Uic Strategy

Energy Efficiency & Conservation StrategyCity of Shreveport, Louisiana

December 3, 2009

Gulf Geoexchange and Consulting Services, Inc.in collaboration with

Morgan Hill Sutton & Mitchell Architects, LLCPurdue Center for Regional Development

Consortium for Education Research & Technology of North Louisianaand Chronicles of Numbers, LLC

Table of ContentsEnergy Efficiency & Conservation Strategy

3 Executive Summary

7 Attachment D: Energy Efficiency & Conservation Strategy

17 Appendices

19 Appendix A – Framework Document for the Comprehensive Energy Efficiency & Conservation Plan 35 Appendix B – Aligning Higher Education to support the EECS and CEECP 43 Appendix C – Current Energy Efficiency and Conservation Activities for the Shreveport Community 45 Appendix D – Steering Committee Members 47 Appendix E – Potential/Proposed Working Group Members 53 Appendix F – Meeting Minutes

9 Attachment D: EECBG Strategy19 Attachment B1: Activity Sheets19 Attachment B2: Financial Management Assessment19 Attachment B3: NETL F 451.1 - 1/3 - EECBG19 SF424A: Buget File21 Activity Budget Justifications23 Assurance Document23 SF LLL: Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

3

Executive Summary

The City of Shreveport currently has a number of assets and opportunities related to energy efficiency. The city and surrounding region have a tremendous capacity for energy production, particularly natural gas. With this capacity for energy production comes potential for local innovation and entrepreneurship. At the same time, the City faces significant challenges. With the increased extraction of natural gas, the community will need to understand the full impacts of this production on the environment. The capacity, condition, and maintenance of our sewer/stormwater management facilities is a cause of growing concern. The recent update of EPA standards for air quality places our community in jeopardy of receiving non-attainment status for ozone levels. And, during the difficult economic climate that we are currently facing, the city needs to find new ways to save money, and change spending patterns to achieve more positive impacts.

Through the current process of completing the Shreveport Caddo Master Plan, the City has been reminded of the citizens’ desires to improve quality of life, becoming a “greener,” healthier, more sustainable community.1 While the City of Shreveport’s history of development has burdened it with an auto-centric layout, we now find a unique opportunity to transform our community into a model of sustainability.

To date, the City has pursued a series of independent initiatives to address issues of environmental concern and take advantage of local assets.2 With the funds provided by the US Department of Energy’s Energy Efficiency Community Block Grant (EECBG), the City can advance these efforts and invest in new energy efficient innovations.

With a grant for $1,977,900 from the Department of Energy (DOE), the City of Shreveport initiated a contract for the completion of an Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy (EECS) intended to maximize the leverage of new investments and coordinate with existing energy efficiency endeavors. Through great foresight and leadership, the Mayor and City Council set new precedents by mobilizing to address our most critical environmental concerns and empowering a diverse, citizen-based Steering Committee3 to direct the development of the EECS, setting the priorities for investment.

The City’s energy efficiency consultant, Gulf Geoexchange and Consulting Services, Inc. (GGCS) assembled a project team with expertise to successfully advance Shreveport’s goals for energy efficiency and conservation. Tasks have been divided among project team members according to their area of expertise, and developed with the support of the collective team.

5

The City charged the project team with producing: 1) an Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy report 2) a Framework Document for the future completion of a Comprehensive Energy

Efficiency and Conservation Plan (CEECP). 4

The first task, the EECS report, involved the selection of activities to be funded by the City’s EECBG and required the integral involvement of the steering committee. Through interviews with city government, and the input of the EECS Steering Committee, the project team assembled a full range of potential activities eligible for the City to consider. Then the project team prepared a detailed report explaining and providing a cost/benefit analysis of each potential activity, so that each could be fairly evaluated by the EECS Steering Committee. Benefits considered during this analysis include:

• energy savings• greenhouse gas emissions reductions• additional funding to be leveraged• costs saved• jobs created/retained• long vs. short term impact (i.e. sustainability)• coordination among other EECBG funding recipients• other tangible and intangible benefits

Activities were then selected and prioritized based on this assistance, and are reported in this document. The EECS covers all items required in Attachment D of the EECBG program, listing activities recommended for funding, showing the dollar amounts recommended to be allocated to each project/program, and including a description of the metrics to be used to measure the success of the selected activities. In addition to the EECS, the project team prepared Attachment B1 Activity Sheets, Budget Justification files, and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) forms for all applicable projects/programs to be submitted to the US Department of Energy (DOE).

The second task, requested by the City of Shreveport, was to prepare a CEECP Framework Document. This document, included in Appendix A, details the process for developing and implementing the CEECP. The EECS Steering Committee was also called upon to advise the project team in the preparation of this Framework Document. Committee members were introduced to ‘Strategic Doing’ and participated in a small scale version of the process proposed for the CEECP. The committee provided feedback regarding the proposed process and identified an initial list of stakeholders to be invited to work on the CEECP.

Ultimately, the Steering Committee recommended the CEECP as an activity to be funded through savings leveraged by the EECS. This comprehensive plan will be vital for the ongoing success of the City’s efforts to become energy efficient. It will allow them to build upon the initial investments made through the EECS, continue to pursue additional activities, and provide for ongoing evaluation.

1 See the Shreveport Caddo 2030 Vision Report: www.communicationsmgr.com/projects/1409/docs/VisionPoster-FINAL-LO.pdf2 See Appendix C3 See Appendix D4 See Appendix A

7

Attachment D:Energy Efficiency & Conservation StrategyCity of Shreveport, Louisiana

Prepared byGulf Geoexchange and Consulting Services, Inc.

City of Shreveport, Louisiana◦Gulf Geoexchange and Consulting Services8

Energy Efficiency & Conservation Strategy 9

Attachment D: Energy Efficiency & Conservation Strategy for Units of Local Governments & Indian Tribes

1. Describe your government’s proposed Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy. Provide a concise summary of your measureable goals and objectives, which should be aligned with the defined purposes and eligible activities of the EECBG Program. These goals and objectives should be comprehensive and maximize benefits community-wide. Provide a schedule or timetable for major milestones. If you government has an existing energy, climate, or other related strategy please describe how these strategies relate to each other.

The City of Shreveport invests in long-term community transformation. The Mayor and City Council empowered a diverse, citizen-based Steering Committee, for development of the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy (activity 1). The Committee recommended EECBG funding priorities that increase energy efficiency, reduce energy consumption, cross jurisdictional levels of governance, build community relations, stimulate the economy, and maximize benefits beyond the funding period.

The City of Shreveport’s EECS (activity 1) investments will include both long-term and short- term initiatives that will sustainably transform the environmental, economic, social and cultural future of the Shreveport region. Technical consultants (activity 2) will be used in establishing our baseline, facilitating a comprehensive EEC plan process, structuring projects, and in measuring and verifying progress. The Comprehensive Energy Efficiency and Conservation Plan (CEECP), described in Appendix A, will use a process of community engagement and accountability, “strategic doing.” Independent audits (activity 3) of government buildings will be used to determine the scope and benefits of building improvements. These audits will set the examples for residential and commercial programs to demonstrate benefits and strategies. To implement EEC improvements, financial programs (activity 4) and leveraging strategies will be utilized. Energy efficiency retrofits (activity 5) of government buildings will leverage energy savings from improvements to fund additional retrofits and technical consultant services. To encourage more low and moderate income residential retrofits (activity 5), the City will provide incentives and loan assistance. Success and progress toward our sustainable future will require purposeful education, job training, and outreach programs (activity 6) that will inform our region of the benefits of energy efficiency and conservation. We are aligning the resources of higher education to support the transformation of existing inefficiencies and the emergence of new innovations through a Consortium of 12 regional institutions (CERT). To ensure that renovations and new construction are advancing our EEC goals, the City of Shreveport will adopt and enforce state energy codes (activity 8) currently required for state approvals. To grow EEC businesses, Shreveport will initiate an EEC Business Incubator Program (activity 14) in collaboration with existing incubator programs and higher education resources.

Goals and Objectives

Goal 1: Transform the City of Shreveport’s communities around a long-term energy efficiency and conservation plan process, using an innovative “strategic doing” method.

Objective 1A: Prepare a Comprehensive Energy Efficiency and Conservation Plan, supported by technical services and guided by an invited volunteer Steering Committee.

Objective 1B: Reduce energy consumption by 20% (229,870,208 KwH and 158,965 metric tons GHG reduction) by 2020.


Objective 1C: Develop financial programs to support audits and retrofits through PACE, revolving loans and other alternative financing products.

Objective 1D: Implement retrofits on 40 prioritized government buildings and 1000 low to moderate income households to achieve energy efficiency over the next 36 months. Objective 1E: Adopt state energy efficiency codes.

Milestones (if funds are received January 2010): • Begin planning process for the Comprehensive EEC Plan by establishing

baselines, goals, and metrics; organize focus groups. (1st quarter 2010)• Perform energy audits to form a baseline for energy consumption and

recommended retrofits for all government buildings. (1st quarter 2010 ending mid-year 2011)

• Institute audit programs for residents in conjunction with utility companies and other agencies to get buy-in throughout the community. (1st quarter 2010)

• Launch PACE Bond program, revolving loan program, and alternative financing for retrofits and promote to the City’s residents and businesses. (2nd quarter 2010)

• Retrofit 40 government buildings based on audit recommendations. (2nd quarter 2010 to 2nd quarter 2012)

• Provide workforce training for governmental and residential retrofits and provide advanced training for city inspectors on new energy codes. (2nd quarter 2010)

Goal 2: Cultivate private/public partnerships that develop local and regional assets, develop the workforce, and educate citizens concerning energy efficiency and conservation.

Objective 2A: Provide technical services to support a planned, sustainable program of improvements and measures beyond the 3-year EECS proposal. The programs will 1.) update and complete a baseline of current EEC initiatives, city energy consumption and emissions; 2.) develop plans and programs for a Bicycle/Pedestrian Master Plan, Urban Agriculture, and Urban Forestry; 3.) preparation of smart growth and energy efficiency regulations; and 4.) plan for contingency funding to advance other EEC programs that emerge from the comprehensive EEC plan..

Objective 2B: Establish a diverse education and outreach program, including a web-based information clearinghouse, cooperative strategies with local utilities and media, and cultivate K-12, higher education and private sector partnerships.

Objective 2C: Establish a business incubator program. Milestones (if funds are received January 2010):

• Initiate “strategic doing” method to begin the proposed planning processes. (1st quarter 2010)

• Develop public website for focus areas and activities. (1st quarter 2010)• Collaborate with higher education and private sector on K-12 energy

education demonstration project. (1st quarter 2010)• Employ incubator director. (1st quarter 2011)• Collaborate with existing regional incubators and higher education to support

start-up companies. (1st quarter 2010)


The City of Shreveport is committed to energy efficiency and conservation. To date the City and Parish (county) have pursued a series of independent initiatives, although not part of a comprehensive strategy, to address issues of environmental and energy concerns. The City’s proposed EECS strategy, and subsequent comprehensive energy efficiency and conservation planning (CEECP), will build on and sustain these current efforts:

• Energy Efficiency upgrades to 33 City Buildings in 2004;• Landfill Methane Recapture for use by a local General Motors Assembly Plant;• Curbside Recycling Program;• Household hazardous waste collection Program;• Sewerage Sludge 100% Recycling;• Recycling of Sewerage Effluent for Industrial Use ;• Ozone Abatement Program;• Environmental training demonstration project, recent abatement of a 144,000

sq. ft. high rise Brownfield site using an EPA revolving loan program;• Bio-diesel Fuel Blend to reduce fossil fuel use—City, Caddo Parish and Caddo

Parish Schools; • Hybrid Electric Vehicles – SporTran (City transit authority) is using 2 hybrid

electric buses in their fleet, and the city is adding 3 hybrid electric cars;• Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) – SporTran is phasing in CNG for the bus

transit fleet, with five on order; • Intelligent Transportation System – The City is installing in phases an

intelligent traffic signalization system; and• Vehicle Pollution Control – Caddo Parish and Caddo Parish Schools.

