabeach.gov>; Angela Crespi <acrespi@hermosabch.org>
Subject: New eComment for City Council Special Meeting: City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel
- Pacific Room (8am-2pm)
New eComment for City Council Special Meeting:
City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel -
Pacific Room (8am-2pm)
Tracy Hopkins submitted a new eComment.
Meeting: City Council Special Meeting: City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel - Pacific
Room (8am-2pm)
Item: VII. PRESENTATION FROM CLEAN POWER ALLIANCE (Executive Director Ted
Bardacke - 8:35 A.M.)
eComment: Just say "NO!" to CCA in Hermosa Beach! It's risky, costly and not a good deal for
Hermosa. Community Choice Aggregation is a new program that allows California city
governments to operate “communitywide electricity buyers’ programs.” Commonly known as
community choice aggregators, or CCAs, these are new government agencies created by Joint
Powers Agreement among several cities. Additionally, individual cities may run their own CCA
programs. Our local utility company, Edison, will still provide transmission, distribution and
customer billing services to the CCA agency for a fee that is passed along to consumers. Once
our city council decides to join or establish a CCA, all residents are automatically enrolled in the
program. It will be up to individual residents to “opt out” and continue with their regular service
with Edison. CCAs are vulnerable to changing market conditions. Energy procurement is risky,
complex, costly and long-term. Because withdrawal from CCA membership is cost-prohibitive,
our city’s decision to join binds future City Councils and future generations of taxpayers. CCAs
operate without adequate oversight, virtually invisible to the public. Creating Joint Powers
Agencies (JPAs), such as CCAs, costs taxpayers money. JPAs employ staff, set up offices and,
most importantly, make decisions -- such as issue debt -- for which taxpayers are responsible
but have no knowledge or say. JPA governing board members are not directly elected by voters,
which contributes to their relative obscurity and lack of transparency. Does the nominal increase
in renewable energy use promised by CCAs justify their risks? Unequivocally, no. Local
government doesn’t belong in the electricity business. It is reckless for government to gamble on
risky ventures for which it is ill-prepared and unqualified. “Green” energy companies,
consultants, activists and lobbyists all stand to gain politically and financially from the
proliferation of CCAs. Public agencies rely on some of these same sources for advice on CCAs -
- a clear conflict of interest. Today’s cities and counties struggle to provide essential services,
including basic public safety and human services. Throwing precious tax dollars into a CCA
money pit won’t help the environment, but will burden future generations with additional
unwanted debt.
From: noreply@granicusideas.com <noreply@granicusideas.com>
Sent: Friday, November 5, 2021 7:00 PM
To: Ann Yang <anny@hermosabch.org>; City Council <citycouncil@hermosabeach.gov>; Suja Lowenthal
<suja@hermosabeach.gov>; Angela Crespi <acrespi@hermosabch.org>
Subject: New eComment for City Council Special Meeting: City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel
- Pacific Room (8am-2pm)
New eComment for City Council Special Meeting:
City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel -
Pacific Room (8am-2pm)
Tracy Hopkins submitted a new eComment.
Meeting: City Council Special Meeting: City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel - Pacific
Room (8am-2pm)
Item: REPORT 21-0660 STATUS UPDATE AND DISCUSSION OF CITY'S GREENHOUSE
GAS EMISSIONS GOALS (Environmental Programs Manager Doug Krauss)
eComment: RE: Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan - Electricity. Page 1
recommends RECs (renewables energy certificates) for achieving carbon neutral goals. AB 1110
legislated RECs* out of existence. RECs are now only used by any load serving entity to meet a
small portion of the annual RPS compliance. RECs are not energy, nor do they “reduce” carbon
from your energy. Whoever wrote the third paragraph (and other text about RECs) in this
“Carbon Neutral Plan” is apparently unaware of clean energy law. Here’s what ARB’s chair
writes** about RECs (as employed by CCA). Is our city council being directed, or counseled, by
someone who does not comply with California law? Will someone ask if there is any idea who’s
selling RECs so heavily to our city? * https://s3-us-west-
1.amazonaws.com/themarinpost/doc/2451/CPA_RECs.pdf ** https://s3-us-west-
1.amazonaws.com/themarinpost/doc/2451/CPA_RECs.pdf
From: noreply@granicusideas.com <noreply@granicusideas.com>
Sent: Friday, November 5, 2021 8:11 PM
To: Ann Yang <anny@hermosabch.org>; City Council <citycouncil@hermosabeach.gov>; Suja Lowenthal
<suja@hermosabeach.gov>; Angela Crespi <acrespi@hermosabch.org>
Subject: New eComment for City Council Special Meeting: City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel
- Pacific Room (8am-2pm)
New eComment for City Council Special Meeting:
City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel -
Pacific Room (8am-2pm)
Tracy Hopkins submitted a new eComment.