In related action, the City and Caddo Parish jointly funded the development of a Master Plan for 2010-2030 and appointed a Community Advisory Group to oversee the plan’s development. To date, 18 community forums, neighborhood sessions, and workshops have documented citizens’ desire to improve quality of life and a “greener,” healthier, more sustainable community.

2. Describe your government’s proposed implementation plan for the use of EECBG Program funds to assist you in achieving the goals and objectives outlined in the strategy described in question #1. Your description should include a summary of the activities submitted on your activity worksheets, and how each activity supports one or more of your strategy’s goals/objectives.

The following is a list of the City of Shreveport’s proposed activities which will implement the City’s goals and objectives outlined in Question 1:

Activity 1. Energy Efficiency & Conservation (EEC) Strategy: Consultant prepared strategy and Comprehensive EEC Plan guided by an invited volunteer steering committee. (Funds already DOE approved and committed.) Allocation: $250,000

Activity 2. Technical Consulting Services: To implement the programs and action items delineated in the EECS, the City of Shreveport proposes to continue the services of the technical consultant. This will assist the City not only to meet our goal of a 20% reduction in energy use, but provide a planned, sustainable program of improvements and measures to serve us well beyond the three-year time period of the EECS. Among those areas of technical services needs are:

1) to update and complete a baseline of current EEC initiatives and city energy consumption and GHG emissions;


2) to prepare a Comprehensive Energy Efficiency and Conservation Plan; 3) to develop a Bicycle/Pedestrian Master Plan; 4) to develop Urban Agriculture/Forestry Plans and Programs; and 5) to prepare smart growth and energy efficiency development regulations; 6) planning contingency and funding to prepare additional planning

activities required to advance other EEC programs that emerge from the comprehensive EEC Plan.

The process of “strategic doing” incorporated into the CEECP process will allow broader community and technical participation, more efficient alignment of energy and energy-related assets, faster results and greater accountability. Proposed allocation: $150,000. Additionally, $1,550,000 will be allocated for technical consulting services from the funds leveraged in the EECBG Energy Efficiency Retrofit Program.

Activity 3. Residential and Commercial Buildings Audits: The City in 2004 audited 33 public buildings and performed energy efficiency retrofits that over four years resulted in $500,000 in savings, a reduction of 1000, KwH/mo., a drop in peak demand and 5t4 million fewer pounds of GHG emissions. The City proposes to allocate $100,000 to re-audit its public buildings and facilities with the goal of further reducing energy usage by 20%.

In addition to funding audits on public buildings, the City proposes to allocate $200,000 for energy audits on residential housing. A portion of the $200,000 allocation will be used to promote, educate and inform residents of the benefits of an audit and the energy cost savings and financing available to retrofit their homes. The City will work with local utility companies and/or other agencies to cover the cost of the audits, if possible. The goal is for audits to be performed on approximately 8,000 residences, or 10% of Shreveport’s housing stock. Proposed allocation: $300,000.

Activity 4. Financial Incentive Program: The City proposes to allocate $390,000 to develop financial programs: 1) establish a PACE Bond Program; 2) establish a local, energy revolving loan fund; 3) look for other alternative financing products to ensure access to conservation and renewable energy for all of the city’s residences and businesses; coordinate also with the State Energy Plan. Proposed allocation: $390,000.

Activity 5. Energy Efficiency Retrofits: Based on the public buildings audits, the City will develop a list of proposed retrofit improvements prioritized based on energy and GHG emission savings, cost, timing/phasing and ease of implementation. From this list, the City proposes to use $20,000,000 of anticipated funding from the sale of Clean Renewable Energy bonds and/or Qualified Energy Conservation Bonds to install energy efficiency measures on its public buildings, for example, the retrofit of Government Plaza. The City also proposes to assist low- and moderate-income households with securing financing for energy efficiency retrofits. Financing mechanisms include the PACE Bond Program and local energy revolving loan program, HERO Program and the State’s Weatherization Assistance Program. Proposed allocation: $510,000.

Activity 6. Energy Efficiency and Conservation Programs: The City proposes to develop an array of education and outreach strategies to reach our diverse citizenry: 1) web-based information clearing house to serve as a portal for energy efficiency and conservation information and program access (the site will also serve as an access point for the “strategic doing” groups and their initiatives, similar to the web2.0 site used by the EECS Steering


committee); 2) employ a cooperative strategy using local utilities, media, Consortium for Education, Research and Technology of N LA (CERT) and others to educate the public about existing and new energy efficiency programs; and 3) collaborate with a business/education partnership in piloting four summer energy camps, co-sponsored by energy companies, for high school students on college campuses. Proposed allocation: $100,000.

Activity 8. Codes and Inspections: The City proposes to upgrade its current building code by adopting the Louisiana Energy Efficiency Building Code. To implement and enforce the new code, the City proposes the following actions: 1) provide advanced training for city inspectors on the new Energy Efficiency Building Code and current practices in the field; 2) cover the costs of training for city inspectors to become Home Energy Rebate Option (HERO) Energy Raters to facilitate/expedite the HERO program; 3) upgrade code books, permitting forms, and enforcement tools, including their public distribution; and 4) acquire energy efficiency permitting software. Proposed allocation: $100,000.

Activity 14. Other EEC Initiatives: The City will collaborate with CERT, Southern University of Shreveport’s Small Business Incubator, Louisiana Tech’s Small Business Incubator, and LSU-Shreveport’s Small Business Development Center to establish an Energy Efficiency Incubator Program. The allocation of $177,900 will provide initial funding for a program director for 3 years, to be housed at a new City energy department or as part of the CERT Sustainability Trust. The incubator program will work with existing regional incubators and higher education institutions in supporting start-up companies that can emerge from the audit, retrofit and weatherization programs or other EECP initiatives. Proposed allocation: $177,900.

3. Describe how your government is taking into account the proposed implementation plans and activities for use of funds by adjacent units of local government that are grant recipients under the Program.

The Comprehensive EEC plan process will include region support of higher education through CERT and involvement from the City, Parish, and school systems. The City of Shreveport and Caddo Parish are sharing in the cost of energy efficiency upgrades to the Government Plaza building. The City’s Workforce Investment Board #71 will collaborate with the regional 10-parish (county) WIB #70 and the CERT (the higher education consortium) on expanding training and certification for energy-related jobs.

The City of Shreveport and Technical Consultant Team will collaborate with non-profit 501(c)3 Community Renewal International in the process of planning the Center for Community Renewal as a LEED platinum, net zero energy, and carbon neutral in downtown Shreveport’s commercial historic district. The 270,000 square foot facility will include renovation of the Petroleum Tower (a recently abated Brownfield site) and an adjacent new seven-story building.

The City will also collaborate also with Caddo Parish (county) on a joint application for federal funds to retrofit the Government Plaza Building that house administrative functions for both government bodies.

4. Describe how your government will coordinate and share information with the state in which you are located regarding activities carried out with grant funds to maximize energy efficiency and conservation benefits.

The City will communicate with the State in the process of upgrading its current building code by adopting the Louisiana Energy Efficiency Building Code. To implement and enforce


the new code, the City proposes to partner with both the State and higher education institutions to provide advanced training for city inspectors on the new Energy Efficiency Building Code and current practices in the field. The City envisions collaborating with business and government leaders at regional and statewide workshops and conferences, sharing information networks and databases, and contributing to the body of collective knowledge and best practices in energy measures and savings. The City will share with the State a copy of the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy, once it has been approved by the U.S. Department of Energy, and will also forward copies of their quarterly reports, success stories and best practices gleaned from the EECS grant funds.

5. Describe how this plan has been designed to ensure that it sustains benefits beyond the EECBG funding period.

Shreveport’s joint strategies—the creation of a project team and the integral involvement of the citizen-based Steering Committee in evaluating and selecting projects and programs based on cost/benefit analysis—combine to ensure benefits beyond the project period. The project team modeled the “strategic doing” process in crafting a Framework Document for the completion of a Comprehensive Energy Efficiency and Conservation Plan.

These innovative City of Shreveport strategies created with EECS funds will yield benefits sustainable into future generations:

• The creation of a network of stakeholders to provide energy savings audits, installations, awareness, educational outreach and collaboration with public-private partnerships;

• Creating media outreach and retail awareness programs to encourage energy savings;

• Promoting positive media coverage of energy savings, promoting educational material for schools, businesses and government, and expanding citizen awareness of energy use and greenhouse gas emissions;

• Developing of information and distribution systems to encourage energy savings;• Promoting volunteer organizations that “save energy” through efforts like

community gardens, summer energy camps, recycling and biking-walking events;• Providing greater awareness at the personal, residential, commercial and

industrial level of the long-term benefits of energy savings investments and opportunities for leveraging through the successes that Shreveport displays in the implementation of the EECBG program;

• Educating the public about existing opportunities for leveraging, as stakeholders and private entities see; Development of a verifiable data collection system to measure energy savings in KwH and CCF by building type, energy cost savings, number of buildings, dollars spent and leveraged, building square footage, and audits performed and jobs created;

• Annual reporting on progress of the City to achieve EEC goals and recommend adjustments;

• Energy reductions from retrofits will be sustained by a maintenance and operating program that requires “retro-commissioning” to assure optimal equipment performance and real-time energy tracking.

6. The President has made it clear that every taxpayer dollar spent on our economic recovery must be subject to unprecedented levels of transparency and accountability. Describe the auditing or monitoring procedures


currently in place or that will be in place (by what date), to ensure funds are used for authorized purposes and every step is taken to prevent instances of fraud, waste, error, and abuse.

Shreveport’s Administration Staff and Technical Consultant Team are experienced in regulatory requirements for measurement and verification and will develop an implementation process to assure transparency and accountability. Elements of that process include:

• Written commitments by all participants of measurement and verification requirements, with third-party input.

• Written contracts and memoranda of understanding with vendors, retailers and partnering organizations who provide resources capable of being leveraged.

• On-site or in-home inspection of installed measures goal of 10% of EECBG program participants.

• Verification of energy savings of all installed measures from quarterly reports that show energy savings compared to our baseline and our goals approved by the City Department of Operational Services or the proposed City Energy Department.

• Energy savings tracked on a project-by-project basis and then aggregated by sector. Individual project results verified by inspection. Results continually evaluated to track performance and program implementation, and the program modified as necessary to meet project goals and reporting requirements. Data collected consist of but not limited to the energy savings in KwH, by building type, energy cost savings, number of buildings, dollars spent and leveraged, building square footage, audits performed and jobs created.

• Designation of a single-point employee/contractor contact to handle any and all participant complaints, criticisms or feedback.

• Publication of results at City’s website, and also through local media on a monthly, quarterly and annual basis.

City funds for the project will be managed by the City Department of Operational Services.