Meeting: City Council Special Meeting: City Council Retreat at The Beach House Hotel - Pacific
Room (8am-2pm)
Item: VIII. CARBON REDUCTION STRATEGIES & PROCESS (9:05 A.M.)
eComment: A Climate Action Plan (CAP) appears to be a Trojan horse that sets into motion
Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS) parameters and reinforces these through continued
solicitation of SCS grants. CAPs are not required. It is 100% voluntary. CAPs are the local
implementation of regional plans for Sustainable Development. Sustainable Development (SD) is
a scheme to transform economies from price-based systems, to a carbon-credit resourced-
based system. Under the guise of protecting the poor through social equity and social justice
wealth redistribution programs, poor people are being used as an excuse to subsidize
governments through increased costs, prices and fees. SD seeks behavior modification based
on artificial scarcities, much of which is created by government agency policies. This is being
promoted though Green House Gas (GHG) reduction policies, which have ever changing
reduction goals. SD constrains energy output. As prices go up, people use less of a product or
service. For example, electricity and water. SD embraces, forced conservation or rationing.
Locally, SD is fomented through Sustainable Community Strategies (SCS) in city general plans,
the Countywide Vision, and local climate action plans. A primary driver for SD is the Southern
Claifornia Association of Governments (SCAG). To help finance SCAGs $565 billion dollar 2016
RTP/SCS, they plan on installing a vehicle mileage tax (VMT) by... Making adjustments to state
and federal gas excise tax rates and the long-term replacement of gas taxes with mileage-based
user fees. Is Hermosa Beach's CAP plan implementing SD using flawed models for their
greenhouse inventory forecasts, which embrace behavior modification techniques without
consideration to the financial impacts to residents and businesses? Does the CAP seek GHG
reduction through increased costs for water and energy producers? Will these costs be passed
on to the consumer in the way of higher prices? Please item all money inputs for the
development of the CAP to date, denoting sources. Please provide us with a budget for the
implementation, operation and maintenance of the CAP, including consultant and staff time.
From: David Grethen
Sent: Friday, November 5, 2021 11:20 AM
Subject: Carbon Reduction Strategy (CCA vs Local Solar)
Attached is a letter I wrote that was attached to a September 2016 Council meeting (just before
my Commission appointment).
Although it is five years old, it is still quite relevant, and would fit perfectly as an attachment
under Item VIII Carbon Reduction Strategies for tomorrow's meeting agenda.
The essence of the letter is about tradeoffs between CCA-provided power and City power
projects, with a possible strategy to blend these over time, and recommendation to continuously
look at the city's overall electrical system architecture and allocation of loads to sources.
From: David Grethen
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 12:05 PM
Subject: Carbon Neutrality Comments for 9-27-2016 Agenda
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HB City Council - 9/27/2016 - D. Grethen (Agenda Item 6d - Carbon Neutrality Short-Term
Update)
Scope: Comments herein relate to the following items in the Staff report: Solar project at
Community Center; Potential solar project at municipal lot; mention of energy projects within
and outside the city; CCA status and planned Town Hall. The thread that ties these together is
local electricity generation planning.
Summary and Recommendations (Further Discussions Below):
(1) Council/Staff should proactively use a comprehensive forward-thinking approach for the
planning and capital funding of candidate local electricity generation projects to supply
municipal electrical loads, realizing that CCA might be preferable to local solar as the renewable
source to meet carbon goals.
(2) Council/Staff should openly share its vision or desires for any potential local electricity
generation projects under the scope of CCA per the existing CCA Implementation Plan
document, at future CCA Town Hall meetings. Note: CCA projects here are not to be confused
with City capital projects above.
Discussion (Municipal Electricity Plans):
Without CCA, then it appears that HB may have to generate its own renewable energy to meet
municipal carbon goals, and solar is the likely technology right now. But with CCA, it is
conceivable that no solar projects would be needed. Therefore trade studies should be performed
to most effectively allocate the various municipal electricity loads to the best-fit power sources
and systems.
Power sources might be regarded as grid versus solar. Grid currently means SCE but later might
be presumed to be CCA. Solar could mean a ’small’ or ’limited’ system that has limited solar
arrays and little/no battery storage so that the source is really a mix of grid and solar (providing
grid when no sun). Solar could also mean a ’large’ or ‘self-sufficient’ system with large solar
arrays to supply all loads and charge a large battery that supplies all loads when no sun.
A comprehensive analysis tool could lay out scenarios over time and evaluate various types of
grid vs. solar options. and ‘small’ vs. ‘large solar options, matched to the various municipal loads
(including vehicle charging) and evaluate them based on cost effectiveness, capital tie-up, carbon
reductions (and area).
A most extreme scenario would be all-grid, where we fund no solar and wait for CCA. Another
extreme would be all solar, where we tie up all of our capital as soon as possible, but might have
regrets if CCA comes along and is especially cost-effective, plus regrets that we did not deploy
our capital elsewhere in town. More realistic would scenarios might involve a carefully measured
rollout of solar until CCA materializes (or not), and as better energy price information or
technologies become available. A ’living’ analysis tool would guide decisions.
The staff report 16-0582 for the Council agenda begins to identify some candidate solar projects
including the near-term Community Center. It mentions Parking Lot A, and lists others in Table
3. This looks like a start at comprehensiveness, but still doesn‘t seem to provide enough
perspective to evaluate an individual project such as the Community Center. My sense is that a
‘bottoms-up’ approach was taken there based on a given budget allocation and available
installation area, to see how much energy could get for that.
It would be useful to have a rough-order-of-magnitude cost estimate to know the cost of
powering the entire municipality with solar. This could be generated for the ‘all solar’ extreme
case mentioned above. If we had this, then we would understand what is the potential maximum
capital investment or cost, and help decide if this is really the preferred path. We would also then
have context to examine how various future proposed projects contribute as a fraction of cost for
a given fractional improvement in carbon reduction.
I do appreciate that the Community Center solar proposal presentation in the agenda package
provides an estimate of how much power usage would be offloaded by solar (~60% I believe),
and includes enough system description to know that this does not include storage and is grid-
connected, thus being a limited system. It is also interesting that the Parking Lot A item does
mention storage, and it would be good to have more info on that and other candidates.
Discussion (CCA Local Energy Projects):
The CCA Implementation Plan discusses local energy projects including “distributed generation
and storage functions”, of which solar is an example. While this includes encouraging private
users to install such systems, it seems to invite the possibility of the CCA itself providing its own
energy beyond what is procured in the market.
Since most of the recent CCA discussion (e.g. Council meetings) has focused on the procurement
function, we should also assure that the local energy aspect of this is also communicated to the
public. It has been stated that our CCA will not be an energy “utility”, which is fair if there is just
procurement, but once the CCA ventures into the business of providing energy sources, it
becomes more like a real utility, and presents an additional set of risks to be managed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Matt McCool
Sent: Friday, November 5, 2021 9:00 PM
To: Ann Yang <anny@hermosabch.org>
Subject: Supplemental Item VI. PLAN HERMOSA: CARBON REDUCTION GOALS
Dear City Council:
We are really going, "Back to the Future?"
It is misleading and a disgrace not to include the full staff report from February 24, 2015:
https://hermosabeach.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2214645&GUID=E24
BDAA3-6F0F-403D-A781-C8801FD25F0A
Please see attachment (7) Implementation Costs and Schedule-2020 target.pdf for the $511,051 in
carbon offsets.
This matter was settled in 2017, and you lost. You lost big time! You lost so much so, that you do not
even use the term "carbon neutrality" anymore.