17

AppendicesEnergy Efficiency & Conservation StrategyCity of Shreveport, Louisiana

Appendix A – Framework Document for the Comprehensive Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy

Appendix B – Aligning Higher Education to support the EECS and CEECPAppendix C – Current Energy Efficiency and Conservation Activities for the

Shreveport CommunityAppendix D – Steering Committee MembersAppendix E – List of Potential/Proposed Working Group MembersAppendix F – EECS Steering Committee Meeting Minutes

19

Appendix A: Framework Document for the Comprehensive Energy Efficiency & Conservation PlanCity of Shreveport, Louisiana

Prepared byMorgan Hill Sutton & Mitchell Architects, LLCand Purdue Center for Regional Development

City of Shreveport, Louisiana ◦ MHSM Architects ◦ Purdue Center for Regional Development20

Framework Document for the Comprehensive Energy Efficiency & Conservation Plan 21

1.0 Purpose

Following the implementation of the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy (EECS), the City of Shreveport will conduct a Comprehensive Energy Efficiency and Conservation Plan (CEECP) to guide long term decision-making and investment. To position ourselves as a front runner in achieving the objectives outlined in the Energy Efficiency Community Block Grant (EECBG), the City of Shreveport must go beyond minimum requirements to pursue innovation and transformation. Reaching higher will allow the City to maximize long term benefits and develop a competitive advantage when applying for future funding. The CEECP will build upon the initial investments identified EECS, chart the course for future investments, and develop a long term strategy for Shreveport to become more energy efficient.

The CEECP will implement a process that empowers citizens, enabling many people to make meaningful contributions toward addressing complex community issues. The process used will generate new ideas and align existing resources around innovation. The outcomes of such a process will be new businesses, increased job opportunities, and improved quality of life.

1.1 Goals and Objectives

The CEECP will strive to provide a clear direction for achieving:

• job creation• energy savings• reduction of greenhouse gas emissions• provident use of local resources• renewable energy production• maximized leveraging of funds

In addition to fulfilling these initial goals as outlined by the Department of Energy and the City of Shreveport for the EECS, the CEECP will:

• serve as a means for the City to pursue future funding from state and federal sources• provide a framework for regional collaboration among municipal and parish governments• cultivate local capacity, leadership, advocacy, and innovation

1.2 Achieving Balanced Sustainability

As our community works to improve its energy efficiency, it will be important to evaluate our opportunities, not only from an environmental and economic point of view, but also from a social and cultural perspective. We have the ability to make decisions that can save money, generate income, improve environmental quality, conserve local resources, support and enhance cultural and heritage resources, and positively impact all citizens in the greater Shreveport region. Ultimately, the CEECP will aim to maximize benefits according to a quadruple bottom line (Fig. 1):

• environmental quality• economic prosperity• social equity1

• cultural vitality2


These multiple bottom lines should guide the indicators/metrics that will be used to determine preferred initiatives and evaluate progress during the implementation. A sustainable plan will successfully balance the indicators on this quadruple bottom line, offering a suite of solutions to serve all aspects of our community.

1.3 Building Local Capacity Through Strategic Doing

The CEECP will identify and support local assets that can help the City of Shreveport become more energy efficient. The plan will cultivate open networks to link and leverage these local assets through a process called ‘strategic doing.’ This innovative approach represents a shift from the slow process of traditional strategic planning to fast cycles of strategic doing. John McCann discusses the need for this shift in his essay on “Leadership as Creativity:”

Henry Mintzburg, author of The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning and the insightful article “Crafting Strategy” says, “The future is an abstraction...it never arrives.” It is always “out yonder.” Planning, according to Mintzburg, can only accomplish two objectives: it gives us an image of the future, and; allows us to make decisions about actions we take now that will impact that future when it arrives. Thinking (planning) and acting (doing) are inseparable. Formal planning -- especially that type typically labeled “strategic” (a word widely used yet seldom defined) -- can put too much distance between these two.

So where can creativity, ambiguity, tension, and decisiveness come together in a healthy environment that regards the integrity of the individual and the value of the organization equally? This is accomplished only through dialogue.3

Strategic doing is a civic discipline to guide open innovation. It is a methodology for productive dialogue, building on existing assets, energy, and excitement to empower community members and organizations to take decisive action. As a result, participants in Strategic Doing become fully engaged in the process and align to accomplish meaningful work.

Without a coherent strategy, individuals act independently, often resulting in counterproductivity. With strategic planning, a course of action is recommended, but may fail to result in unified

Environmental Quality Economic Prosperity

Cultural VitalitySocial Equity

Unbalanced Indicators

Balanced QuadrupleBottom Line

Fig. 1: Balanced Sustainability


activity. The process is often controlled by a handful of people, and if the process is weak, the commitment to implementation withers quickly. On the contrary, with strategic doing, plans and action synchronize, allowing for frequent feedback, learning, and realignment throughout the process. (Fig. 2)

Strategic doing uses an open network model. Open networks offer unique advantages and will provide the structure for progress and innovation in our modern economy. Networked processes are more fluid, adaptable, and flexible. They combine open participation and leadership direction. And, we find that as our network of partners grows, our opportunities multiply and we generate new assets and unforeseen innovation.

In order for strategic doing to work, we must create trusted civic spaces, develop new leadership characteristics, and promote civility. All partners decide to exhibit characteristics and behaviors that enable productive dialogue: genuine curiosity, appreciative inquiry, transparency, joint accountability, transformative thinking, commitment to engage, participation to contribute, active listening and learning, collaboration, and mutual respect. (Fig. 3)

Fig. 2: Strategic Planning vs. Strategic Doing

Fig. 3: Creating Partnerships to Link & Leverage Our Assets

NeighborhoodsPublic Sector

Transportation/ Health Advocates

Community Based Organizations

Higher Education

Collaborative Initiatives

Energy Efficiency/ Conservation Advocates

Business/Industry

Strategic DoingStrategic Planning

Fast, experimental

Cyclical

Inexpensive

Short time horizon

Monthly revisions

Networks

Link and leverage

Horizontally connect

Relationships

Slow, deliberate

Linear

Expensive

Long time horizon

Annual revisions

Hierarchies

Command and Control

Vertically connect

Transactions


Fig. 4: Increasing Our Prosperity as we Build Trust and Collaboration

Information & Leadership

Opportunity Zone

Information & Leadership

Prosperity

Productivity

Innovation

Collaboration

Trusted relationships create resiliency. Trust emerges when we behave in ways that build trust and mutual respect. As we work together in a trusted space, we accomplish more. We attract new partners and assets. As the number of trusted relationships increases, the value of the network goes up. More opportunities arise with stronger networks. (Fig. 4)

Leaders in the Strategic Doing process guide positive conversations and develop others’ capacity to lead. Ultimately, leadership and work are shared responsibilities, distributed within the group.

Competitive communities are those that break down silos, link, and leverage their assets quickly. Strategic doing will enable the City of Shreveport to accomplish these goals and meet the complex challenges to create deep transformation within our community. Collaboration leads to innovation. Innovation improves our productivity and our prosperity. (Fig. 4)

Strategic Doing answers four major questions (Fig. 5):

What could we do? What are our assets and how can we link/leverage them to uncover opportunities and develop new ideas?

What should we do? What outcomes do we want most to achieve? How can we get there?

What will we do? What commitments are required to accomplish our outcomes?

How will we learn? When and how will we come back together to assess our progress and revise our strategy?


This cycle of conversations is frequent, ongoing, and supports transparent accountability. Groups come together every 30-60 days. The goal is to articulate a clear direction and define initiatives that align with this direction. Leadership keeps people focused and the process open. Thick and trusted networks evolve that help us learn, make decisions, and act more quickly.

Learn/Adjust

Explore/Mine

Focus/Align

Commit/Act

Fig. 5: The Strategic Doing Cycle

Notes:1 Rose, Kalima and Julie Silas. 2001. Achieving Equity through Smart Growth: Perspectives from Philanthropy. PolicyLink and The Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities.

2002. Promoting Regional Equity. PolicyLink and The Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities.

2 Jackson, Maria Rosario, Florence Kabwasa-Green, and Joaquin Herranz. 2006. Cultural Vitality in Communities: Interpretation and Indicators. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.

Borrup, Tom. 2006. The Creative Community Builder’s Handbook: How to Transform Communities Using Local Assets, Art, and Culture. St. Paul, Minnesota: Fieldstone Alliance.

3 McCann, John M. 2009. Leadership As Creativity: Finding the Opportunity Hidden Within Decision Making and Dialogue. Resources, Lessons Learned. National Endowment for the Arts. http://arts.endow.gov/resources/Lessons/MCCANN2.HTML


2.0 Plan Participants

2.1 Public

The CEECP should be shaped around the vision of the Citizens of Shreveport, and build on the values identified by the Shreveport Caddo Master Plan, local advocacy groups, and other public forums.1 All citizens in Shreveport will be encouraged to play an active part as our community strives to become more energy independent.

Roles:Seek information, education, and trainingVoice opinions that will guide other participantsConserve energy within our own sphereLive providentlyExplore opportunities for new business creation

2.2 Government

Elected officials and department heads provide leadership, shaping the process to ensure the completion and implementation of the CEECP.

Roles:Define the timeframe and jurisdictional area of the planManage the project teamAdopt the planAllocate and spend the funds needed to implement the planEvaluate progressReport on evaluationsAmend the plan over time as needed

2.3 Steering Committee

The steering committee formed in Phase I of the EECS will be invited to extend their involvement as stewards over the plan process and serve on each of the working groups. As jurisdictional boundaries are determined and partnerships are formed, others may be invited to join the steering committee. 2

Building Energy E�ciency

Clean & Renewable Energy Sources

Reduction of Waste & Pollution

Energy Education/Outreach

Transportation & Land Use Alternatives

Working Groups

Citi

zens

of S

hrev

epor

t

Green Workforce/Business Incentives

• Steering Committee• Project Team

• Government

Core Group

Fig. 6: Plan Participants


Roles:Oversee the plan processGuide and direct the project teamProvide leadership and advocacy in working groupsRecommend the plan and its initiatives to government leaders for adoption/implementation

2.4 Project Team

The project team, led by Gulf Geoexchange and Consulting Services, Inc. (GGCS), is currently comprised of Morgan Hill Sutton & Mitchell Architects, LLC (MHSM), Consortium for Education Research and Technology of North Louisiana (CERT), Purdue Center for Regional Development, and Chronicles of Numbers, LLC.

Roles:Inventory potential working group members/stakeholdersTeach ‘strategic doing’ and provide technical assistance to the working groupsProvide a web 2.0 workspace for working groups and a public interfaceProvide expertise and analysis of best practices and case studies within the six focus areasConvene and facilitate working groups every 30-60 days Formalize the ideas generated by the working groups into a plan documentSet metrics for baseline, produce target projections and provide evaluation for initiativesStructure GIS database and procedures for monitoring trendsProvide a format and procedures for regular evaluation and reporting

2.5 Working Groups

A series of working groups will be organized around focus areas, described in section 3.0 of this report. Each working group will engage an open network of public and private sector stakeholders. 3

Roles:Determine goals and principlesSet targetsPublicize and promote the planGenerate potential initiativesSelect preferred initiativesDevelop prioritized/phased implementation strategyIdentify obstacles to implementation and describe strategies to remove obstaclesReview the planAdvise the project teamOversee implementationEvaluate and report progress on initiatives

1 Shreveport Caddo 2030 Vision Report: www.communicationsmgr.com/projects/1409/docs/VisionPoster-FINAL-LO.pdf2 See Appendix D3 See Appendix E


3.0 Plan Focus Areas

The CEECP will be structured around seven major focus areas that cover all of the eligible activities outlined for the EECBG. (Fig. 7) While each of these focus areas are strongly interrelated, they also serve as major categories for our work during the planning process. Working groups will be formed around each of these focus areas and, from these working group discussions, specific initiatives will emerge.