What happen to it?
This issue was discussed at the third City Council debate in 2017:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhkQVKu3seg
I recall the last attempt to save carbon neutrality was a confrontation with me during an EPAC
Commission meeting with then-candidate Mary Campbell, the Boss and the Consigliere:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEGkUAcEHtI
It's time to let it go.
Very respectfully,
Matt McCool
From: Warren Barr <wbarrod@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, November 5, 2021 4:34 PM
To: Councilmember Mary Campbell <mcampbell@hermosabeach.gov>; Mayor Justin Massey
<jmassey@hermosabeach.gov>; Councilmember Stacey Armato <sarmato@hermosabeach.gov>; City
Clerk <cityclerk@hermosabeach.gov>; Mayor Pro Tem Michael Detoy <mdetoy@hermosabeach.gov>;
Suja Lowenthal <suja@hermosabeach.gov>; Ann Yang <anny@hermosabch.org>
Subject: Do not restrict public comment
The fundamental right to comment to the City Council on the public record should not be infringed.
Please do NOT delete section
6.4 Written Communication to Council. Persons who wish to address an issue to the City Council for the
official record may submit written material to the Council in lieu of or in addition to speaking under the
Public Participation section of the meeting. Such written correspondence must be delivered to the City
Clerk by noon of the Tuesday one week before the Regular Council meeting in order to be included on
the agenda.
Sincerely,
Warren Barr
City of Hermosa Beach
City Council Retreat
November 6, 2021
Community Choice
Energy
Enabled by state legislation in 2002
Currently 23 entities, serving ~ 1/3 of IOU electricity load in CA
Provide consumer choice, competition, innovation, local control and investment, and tools for climate action and resilience
CCAs have driven almost 10,000 MW of new-build clean energy development in CA
Goals and values differ by CCA
Community Choice Aggregators
serve a growing share of
customers across the state
2
CCA Models
Non-recourse to JPA members
Mo general fund liability
Program spending is pooled and
available to all customers or
certain targeted populations
Rate setting and procurement
decisions made at JPA Board level
Agency staff run core operations
Joint Powers Authority
3
General fund at-risk
Excess revenue available for city-
specific energy related spending
Rate setting and procurement
decisions made at City Council
level
Consultants run core operations
with varying degrees of oversight
by city staff
Municipal Enterprise Fund
Clean Power Alliance is a JPA made up of 30 Cities
and the Counties of Los Angeles and Ventura
CPA serves approximately 1 million customer accounts representing 3 million residents and businesses
Largest CCA in CA; more customers on 100% renewable energy rates than any utility in the nation
Each member has a seat on Board of Directors –One member, one vote
Experienced staff from private and public sectors
4
Clean Power Alliance provides clean,
renewable energy at competitive rates
Clean Power Alliance purchases
clean power and Southern
California Edison delivers it.
SCE sends a single monthly bill,
which includes SCE charges for
electricity delivery and CPA
charges for electricity
supply/generation.
CPA charges are NOT an added
fee; they simply replaces the SCE
supply/generation charges on the
bill.
CPA customers are subject to an
“exit fee” called the PCIA. All CPA
rates/comparisons include this
charge, which changes year to
year.
5
The Power of Choice
Customers are automatically enrolled at the
default rate selected by their community
7
Alhambra
Beverly Hills
Carson
Claremont
Downey
Hawaiian
Gardens
Los Angeles
County
Moorpark
Redondo Beach
Whittier
Agoura Hills
Calabasas
Culver City
Malibu
Manhattan Beach
Ojai
Oxnard
Rolling Hills
Estates
Santa Monica
Sierra Madre
South Pasadena
Thousand Oaks
Ventura County
Ventura
West Hollywood
15
Communities
336,840
Customers
94.6%
Participation Rate
10
Communities
506,149
Customers
96.3%
Participation Rate
7
Communities
154,047
Customers
96.1%
Participation Rate
Arcadia
Camarillo
Hawthorne
Paramount
Simi Valley
Temple City
Westlake Village
Low-income customers in 100% Green
default communities receive 100%
renewable energy at no extra cost.