3.1 Building Energy Efficiency

Eligible activities within the Building Energy Efficiency focus area include energy audits for commercial, residential, industrial, governmental, and non-profit buildings, financial incentive programs, revised building codes/inspections, and energy efficiency retrofits. 3.2 Clean and Renewable Energy Sources

Eligible activities within the Clean and Renewable Energy Sources focus area include on-site renewable energy generation, energy distribution technology, and the reduction/capture of methane and other greenhouse gases. 3.3 Reduction of Waste and Pollution

Eligible activities within the Clean and Renewable Energy Sources focus area include recycling programs, activities that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and watershed management. 3.4 Transportation and Land Use Alternatives

The Transportation and Land Use Alternatives focus area covers activities related to energy conservation in transportation and patterns of land use. It will explore the application of Smart Growth principles in our community and look for opportunities to expand urban agriculture and urban forestry within the city. 3.5 Green Workforce/Business Incentives

The Green Workforce/Business Incentives focus area explores economic and workforce development opportunities related to all other focus areas to find opportunities for the “greening” of occupations, project increased demand, enhance skills, and identify new and emerging occupations. 3.6 Energy Education/Outreach

The Energy Education/Outreach focus area explores methods for transforming the way our community thinks about energy efficiency and conservation, sharing information and promoting any of the projects above. It will emphasize the engagement of K-12 and higher education in collaborative efforts around green workforce training and curricula.

3.7 Other

This focus area is for any innovations that do not fit in the other six categories. The Department of Energy has included ‘other’ as an eligible activity and encourages the innovation of energy efficiency and conservation strategies not included in the listed eligible activities.


Fig. 7: EECBG Eligible Activities

Source: US Department of Energy, www.eecbg.energy.gov/solutioncenter/eligibleactivities/default.html


4.0 Plan Process

The process for developing the CEECP will involve seven stages:

1. Plan Initiation2. Baseline3. Target4. Opportunities/Options5. Preferred Action Plan6. Implementation and Evaluation7. Plan Review and Adoption

‘Strategic doing’ will guide the work during each stage of development. Participants will organize themselves in working groups to accomplish a set of specific initiatives. (Fig. 8) They will use cycles of strategic doing to cross-pollinate ideas and link/leverage assets among the various working groups.

Core Group

Working Groups

Initiatives

Fig. 8: Managing Strategic Doing

Meet

Work

MeetMeet

Work

Meet

Working Groups convene Initiatives

The Core Group convenes Working Groups30-60 days

Fig. 9: The Pattern of the Strategic Doing Process

This cycle of conversations will be frequent, ongoing, and will support transparent accountability. Participants will leave each conversation with commitments, break off to accomplish tasks, and reconvene to report and then determine the next set of tasks. Progress on individual initiatives will be regularly reported to their respective working group, and working groups will come together every 30-60 days. (Fig. 9) Web 2.0 tools will provide a trusted space for participants to continue conversations, share ideas, and to report on their work, allowing for greater collaboration, transparency and accountability.


Stage 1. Plan InitiationDuring the first stage, the groundwork will be laid for the plan. Stakeholders will be engaged and organized. The process will be prepared and initiated.

ActivitiesCultivate partnerships with institutions of higher education, state and neighboring local

governments, private sector industry, and community based organizationsReengage steering committee established during the EECSDefine timeframe and jurisdictional area covered by planAssemble working groups around each focus area to include members of the steering committeeTeach strategic doingInitiate Web 2.0 tools to create a collaborative space for working groupsEstablish consensus on goals and principles

DeliverablesMap of jurisdictional area covered by planTimeline for plan process Training materials for strategic doing workshopWeb 2.0 site with public interface and work space for focus area groupsPresentation/report describing goals and principles

Stage 2. Baseline To produce a baseline, data will be gathered and analyzed to provide a picture of our community’s current energy use and carbon footprint. Projections will be made to describe where we will be in the future if we follow a “business as usual” scenario.

ActivitiesEstablish indicators and metrics linked to goals/principlesCollect and analyze dataEstablish baseline report of the analysisProduce forecasts and projections

DeliverablesGIS layers and analysis mapping for spatially relevant indicatorsPublished presentation/report describing current indicator values, forecasts, and projections

Stage 3. TargetThe target will provide a description of where we want to be, in terms of energy efficiency and conservation, by our target date. It will define our broader desired outcomes, and allow us to understand our end goal.

ActivitiesDetermine targetsSeek consensus and approval for targets

DeliverablesPublished presentation/report identifying the targetsPromotional materials, public service announcementsFormally adopted resolution


Stage 4. Opportunities/Options During Stage 4, we will address the following questions: What could we do to improve our energy efficiency and conservation? What plans are already underway? What are other communities doing? How could we be innovative?

ActivitiesCompile best practicesGenerate potential projects/initiatives

DeliverablesPublished presentation/report identifying best practices for each focus area (case studies)Published presentation/report describing and analyzing initiatives

Stage 5. Preferred Action Plan During Stage 5, We will address the following questions: What should we do? What actions are going to be most successful in achieving our goals? What actions are most leverageable, sustainable, and feasible?

ActivitiesEvaluate initiatives based on metrics, sustainability, and feasibilitySelect and prioritize preferred initiativesIdentify funding strategies

DeliverablesPublished presentation/report outlining the preferred initiatives with funding strategies

Stage 6. Implementation and Evaluation During Stage 6, We will address the following questions: What will we do? How should we prioritize actions? What preparations need to be made to accomplish these actions? Who will do what, when, and for how much? How will we fund our initiatives?

Plan Review & Adoption

Plan Initiation

EstablishBaseline

SetTarget

ExploreOpportunities

Preferred Action Plan

Implementation & Evaluation

1.0

Fig. 10: The CEECP Process

Fig. 11: The EECS and CEECP Processes

t

TCEECP version 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3

EECS 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 3 YearsShort Term

Long Term


1.1 1.2 Target

How will we evaluate our progress? During this stage, we will create a reporting system to evaluate and update the plan as needed. Who will gather data and prepare reports? Who will receive those reports? How will the plan be adjusted over time to achieve results?

ActivitiesDevelop a prioritized/phased implementation strategy for each initiativeIdentify policies and/or administrative actions adopted or needed to support plan implementationIdentify obstacles to implementation and describe strategies to remove obstaclesEstablish commitments for implementationEstablish mechanisms for ongoing evaluation, accountability, and adaptation (reporting system)

DeliverablesPublished implementation guidebook: the guidebook will include information about the

resources and partnerships required to achieve the plan’s goals; it will detail the prioritized steps to take; it will describe who will do what, when, and how much it will cost.

Stage 7. Plan Review and AdoptionThe process used during Phase I for completing and implementing the EECS is a small scale demonstration of the process proposed for Phase II the Comprehensive Energy Efficiency and Conservation Plan. Both are intended to go through a cycle of reviews to allow for amendment and improvement over time. (Fig. 11)

During this stage, the initial version of the plan would be adopted, subject to change over time as needed. Ultimately, progress evaluated on each initiative will be monitored and adjusted to allow us to achieve or surpass our target goal. (Fig. 12)

ActivitiesReview preliminary and final drafts of the Comprehensive Energy Efficiency & Conservation Plan

DeliverablesPreliminary and final draft of the Comprehensive Energy Efficiency & Conservation Plan

Baseline

Target

Progress on Initiatives provide benchmarks for achieving the Target Goal

Milestones gage our progress on each Initiative

Fig. 12: Evaluating Our Progress

35

Appendix B: Aligning Higher Education to support the Energy Efficiency & Conservation Strategy and Comprehensive Energy Efficiency & Conservation Plan

Prepared by the Consortium for Education, Research & Technologyof North Louisiana

City of Shreveport, Louisiana ◦ Consortium for Education Research & Technology of North Louisiana36

Aligning Higher Education to Support the EECS and CEECP 37

The Consortium for Education, Research & Technology of North Louisiana (CERT) has been retained by Gulf Geoexchange and Consulting Services, Inc. in partnership with the City of Shreveport and serves on the Project Team in three key roles to support the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy (EECS):

• Identify and align the combined resources of 12 higher education member institutions across North Louisiana to focus on research and development, workforce development and K-12/community outreach;

• Serve a “link and leverage” role to others across existing silos—education, government, nonprofits, businesses, funding sources and others—who can help with the process (e.g. baseline, reporting, GIS); and

• Help inform the work group, creating common knowledge base (e.g., best practices, analyses) to explore new educational models to use in the process.

As part of the Project Team, CERT will help manage the networks, identify funding and track initiatives.

Higher education resources. CERT Chancellors/Presidents (or their designees) for the past year have committed to learning the Strategic Doing process and to aligning their resources on multiple, innovative initiatives or projects. CERT has surveyed member institutions to identify current “energy systems” research projects, grants, and members of college faculties who have expertise and new technologies to contribute in one or more of the six EECS focus areas:

• Building Energy Efficiency• Clean and Renewable Energy Sources• Reduction of Waste and Pollution• Transportation and Land Use Alternatives• Green Workforce/ Business Incentives• Energy Education/ Outreach

Database. CERT is constructing a database of both academic and research and development resources of the 12 member institutions across the region. Examples include a Louisiana Tech University research project, “Nanoparticle Incorporated Heterogeneous Catalyst System for Biodiesel Production” and an LSU-Shreveport Institute of Human Services & Public Policy that can assist the Project Team in designing metrics and indicators.

“Green Jobs” framework. CERT will convene a work group of higher education and k-12 educators to develop a plan framework for green jobs. CERT surveyed the U.S. Department of Labor February 2009 report, “Greening of the World of Work: Implications for O*NET-SOC and New and Emerging Occupations.” DOL urges moving beyond simply applying a broad label such as “green jobs,” to identify the “greening of occupations” in three categories, and project increased demand:

• Green increased demand occupations—an increase in the employment demand for an existing occupations

• Green enhanced skills occupations—a significant change to the work and worker requirements of an existing occupation; i.e., tasks, skills, knowledge and credentials have been altered, and

• Green new and emerging (N&E) occupations—impact is sufficient to create the need for unique work and worker requirements; the new occupation could be entirely novel or “born” from an existing occupation.


Through a multi-stage research and screening process that included a review of existing literature, identification and compiling of job titles, review and sorting of job titles, and clustering of job titles into 12 sector occupational sectors, the National Center for O*NET Development identified 64 “green increased demand,” 60 “green enhanced skills,” and 91 “new and emerging occupations.” The following matrix, excerpted from “A Green Growing Economy: Opportunities of Tomorrow,” by Juliet P. Scarpa (May 13, 2009), shows the potential for green jobs across sectors:

Industry Sector Definition Requirements Sample Occupations

Green Building/ Sustainable/ Integrated Design Traditional Industry Sectors; Manufacturing; Construction; Utilities

The design and construction of environmentally sustainable and energy efficient buildings

Manufacturing building materials; planning, design and construction

Green architects; HVAC workers; Carpenters; Plumbers; Welders; Electricians; Sheet-metal workers; Cement masons; Skilled machine operators

Energy EfficiencyTraditional Industry Sectors: Manufacturing; Construction; Utilities

The retrofitting of existing building infrastructure using healthy and more resource-efficient models of construction, renovation, operation, maintenance, and demolition.