Rate and Product Trends
CPA generation costs represent ~ 1/3 of a customer bill
SCE delivery costs represent the other 2/3; these costs are identical for CPA and SCE
customers
Cost comparisons fluctuate over time as both SCE and CPA rates change to reflect market
dynamics and the PCIA adjusts annually
CPA had lowest prices in SoCal from 2018 to 2020. In 2021, all products are more
expensive than SCE by between 5% -10%
2022 rates will be more competitive as PCIA decreases and SCE rates are projected to rise
CPA’s Board of Directors typically considers rate changes once a year based on cost-of-
service principles; SCE changes rates multiple times per year
Price differentials of Lean, Clean and 100% Green rates are narrowing
State minimum renewable requirements and SCE GHG performance are increasing
What Lean and Clean look like today could be different from what they look like in 2023
and through the rest of the decade
Power Procurement –Reliable and Renewable
21 long-term contracts signed to
date, totaling 1,613 MW of
renewable energy and 878 MW of
storage
Diverse portfolio reduces more than
one million tons of Greenhouse
Gases (GHG) annually while
improving system reliability
Approximately 2,500 jobs created
Preferences for projects that:
Are in or close to CPA territory
Show high levels of environmental
stewardship
Prioritize workforce development
Bring benefits to disadvantaged
communities
Programs that Benefit the Community
Our Board of Directors has adopted a five-
year strategic plan calling for $200 million in
local investment in customer programs and
project development that benefit
communities in three priority areas:
Resiliency and Demand Management
Building and Transportation Electrification
Local Renewable Energy Procurement
Resilience and Demand Management
Power Ready:Clean backup
power for member agencies’
critical infrastructure at no direct
cost
Power Response: Incentives for
CPA residential and commercial
customers to save energy during
peak hours using automated
devices
Protecting our communities while saving energy and money
11
Electrification
CPA investment of $2.5
million is leveraging
~$20 million in state
and partner funds
Funding for 24/7
publicly accessible EV
chargers
Building electrification
code assistance under
development
Electric Vehicle Charging Station Incentives in LA and Ventura Counties
12
Local renewable energy procurement
Power Share brings 100%
renewable energy and local
economic development to low-
income communities in CPA service
territory
Participating low-income customers
receive a 20% discount on their
monthly electric bills –with no
capital investment, no fees, no home
ownership requirements
SoCal focus on large-scale
development benefits regional
economy
Community Solar and Large Scale SoCal Projects
13
CPA Bill Assistance Programs
Approximately 1/3 of all CPA customers receive bill assistance
14
•$15 million in assistance for residential customers who
were unable to pay utility bills during height of COVIDCA COVID-19 Utility Bill Relief
•Debt-forgiveness program for customers with at least
$500 in past due electricity bills
AMP (Arrearage Management
Plan)
•Reduces energy bills for eligible customers by about
30%
CARE (California Alternate
Rates for energy)
•Reduces electric bills for qualified households by 18%FERA (Family Electric Rate
Assistance)
•Offsets energy bill for critical home medical equipmentMedical Baseline
•Save money and earn credits by using less energy
during times of heavy demand CPA Power Response Incentives
Typical Process to join CPA
15
City Council
Considers
Expressing
Interest in
Joining CPA
CPA
Conducts
Feasibility
Study/ Board
Considers
Inviting New
Member
City Council
Considers
Adopting
Ordinance
Joining JPA
CPA Board
Approves
and Files
Imple-
mentation
Plan by End
of CY
Onboarding
Process/
Public
Outreach
CPA Service
Goes Live
City Does Not Move Forward
City Does
Not Move
Forward
City Cannot
Join JPA
City Does
Not Join
JPA
No
City Waits
Another
Year to
Launch CPA
Service
No No No
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Jan-Jun Jan-Sept Oct-Nov Nov-Dec CY +1 CY +2
Power for Good
Reliable clean energy at
competitive rates
Community and customer choice
Accelerated and cost-effective
emission reductions
Local control and values alignment
Investment in local needs, green
jobs and green economy
CPA brings multiple
opportunities and benefits
16
Clean Power Alliance
Customer service
888-585-3788
customerservice@cleanpoweralliance.org
www.cleanpoweralliance.org
Questions