Auditing energy use in existing buildings; Manufacturing materials and devices; Installing efficient lighting and heating systems; Installing insulation, windows and appliances; Production of appropriate technologies (fluorescent lights, water filtration systems, permeable concretes, solar panels, etc.); Maintenance & operation

Electricians; Technicians; Insulation workers; Equipment and installation specialist (solar panel installation); Home weatherizing; Energy Auditors

Renewable Energy (Solar/PV, Wind Energy, Geothermal, Hydro/Marine)Traditional Industry Sectors: Utilities

The use of natural resources (other than Biomass) for energy which are naturally replinishable

Manufacturing parts; Assembly & Installation of solar panels/ finished heating systems; Constructing wind farms; Operating and maintaining wind turbines; repairing systems; Marketing and selling systems to consumers

Solar panel installer; Steelworkers

Recycling/ Waste Management/ Removal Traditional Industry Sectors: Manufacturing; Utilities; Technology

The collection, treatment, and disposal or reuse of waste materials

Composting; Materials reuse and recycling; Pollution Control; Water Conservation & treatment; Components, Manufacturing & Distribution/Enabling Technology; Environmental Consulting, Protection & Remediation

Recycling technician; Waste treatment operators; Sustainability coordinator; Bio-mimicry engineer; Environmental Science and protection technician

Industry Sector Definition Requirements Sample Occupations


Smart Grid/ Smart EnergyTraditional Industry Sectors: Manufacturing; Utilities

Auto-balancing, self-monitoring power grid that accepts any source of fuel and transforms it into a consumer’s optimal renewable energy usage with minimal human intervention

Manufacturing & Installation, Distributing and marketing products

Field and control engineers; Communication protocol program manager; Managing consultant

Biomass/ Biofuels/ Biosynergy/ Ethanol/ Fuel Cells/ HydrogenTraditional Industry-sectors; Manufacturing; Construction; Agriculture; transportation

Fuel creation from chemical/ biological materials other than fossil fuels

Growing and harvesting crops for feedstock, collecting waste oils for feedstock, manufacturing parts for production facilities; construction, maintenance and operation of production facilities

Process technicians in biodiesel or ethanol companies

Vehicle Electrification/ Alternative TransportationTraditional Industry Sectors: Transportation

A ground vehicle propelled by a motor powered by electrical energy from rechargeable batteries or other source onboard the vehicle or from and external source in, on, or above the roadway

Public Transportation, Bicycle repair & bike delivery services, Transit line construction, Emissions broker, Engine component manufacturing

Research and Development jobs; Technology design jobs; Hybrid & Biodiesel vehicle conversion & repair jobs; Maintenance jobs; Automotive service technicians and mechanics

Sustainable Agriculture/ Green SpaceTraditional Industry Sectors: Agriculture

An integrated system of plant and animal production practices that are efficient and sustainable

Production, Marketing, Processing, Consumption

Sustainable/ organic farming; Local Food production/ systems; Forestry – sustainable forestry worker; Urban agriculture; Land use planning; Sustainable landscaping

Green Jobs in Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy (EECS) Focus Areas

CERT will work with the EECS work group on Green Workforce/ Business Incentives to engage an open network of public and private sector stakeholders (e.g. North Louisiana Economic Partnership, Workforce Investment Board representatives, energy-related employer representatives) to identify occupations in the four focus areas that are expected to show a) increased demand, b) enhanced skills, or c) new and emerging occupations. The work group will develop a Matrix naming green occupations needed for the focus areas, sorted by categories—increased demand, enhanced skills, or new and expanded (N&E)—citing labor demand information, listing available training programs, and identifying curricula that need to be developed with employer input.


EECS Focus Area Potential “Green Jobs” Growth

Building Energy EfficiencyRepresents both the design and construction of environmentally sustainable and energy efficient buildings as well as the retrofitting of existing building infrastructure

Green architectsHVAC workersCarpentersPlumbersWeldersElectriciansEnergy auditors

Clean & Renewable Energy SourcesOnsite renewable energy generation; energy distribu-tion technology; and reduction/ capture of methane and other greenhouse gases

Solar panel installerField and control engineersCommunication protocol program manager

Reduction of Waste & PollutionRecycling programs; reduction of greenhouse gas emissions; and watershed management

Recycling technicianWaste treatment operatorsSustainability coordinatorEnvironmental science & protection technician

Transportation & Land Use AlternativesEnergy conservation in transportation; sustainable agriculture and green space

Research & development jobsTechnology design jobsCNG and electrical conversion and repair jobsAutomotive technicians and mechanicsOrganic farmingLocal food production Urban agricultureForestry worker

Implications for EECS Work Group on sixth Focus Area, Energy Education/ OutreachThe “Green Jobs” work group will summarize process and research, with recommendations for the EECS Steering Committee. The work group, spanning K-12, community colleges and universities, will identify “career pathways” or “career lattices” that offer opportunities for citizens to pursue ascending levels of education and certifications. The green revolution can bring both environmental and social change by providing green jobs that are family-supporting to people without high levels of education, provided they seek additional training. Historically, community colleges have moved the working poor to middle-skills jobs with sustaining wages; Bossier Parish Community College, Louisiana Technical College, and Southern University at Shreveport address that need.

Potential funding opportunities. CERT has developed a summary sheet and is researching federal and other funding opportunities that EECS can leverage for identified energy efficiency and conservation projects. Of the funding opportunities reviewed, fewer than one-third require cost sharing, though all programs award points for leveraging other grants and private sector partners, for example, a Retrofit Ramp-up program rewards partnering with banks, local utilities, appliance retailers, and construction firms. Funding agencies and programs include Housing & Urban Development, Department of Commerce, Department of Energy, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Agriculture, Department of Homeland Security, National Science Foundation, Department of the Interior, Department of Education, and Department of Transportation. Building energy audits, tax credits, and weatherization, particularly for low-income, are encouraged, and innovation is rewarded across a wide variety of market sectors. (See samples in the Appendix.)

Public/ private partnerships. CERT will identify and align strategic partners to support EECS working groups. For example, CERT currently works with Community Renewal International (CRI) in connecting Louisiana higher education to companies like Storer

Sheet-metal workersCement masonsSkilled machine operatorsInsulation workersHome weatherizing

Land use planningSustainable landscaping


Equipment, Trane, Hubbell Building Automation and CISCO to deploy new energy conserving technologies for the design and construction of the national Center for Community Renewal.

Energy education/ outreach. Although CERT will be convening higher education and K-12 for collaborative efforts around green workforce and curricula, the EECS Steering Committee stipulates that every project selected and funded should incorporate strategies and funds for marketing energy education to citizens. One member states, “Build policies that encourage us to think of ourselves as energy producers and consumers, energy entrepreneurs.” CERT will not only work with member institutions’ science-based programs, but also reach out to the Liberal Arts community at the institutions as experts increasing social accountability and promoting citizenship (e.g. Oikos Scholars Program at Oklahoma City University and LaGrange University). Another member urged creating energy-related projects that serve neighborhoods and diversion programs for unemployed, underemployed, prison labor and at-risk youth. Committee members agreed on the importance of improving citizens’ knowledge of the natural environment and climate change, as well establishing a process for informing citizens on a regular basis about environmental issues.

CERT was asked to serve as the “key hub for collaboration” around projects that educate citizens about energy. For example, CERT is partnering with EnCana Energy, Bossier Parish Community College and Southern University at Shreveport to conduct four, one-week Energy Venture Camps in summer 2010 for Bossier and Caddo 14- and 15-year olds. Some members of the EECS Steering Committee and Project Team also serve on the Shreveport/Caddo Master Plan work groups, and will seek to build on the values identified by Shreveport citizens. CERT will identify portions of the Master Plan that contribute to EECS initiatives to improve Shreveport’s energy independence.

43

Appendix CCurrent Energy Efficiency and Conservation Activities for the Shreveport CommunityCity of Shreveport, Caddo Parish and Caddo Parish School Board, 10.29.09

The following is a summary of the energy efficiency and conservation activities for the Shreveport community by focus area for the Comprehensive Energy Efficiency and Conservation Plan:

Building Energy Efficiency:1. Energy Efficiency upgrades to City Buildings – Lighting and HVAC upgrades that include

33 buildings in 2004.

Clean and Renewable Energy Sources:1. Landfill Methane Recapture – The City has installed a methane recapture project at the

landfill. The methane is used at the local General Motors assembly Plant.

Waste and Pollution Reduction:1. Curbside Recycling – The city has implemented curbside pickup for single stream

recycling of most residential trash excluding food and hazardous waste

2. Household Hazardous Waste Collection

3. Sewage Sludge Recycling – 100% of the sewage sludge from waste treatment is processed into “class EQ” materials for use on local farms. No sludge is going to the land fill.

4. Recycling of Sewerage Effluent – A pipeline is being installed from a waste treatment plant to the Industrial Port of the Red River

5. Ozone Abatement – The City has implemented an ozone abatement program

6. Brownfield Demonstration Project - Partnership project with Community Renewal International (CRI) to use EPA revolving loan to abate a high-rise building in the Shreveport Downtown Historic District. The partnership included CRI, a private abatement company, Southern University Shreveport, EPA and the City in developing an on the job training program that changed lives

Transportation / Land Use:1. Bio-diesel Fuel Blend to reduce fossil fuel use –

a. City diesel fuel fleet now uses a blend of 10% bio-dieselb. Caddo Parish is using B10 or B20 in the entire vehicle fleetc. Caddo Parish Schools are using B10 or B20 in the entire bus fleet

2. Hybrid Electric Vehicles – Sportran is using 2 hybrid electric buses in their public transit fleet and the City is adding 3 hybrid electric cars.

3. Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) – The City / Sportran is phasing in CNG for the bus transit fleet

4. Intelligent Transportation System – The City is installing an intelligent traffic signalization system

5. Vehicle Pollution Control – Caddo Parish and Caddo Parish School Board received grant funding to install pollution control equipment on their diesel fleets

6. Shreveport Green has a tree planting program to increase the tree canopy to increase energy savings and to mitigate greenhouse gases

45

Appendix DEnergy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy Steering Committee Members

NEIGHBORHOODS

Mr. Lee A. Jeter, Sr.Executive DirectorFuller Center for Housing of Northwest Louisiana1512 Clay StreetShreveport, Louisiana 71101(318) 221-7474Fax: (318) 221-7437Cell: (318) [email protected]

Ms. Leia LewisSankofa Vision, Inc.1651 Tulane StreetShreveport, Louisiana 71103(318) [email protected]

HIGHER EDUCATION

Dr. Jeanne HammingAssociate Professor of EnglishCentenary College of Louisiana2911 Centenary Blvd.Shreveport, Louisiana 71104-3335(318) 869-5082Cell: (318) [email protected]

ENERGY EFFICIENCY

Mr. Gregory L. CoatesStorer Equipment Company, Inc.504 W. 67th StreetShreveport, Louisiana 71106Office (318) 861-8489Cell (318) [email protected]

UTILITIES

Mr. Joe B. Pierce, Jr.1040 Delaware StreetShreveport, Louisiana 71106(318) 865-4164Cell: (318) [email protected]

BUSINESS/INDUSTRY

Mr. Roy GriggsGriggs Enterprises330 Marshall StreetShreveport, Louisiana 71101(318) 424-9748Cell: (318) [email protected]

ENVIRONMENTAL/CONSERVATION ADVOCATE

Mr. Jeff WellbornSeaber CorporationP. O. Box 1801Shreveport, Louisiana 71166-1801(318) [email protected]

TRANSPORTATION/HEALTH & FITNESS

Mr. Ian WebbRiver City Cycling & Fitness3787 Youree DriveShreveport, Louisiana 71105(318) [email protected]

STUDENT

Mr. Stuart Crichton120 E. Wilkinson StreetShreveport, Louisiana 71104(318) [email protected]

47

Appendix E

Energy Efficiency and Conservation StrategyPotential/Proposed Working Group Members

Building Energy & EfficiencyName Organization/InterestPat Murphy Facilities Manager, Biomedical Research Foundation

Don Bloxom Facilities Manager, LSUS

Bill McConathy Facilities Manager, BPCC

Gregg LeRoy Optimum Energy

David Young Siemens Building Technology

John Hubbard AEP SWEPCO

Bill Robertson Public Service Commission

Building Office Managers Association

Bonnie Moore Director, Community Development

Valerie Ervin Community Development

American Society of Mechanical Engineers

American Society of Heating Refrigeration and Air Condition-ing Engineers

Associated General Contractors

Fuller Center for Housing

Mike McSwain American Institute of Architects

Dr. Ravish Patwardhan Neurosurgery, Willis-Knighton

Kurt Foreman North Louisiana Economic Partnership

Linda Biernacki Fire Tech Systems

Neighborhood Associations

Student

Eric Barkley CenterPoint Energy

Trane/Storer

Home Builders Association

City of Shreveport

Johnson Controls, Inc.

Shreveport Housing Authority

Stanton Dossett Red River Properties

Brian Bailey T&L Commercial

Ann Fumarolo Sci-Port

Dr. Gerald Dawkins Caddo Parish School Board

Michael Jaeger Store Manager, Lowes

48

Reduction of Waste & PollutionName Organization/InterestCharles (Andy) Goldthwaite NIH Science Writer

Matthew Wallace Centenary, President, Student Government

Rebecca Prosino Sci-Port

Brian Bailey T&L Commercial

Keith McKlung Caddo Parish

Don Horton Pay Roll Co, Cleaning Co, etc.

Skip Simonton Local Food Kitchen

Land Fill


Reggie Adams Attorney

Lynn Braggs

Pratt Industries

Shreveport Green

BOMA

Jerome Nicholas Landscape Architect

Jon Soul ABS

Ali Mustapha City of Shreveport Stormwater/Drainage

Wes Wyche City of Shreveport

Clean & Renewable Energy SourcesName Organization/InterestBill Ballard VP Finance, Centenary

Tom Meehan SMG/Shreveport Convention Center

Tim Wilhite Wilhite Solar Solutions

Eric Barkley CenterPoint Energy

John Hubbard AEP SWEPCO

Bill Robertson Public Service Commission

Kevin McCotter (NGV projects, other natural gas applications) Chesapeake Energy

John Beaird Beaird Industries

Raymond Hill Thermo-Technics

Petrohawk


Dr. David Bieler Centenary, Hydropower, Hydrothermal Energy Generator

Dr. Juan Rodriguez Centenary, Physics

Dr. James Palmer Louisiana Tech


Bossier CNG

Student

49

Transportation & Land Use AlternativesName Organization/InterestLoren Demerath ABetterShreveport.org

Jon Soul Montessori School

Dr. John Davenport Centenary, GIS

Kevin McCotter (NGV projects, other natural gas applications) Chesapeake Energy

Grace Peterson LSU Ag Center

Shreveport Bicycle Club

LOCO Mountain Bike Club

Red River Runners

Sunrise Triathlon Club

Art Walker Communicaton One

Gene Eddy SporTran

City of Shreveport (traffic engineering)

Tim Wachtel SPAR

Woody Wilson Caddo Parish

Charles Kirkland Director, MPC


Sierra Club

Kent Rogers Director, NLCOG

Dick Bremer Chamber of Commerce


Michael D. Lott Re River Land Services LLC

David Nelson Architect

Board of Realtors

Stanton Dossett Red River Properties

Dianne Loridans Community Renewal


Shreveport Green

Shreveport Historical Preservation

Student

50

Energy Education/OutreachName Organization/InterestCharles (Andy) Goldthwaite NIH Science Writer

Jon Soul Montessori School

Sara Hebert Graphic Designer, Williams Creative

Rebecca Prosino Sci-Port

David Rowe Centenary, President of Oikos

Zeke Aull Facilities & Public Safety, Centenary

Malari Coburn Centenary Environmental Association

Dr. John Davenport Centenary, GIS

Troy Messina Physics & Engineering, Centenary

Chris Jay Robinson Film Center

Dianne Loridans Community Renewal

Greg Van Hoosier Carey Centenary, New Media

Pam Atchison Executive Director, SRAC

Pat Viser PR, Williams Creative

Blair Knicely Marketer, Praeses

Michael Laffey Centenary, Media

Michelle Glaros Centenary, Media

Lynn Bryan Community Renewal

Paul Reuben Robinson Film Center


Student

Shreveport Green

AEP SWEPCO

Richard C. Leger CenterPoint, Marketing and Sales Manager


Brian McWilliams Sci-Port

Eric Gipson

Cathy Williamson Caddo Education Coordinator

Green Workforce/Business IncentivesName Organization/InterestBill Ballard VP Finance, Centenary

Kurt Foreman Northwest Louisiana Economic Development Foundation

Greater Shreveport Chamber

Christopher Martin School of Business, Centenary

Zeke Aull Facilities & Public Safety, Centenary

Murray Viser Barksdale Forward

John Broussard United Steelworkers

Helen Sikes Accounting & Finance, Centenary

Elizabeth Everett Career Services, Centenary

Kempten Schwab VP, Praeses

AGC contact


Harold Turner Red River Bank

Zazell Dudley Shreveport Black Chamber of Commerce

Angie White Northwest Louisiana Economic Development Foundation

Dr. Mary Barrett Energy Business Center, Centenary

Student

51

OtherName Organization/InterestFrances Kelley

Hannah Moore

Jonathan McCartney

Michael Long

Riley Adams

Stafford Johnson

Susan Garner

Thadeus Pardue

Zach Moffett

AJ Haynes

Amanda Thoma

Caldwell Butler

John Ramsay

David Otto Centenary College

Stephanie Lynch

Chloe Haygood

Dr. Raymond Hicks

Ora Hart

Angela Randall

Charlene Tollett

Saladin El-Amin

Jameelah El-Amin

Angelique Feaster

Julie Bass

Min. J. Kojo Livingston

Katrina Boden

Lola Kendrick

Dr. J. Orban

Yolanda Gilyard

Janice Sneed

Milton Lewis

Leroy Lewis, Jr.

Nannie J. Lewis

Katrina Henderson

Juanita Thomas

Mawiyah Bomani

Nadir Bomani

Chappelle Henderson

53

Appendix FENERGY EFFICIENCY & CONSERVATION STRATEGY

MEETING MINUTES

MHSM # 0907.00 October 1, 2009

Steering Committee:• Lee Jeter Sr. [email protected]• Jeanne Hamming [email protected]• Greg Coates [email protected] • Jeff Welborn [email protected]• Joe Pierce Jr. [email protected]• Ian Webb [email protected] • Stuart Crichton [email protected]• Leia Lewis [email protected]

Committee Member Absent: • Roy Griggs [email protected]

Other Attendees: • Mike Strong [email protected]• Wes Wyche [email protected]• Tim Wachtel [email protected]• Murray Lloyd [email protected]• Kim Mitchell [email protected]• Bruce Hoffman [email protected]• Sharon Swanson [email protected]• Caroline Majors [email protected]• Richard Lane [email protected]• Gala Daftary [email protected]

• Mike Strong began the meeting by welcoming the committee members and thanking them for volunteering to serve. Each attendee introduced him/herself and provided a little background on themselves.

• Wes Wyche discussed the committee’s scope of work and a copy was included in the handout.

• Lee Jeter asked about leveraging between the city and parish. Bruce confirmed that this will occur. Lee Jeter asked about what other local awardees were doing and what kind of interaction Shreveport and this committee might have with them. Bruce noted that cooperation and idea exchange among EECBG awardees in a region (and beyond) are encouraged by the DOE.

• Bruce presented an overview slide presentation on EECS that included Steering

Committee responsibilities and focus areas for the Comprehensive EEC Plan. Bruce Hoffman discussed the role his company (Gulf Geoexchange and Consulting Services) would serve (technical advisor and facilitator for the committee) and gave a slide presentation on the EECBG program, explaining how it works and what the Department of Energy is looking for. He noted the 120 day deadline that the City is under for submitting the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy document, as well as the 18 month deadline for encumbering project funds and the 36 month deadline for completion of all projects. Bruce noted that his group has already developed an array of potential projects for consideration by the committee and would be e-mailing them out to committee members for consideration soon.

• Kim Mitchell noted that his firm would be working with GGCS as a

subconsultant. He described 6 “focus areas” around which he suggested working groups be formed, in order to bring to bear all possible ideas and resources the committee potentially moves beyond its initial scope of work and possibly into a broader role as overseer of the city’s overall energy efficiency planning efforts. He suggested that the committee members begin thinking about names of persons and/or organizations that could serve on such working groups. Kim suggested that although the committee chose not to elect a chairman at this point, it would be a good idea to select a spokesperson, who can represent the committee before the public, media, etc. as the need may arise.

• Stuart asked about meeting facilitation. The consultants will provide meeting

facilitation, distribute minutes and agenda prior to meetings. Stuart Crichton noted that someone should be designated to write down ideas on the clipboard when the group is doing its work. Kim offered to do that. Stuart asked if the grant award could cover the cost of retaining an economist/accountant to perform studies. Bruce noted that his group will have accounting capabilities.

• Patti Trudell discussed the role that her organization, the Consortium for Education Research & Technology of North Louisiana (CERT), would play by linking higher education resources together with the changing workforce needs brought about by energy efficiency initiatives.

• Murray Lloyd stated that the committee should consider the area’s unique resources and attributes (such as the river, port, etc.) when deciding which projects/activities to recommend.

• A discussion took place concerning whether or not the committee should select a

chairman. It was decided that no chairman was needed at this point, since the consultant would be conducting and facilitating the meetings.

• After each meeting minutes they will be distributed to the mayor and counsel by

the Department of Operational Services. The committee agreed to meet at 4:00 every Thursday at the MHSM office. It was requested that the times, location,

parking situation, and meeting agenda be circulated to all committee members as far in advance as possible. A question was raised as to how the process would work when the committee gives its report to the Mayor. Mike Strong noted that the committee is an advisory body only and it is possible that the Mayor and city could reject or alter some of the committee’s recommendations; however, he noted that the fact that committee has been created in the first place indicates that the city will seriously consider the recommendations for full implementation.

Meeting Adjourned

ENERGY EFFICIENCY & CONSERVATION STRATEGY

EECS SCHEDULE

October 1- Steering Committee Meeting • Review the scope of work

• Steering Committee Roles

• Presentation on DOE EEC Program

• Overview of Comprehensive EEC and stakeholder groups

October 8- Identify stakeholders, individuals and/or organizations

• Names & Contact information

October 15- Review draft of framework document for the Comprehensive Energy

Efficiency & Conservation Plan • This framework includes planning process, resources and working

groups

October 22- Consider & select projects for funding from the initial $1.7 Million • Evaluation criteria

• Funding options & leveraging

October 29- Framework update and role of higher education • Workforce & Outreach

November 5- Steering Committee review and approval of EECS report. Send to Mayor November 13- Final Plan delivered to Mayor December 22- EECS delivered to DOE

Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy (EECS) Focus Areas The focus areas and initial working groups we recommend for organizing the community around EECBG eligible activities are: • Building Energy Efficiency – Energy Audits (Commercial, Residential, Industrial,

Governmental and Non-Profit buildings), financial incentive programs, building codes / inspections and grants for energy efficiency retrofits.

• Clean & Renewable Energy Sources – On site renewable energy technology to

generate electricity, implementing energy distribution technologies, reduce / capture methane and other greenhouse gases.

• Waste and Pollution Reduction – Recycling programs, reduce greenhouse gas

emissions, watershed management • Transportation / Land Use – Conserve energy used in transportation • Green Business Incentives / Workforce – applies to all focus areas. • Energy Education / Outreach – applies to all focus areas • Other – Incorporating energy efficiency strategies from six “LEED” standards

categories (sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy & atmosphere, materials & resources, indoor environment quality, innovation), “Smart Growth” ten principles (mix land uses, compact building design, housing choices, walkable neighborhoods, unique places, preserve open space / farmland / environment, direct growth toward existing communities, variety of transportation choices, predictable / fair / cost effective development decisions and community / stakeholder collaboration) and possibly “Five Milestones Methodology” from ICLEI.

EECS STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA

DATE: Thursday, October 8, 2009 TIME: 4:00 P.M. LOCATION: 333 Texas Street, Suite 1200 MHSM office is located in the Regions Bank Complex on Texas Street. An atrium connects two office buildings and a parking garage (the parking garage is entered from the 300 block of Milam Street-mid block on the right.) The elevators to MHSM office located on the 12th floor are located behind the water wall in the atrium. AGENDA ITEMS

1. Review any corrections/additions to meeting minutes. 2. Review potential stakeholders for the focus areas of the EEC Plan. 3. Examples of EECS from other cities. 4. Review of leveraging methods. 5. Process strategy for focus area working/stakeholder groups.

This link to the Energy Efficiency Block grant FAQ page provides information that will be useful as we shape the EECS and Comprehensive EEC Plan. http://www.eecbg.energy.gov/about/faq.html


MEETING MINUTES

MHSM # 0907.00 October 8, 2009

Steering Committee: • Lee Jeter Sr. [email protected] • Jeanne Hamming [email protected] • Greg Coates [email protected] • Jeff Welborn [email protected] • Joe Pierce Jr. [email protected] • Ian Webb [email protected] • Stuart Crichton [email protected] • Leia Lewis [email protected] • Roy Griggs [email protected] Other Attendees: • Wes Wyche [email protected] • Tim Wachtel [email protected] • Kim Mitchell [email protected] • Bruce Hoffman [email protected] • Caroline Majors [email protected] • Patti Trudell [email protected] Cc: • Mike Strong [email protected] • Sharon Swanson [email protected] • Richard Lane [email protected] • Murray Lloyd [email protected] • Gala Daftary [email protected] The minutes of the October 1 meeting were approved as drafted.

Kim noted that some potential names have been received from committee members for

the proposed work groups, and encouraged committee members to continue sending in names.

Bruce Hoffman gave a slide presentation on the 14 eligible activities of the EECS. He

noted that a goal should be to use the current $1.9 million dollar allocation to leverage more significant dollars and programs. He showed an example “Energy Efficiency & Conservation Strategy “ (EECS) document (also referred to as the EECBG program’s

“Attachment D”) submitted earlier by the City of Louisville, and stated that the EECS to be submitted for Shreveport would need to be more detailed (patterned after a document he showed which was prepared by the City of Chicago). He suggested that Steering Committee members may have interest in one or more of the 14 activities and can focus on their interests or on all of the activities.

He noted that Caroline Majors is putting together a web-based database for use by the

committee as an idea-sharing resource. He recommended that at least some of the EECBG funds be spent to build “business

cases” for projects (rather than being spent on projects themselves), contending that this approach will result in allowing projects to grow in scale through leveraging with other available resources.

He noted that Caddo Parish has received a $368,000 energy allocation through the

same EECBG program (in their case, administered by the state Department of Natural Resources rather than directly by the US Dept. of Energy). He shared the recommendation he has presented to the Parish on how this funding should be allocated among the various categories of eligible activities, showing how he expected each such allocation to result in a corresponding leveraging of additional dollars totaling $3,730,000.

Kim Mitchell then gave a presentation on the concept of “strategic doing”—in

essence, a model of working in which ideas, resources and people are linked and leveraged and work silos are eliminated. He encouraged the committee to adopt this approach to its work. He and Caroline Majors discussed the proposed web-based platform for idea sharing.

Among the comments from committee members:

- Leia Lewis asked how the idea of community gardening can be brought to scale as city-wide “urban forestry” concept. Bruce noted that consideration of this type of idea is a perfect example of the kinds of things this committee will be doing, and he and Caroline noted how the web-based resource being developed would facilitate productive discussion on this and other creative ideas.

- Greg Coates stated that the concepts discussed were excellent but noted that there was potential for information overload, given the short time that the committee has to do its initial work. He requested that efforts be made to prevent the committee from being overwhelmed as it focuses on the task at hand.

- With regard to the proposed work groups, Joe Pierce noted that the objectives of what those groups would be called to do should be clearly stated up front.

- Lee Jeter asked if there were any existing energy efficiency policies in place with the City or Parish, and was advised that there are not. He asked about the stakeholder list and how stakeholders would be involved. Kim Mitchell explained our goal is to identify potential people for each of the 7 focus areas identified in the previous meeting handout.

- Ian Webb stated it would be very helpful for committee members to receive as much information as possible prior to committee meetings, so materials can be reviewed in advance. Specifically, it was requested that the draft framework document be circulated prior to the next meeting, if at all possible.

Committee members were encouraged to continue submitting names for consideration for the work groups, and to review the various eligible activities (including the lists of potential projects within each category) on the Department of Energy’s website in order to get ideas for projects/programs on which the City’s $1.9 million allocation will be spent.

Meeting Adjourned

EECS STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING

AGENDA

DATE: Thursday, October 15, 2009 TIME: 4:00 – 5:30 P.M. LOCATION: 333 Texas Street, Suite 1200 MHSM office. AGENDA ITEMS

1. Mike Strong’s Comments. 2. Review a draft of the EEC Plan Framework. 3. Review stakeholders list for appropriate fit in one or more of the seven

focus groups. 4. Brainstorm steering committee ideas for the projects by focus area that

could be considered in initial funding.

1


MEETING MINUTES

MHSM # 0907.00 October 15, 2009

Steering Committee: • Greg Coates [email protected] • Jeff Welborn [email protected] • Lee Jeter Sr. [email protected] • Ian Webb [email protected] • Leia Lewis [email protected] Committee Members Absent: • Jeanne Hamming [email protected] • Joe Pierce Jr. [email protected] • Stuart Crichton [email protected] • Roy Griggs [email protected] Other Attendees: • Wes Wyche [email protected] • Tim Wachtel [email protected] • Kim Mitchell [email protected] • Bruce Hoffman (By Phone) [email protected] • Patti Trudell [email protected] • Mike Strong [email protected] Cc: • Caroline Majors [email protected] • Sharon Swanson [email protected] • Richard Lane [email protected] • Murray Lloyd [email protected] • Gala Daftary [email protected] Kim convened the meeting at 4:10 P.M. He presented the draft “framework

document.” Bruce stated that this document will form a part of the EECS submission. Kim suggested that the mayor and council members also be invited to the Near-time website, to be able to monitor the committee’s work online and review ideas being discussed should they wish to do so. Mike said he endorsed this idea so the Mayor and Council can stay informed.

2

The Minutes of the October 8th meeting were approved as drafted.

Mike reported on questions from the city council at the last council meeting. He

reviewed with them the leveraging strategy to use the $1.7 million. The council supports process. Mike requested that the committee attend the next council meeting on Tuesday, October 27, 2009 at 3:00 P.M., or to have a spokesman for the committee attend. Committee members unanimously agreed with the suggestion.

Lee Jeter noted that all the time and effort being put in by the committee would be for

naught if its report and recommendations were to be rejected by the City, and that continuing to keep the mayor and council apprised of its work should help allay any concerns that anyone might have.

Jeff encouraged the entire committee to attend.

It was noted that the deadline for submitting the EECS is December 8 and not

December 22 as was earlier indicated by the DOE. Ian suggested that the presentation to the council illustrate how an example project

will be leveraged. He suggested that before an EECSport invitation for the Mayor and Council goes out, it would be a good idea for the recipients to know it was coming, to keep them from offhandedly discarding/ignoring an e-mail that might appear on its face to be confusing or spam. Mike offered to send an advance note to the mayor and council letting them know it was coming.

Bruce expressed his desire for the committee to develop a wish list of projects and that

the city submit a wish list to him. Ian mentioned the need for an energy code enforcement and adoption. He also

mentioned the need to provide information to the public for how to achieve savings from energy efficient methods or where to locate energy audits.

Sankovision is organic farming, water harvesting and is developing a learning center.

Concept plans are being developed by LA. Tech Architecture. This is a non-profit organization. This organization is entering into a fund raising for approximately $150,000.

Bruce mentioned that a community foods program is an opportunity for up to

$300,000. He said we need to outreach to the community to find out what is going on. The strategy is to build coalitions.

Meeting Adjourned

3

Steering Committee Notes

The following notes are the result of discussions during the 10.15.09 Steering Committee Meeting to explore potential projects for each focus area: Reduce Waste & Pollution

Outreach program to promote not using plastic bottles. Incentive programs to encourage Commercial/Government recycling

Outreach/public education on benefits of recycling. Especially lower income

citizens (need funding for this activity.) Educating individuals about E.E.C. should address all focus areas of

plan. The education process should move in tandem with the network building

process.

Waste oil recycling program for fuel Reduces problems with grease contributing to sewer system overflow. Caddo Schools should be included

City Composting Program

Yard waste (green) Food waste (brown)

Get schools involved as education/entrepreneur initiative Connect to community garden program or urban farming program. Good opportunity to make a model for surrounding communities Leverage parish recycling program.

Clean & Renewables

Wind, Solar, Geothermal heat pumps initiatives should be explored-possibility to

assist projects like the Center for Community Renewal. Look at Government Plaza for alternative energy project connected to roof

project. (Tax credit strategy could pay for approximately 50%) Blocker companies are use to place tax credits.

Could we develop a working group to develop project strategies for using tax

credits for smart projects related to energy efficiency and conservation. Natural Gas-how can we leverage this local natural resource for energy

efficiency and conservation initiatives. C02 capture projects we would like to develop a list of possibilities.

4

Can we leverage industry investments of companies? Jeff to follow-up on

investments private companies are making that could possibly be leveraged.

Building Energy Efficiency

Consider (micro-enterprise) lean program related to audits and energy retrofits. How do we work with the weatherization program? We might incorporate

outreach activities that get the word out. The city should adopt new energy codes with city possibly offering rebates for

exceeding code. We should explain the benefits of incentives we suggest. Residential solar system program-tax credits pay for panels (Bruce)

The following Audits are needed and should be separate pieces of work:

1. Lighting 2. HVAC 3. Water Efficiency

There are funds available for energy audits for low income. We need audit programs for other income levels. “The current state Hero” program with offset of initial cost by city is a possibility.

The city program could be a public/private initiative (e.g. utilities could pay for

outreach developed by CERT.) Transportation/Land Use

CNG fueling station for garbage truck fleet. Project was previously described by COS and a leveraging strategy is already developed.

Replacing traffic signals with LED- +/- $300 K investment could save $25K

per year. Ian commented that this investment does not at first glance appear to produce a significant R.O.I.

Urban Forestry Program

Need tree ordinance (current proposal tabled by council?)

G.I.S. should be an underlying tool for tracking all initiatives-part of maximizing resources that enhances energy efficiency. Public access to add layers and produce/use G.I.S. is important for engaging our citizens and supporting their creativity/innovation.

Urban Agriculture-taking urban gardening to scale

Food supply by local

5

Energy/Education/Outreach

Residential/small business energy efficiency demonstration projects. Small efforts add up-Educate to save $20/month/household= $20 million/year

savings.

6


DATE: Thursday, October 22, 2009 TIME: 4:00 – 6:00 P.M. (Note: Consultants will be available to the Steering Committee from 3-4 P.M. to continue discussions of committee project ideas) LOCATION: 333 Texas Street, Suite 1200 MHSM Office. AGENDA ITEMS

1. Review comments on minutes.

2. Bruce to present projects and evaluations. 3. Committee consideration of projects, priorities and selection. 4. Review of EECSport website and use to review project progress (e.g.,

Forums) 5. Next step

1

ENERGY EFFICIENCY & CONSERVATION STRATEGY MEETING MINUTES

MHSM #0907.00

OCTOBER 22, 2009

Steering Committee: • Greg Coates (by phone) [email protected] • Jeff Welborn [email protected] • Ian Webb [email protected] • Jeanne Hamming [email protected] • Joe Pierce Jr. [email protected] • Stuart Crichton [email protected] • Roy Griggs [email protected] Committee Members Absent: • Leia Lewis [email protected] • Lee Jeter Sr. [email protected] Other Attendees: • Wes Wyche [email protected] • Tim Wachtel [email protected] • Kim Mitchell [email protected] • Bruce Hoffman [email protected] • Patti Trudell [email protected] • Murray Lloyd [email protected] • Caroline Majors [email protected] • Lola Kendrick [email protected] Cc: • Sharon Swanson [email protected] • Richard Lane [email protected] • Gala Daftary [email protected] • Mike Strong [email protected] • From 3 P.M. to 4 P.M. the brainstorming session from the October 22nd meeting was

continued and the following project additions were suggested:

2

• The meeting convened at 4P.M. with Kim reviewing how the Steering Committee ideas are answering the “strategic doing” method first question, “What can we do”? The meeting today will begin to answer the next question “what should we do”? As we look at specific projects to date with preliminary budgets and potential leveraging.

• Bruce reviewed a spread sheet of budgets and leveraging. • There were several questions about how to define jobs created. Bruce gave an example

related to how the work required is considered jobs created. Jeff mentioned that Shreveport is one of the few places in the country where construction jobs are increasing.

• Ian said that he would like to be able to answer questions about the metrics such as

jobs. The DOE uses a formula of $92,000 per job. • Stuart asked about coordinating banks and lending institutions on the leveraging

programs. Bruce reported that member of Gulf-Geo-Exchange are assembling the financing program options.

• Stuart asked about policies that penalize companies for not incorporating energy

savings. Joe said there are currently policies and billing procedures that accomplish the incentive to save energy.

• If we want the short term savings of consumer conservation to produce long term

benefit we need to address utility income structures. • Combining weatherization programs with other social programs will produce positive

benefits. • Jeanne discussed the problems of lack of resources for people in poverty to implement

energy savings. • How do we create programs to supplement the weatherization programs in poverty/low

income programs? • There can be social benefits to low income communities beyond financial savings of

implementing energy saving for low income families. • Education and outreach are important aspects of energy conservation in all society

economic level of our community. Churches can be part of delivering the message and education of conservation.

• Murray commented that the “weatherization program” family is an opportunity for

entrepreneurship. • Bruce Hoffman discussed the new grant opportunity announced earlier in the week by

the Department of Energy, in which around $450 million would be available on a

3

competitive basis to communities throughout the county for energy projects/programs. Around $390 million of this total will available to large cities or counties who received direct EECBG funding (like Shreveport) for “retrofit rampup” projects—8 to 20 awards will be made nationwide. The remainder is dedicated to smaller government bodies. Deadline for submitting a non-mandatory letter of intent is November 19, and deadline to submit an application is December 14.

• The city could lead by promoting flex time and other energy savings work time

strategies to reduce energy. This category on the chart would likely be a project on CNG fueling.

• There was general discussion on leveraging funds such as allocating $100,000 of EECS

funds to leverage additional funds for a $400,000 project hat is ready to begin. • Bruce reported that he has been tasked by Caddo Parish to part of the high speed rail

program. The federal program is interested in including Shreveport. Bruce has started the process of connecting Shreveport to Dallas to Atlanta. The EECS should work to develop a master plan that includes multi-model strategies. Communities across the county are investing significantly in the high speed rail network.

• Wes reported that the EECS Committee is on the council agenda for Tuesday, October

27, at 3:00 P.M. All members are encouraged to attend. Wes requested that the committee agree on a spokesman. Ian agreed to be the spokesperson.

• Joe suggested that we look at some other way to incentivize recycling by not charging

citizens for recycling and raise funds thru some other means such as charging for non-recycled trash.

• Jeanne suggested that we do not know what Pratt Industries is actually recycling. Their

current market includes only materials for cardboard boxes. We should look at other recycling businesses that use materials currently not being recycled. How do we create the new markets required?

• The suggested allocation for methane should go somewhere else. • Joe suggested that we develop one project and leveraging for the city council and just

summarize the remaining funding allocations and projected total leveraging $1,977,900 to $24,782,000.

• Ian asked how we might work with the CAG and master plan group. Caroline a

member of the CAG said she will be looking for how to connect or informing both directions.

• Ian and Jeanne asked about including something in the initial allocation for greenway

programs as discussed it the 3-4 meetings.

4

• Jeanne also proposed urban forestry be placed into a more comprehensive land use that include xericaping and bike master plan and greenway programs.

• A carbon offset program would be a way to pay for some programs. • How do we start a green job programs with initial funding. There is another program

for these $. • Jeanne asked about training/re-training professionals for green practices. These could

be funded by Labor Dept. • Ian suggested rolling incubators, green job training and financing into one initiative. • The incubators could become a local think tank with support from CERT/CRI. • Joe mentioned that utility companies do have some audit programs. • Joe asked for a ranking of potential leveraging of projects as low, medium and high

leveraging. He also suggested that we put all projects on the wall and vote to identify group priorities.

• Jeanne asked that the group also rate the quad-drupple categories of social, economic,

cultural and environmental. • The consultant team will refine project descriptions and put on the wall for voting at the

next meeting. • Kim reviewed the web site.

Meeting Adjourned

5

Steering Committee Notes

The following notes are the result of discussions during the 10.22.09 Steering Committee Meeting to explore potential projects for each focus area. Transportation/Land Use

Expand alternative(s) transportation network to connect social/cultural hubs/districts

Safe/walkable neighborhoods Bicycle blvds. that connect to small stores/businesses Connect important culture hubs/districts with alternative transportation Norton’s Art Gallery (Example) Need working group to identify hubs and explore connections and map using G.I.S.

Map how people move through the city to establish patterns of activity How do we get people outside by choice? Express options for buses including signal changing for buses

e.g., connect Robinson Film Center with commercial Bike parking, showers, lockers, etc. that could be paid by the city by private

businesses as an incentive as part of strategy to reduce vehicle miles traveled. Program to promote with business owners (pub/private partnership) Explore options to promote bicycling Re-development and New Development Strategies

Policies for development that require multi-use, amenities, etc. that add to the alternative transportation, walking network through the city

More efficient public transportation Connect commuters with computer programs Look at employment centers to explore new ideas for public transportation

Reduce parking requirements to reduce paving, cover parking with “green” and solar collectors and absorption coolers

Calculate the bicycle miles traveled by city cyclers, ped/bike traffic counts. How do we improve traffic signalization to improve traffic flow-this is a fundable activity for smart signals

Business incentives to encourage bicycling Expand safe routes to school programs (leveraging opportunity) Incentive bicycling with priority parking for small, fuel efficient, cars and bikes-LEED Credit Systems

6

Bicycle Master Plan that includes biking lanes, “Complete Streets” Green Bicycle Zones and bicycle preference areas

Waste Reduction/Recycling Focus Area

Shreveport has established a baseline and already has an ozone abatement plan Comprehensive air quality plan Also a water quality program Definition by city for infrastructure-Air, Water, Land & Energy Xeriscaping: Waste & Pollution Reduction Switchgrass/Wildflower Could be part of biofuel program to harvest switchgrass “Big belly trash cans” by “Tiny Seahorse”

Green Jobs/Workforce

Diversion programs-unemployed, underemployed, prison labor and at-risk-youth Cyber traffic should be added to a GIS layer for citizen to describe their daily routes/routines

Stakeholder Additions

Bar owner’s participation could result in programs to reduce drunk driving encourage alternative transportation.

CERT is key for collaboration Education/Outreach

Thinking about consumers as energy producers Incentives for individuals to be part of a distributed energy systems Solar collectors on houses to feed grid as an example net metering Consider programs to distribute to neighbors

“Alternative Hedonism” model Movement to shift definition of pleasure (Kate Soper) “Physically Mobile City” – “Unstructured Play” (Land Use Issue)

Award programs for businesses for various green activities such as promoting bicycle use. Publicize these types of activities

Inventory “Green” activities that city and parish are currently doing as a means of demonstrating we have “green capacity”

7


DATE: Thursday, October 29, 2009 TIME: 4:00-6:00 P.M. LOCATION: 333 Texas Street, Suite 1200 MHSM Office AGENDA ITEMS:

1. Review minutes of October 22, 2009 meeting.

2. Review CERT plans for higher education alignment/role in the EECP.

3. Review project descriptions with leveraging (low, medium and high ranking) jobs created and energy saved.

4. Preference voting. Project sheets will be posted on the wall and sticky dots used

for ranking. Voting will also include committee rating of each project for economic, environmental, social and cultural impact.

5. Discussion of projects.

6. Next steps.

1


MHSM #0907.00

OCTOBER 29, 2009

Steering Committee: • Greg Coates [email protected] • Jeff Welborn [email protected] • Ian Webb [email protected] • Jeanne Hamming [email protected] • Stuart Crichton [email protected] • Lee Jeter Sr. [email protected] • Leia Lewis [email protected] Committee Members Absent: • Joe Pierce Jr. [email protected] • Roy Griggs [email protected] Other Attendees: • Kim Mitchell [email protected] • Bruce Hoffman [email protected] • Patti Trudell [email protected] • Murray Lloyd [email protected] • Caroline Majors [email protected] • Lola Kendrick [email protected] Cc: • Wes Wyche [email protected] • Tim Wachtel [email protected] • Sharon Swanson [email protected] • Richard Lane [email protected] • Gala Daftary [email protected] • Mike Strong [email protected] • The meeting convened at 4:05 P.M. The Minutes of the 10/22 meeting was accepted

with no changes. • Patti presented the draft of the strategy for aligning higher education to support the

Comprehensive Energy Efficiency Plan • Patti will upload the “ONET” report from the Labor Department concerning Green Jobs

2

• The committee took a brief break as a tornado warning was in effect and a tornado was reported on North Market

• Patti reported on CERT work with ENCANA on energy education/outreach • Stuart suggested that the CERT report should include more specific projects like

education on re-development and de-construction. He also suggested CERT education programs on environmental assessment. CERT could develop an on-line social network for environmental issues. Also Green computing

• CERT will connect to other higher education institutions through distance learning or

other means to grow the capacity of our regional institutions • Jeanne suggested that we should find ways to include liberal arts & citizenship as

integral components of the EECS/CEECP. She suggested looking at “Oikos” models of which can be found on the websites of LaGrange University and Oklahoma City University.

• Caroline led the discussion and priority voting of 25 projects • The committee was handed 10 sticky sheets (each representing $200,000) and

requested to invest in any of the projects at any amount they choose • The number of projects was reduced to 14 by the voting process. Bruce pointed out that

several will be required projects • Ian stated that education and outreach is a high priority • Murray commented that the education and outreach component is required to be a

component of every activity • Leia said that demonstration projects such as Community Renewal and Sankofa Vision

should be included. This has been discussed previously and is not reflected in the projects

• Leia requested that the CEECP baseline include an assessment of the attitudes and

perceptions of EEC in our community • Leia asked how we will be certain that the city uses leveraged funds appropriately. How

can we ensure accountability and be certain that leveraged funds are allocated properly? Bruce stated that there are DOE reporting requirements and rules to guard against waste, fraud and abuse.

• Leia asked about the sustainability of what we are doing and how we can hold political

leaders accountable to spend leveraged funds appropriately. We need more than

3

goodwill to be part of the strategy. The Government needs to commit to the Comprehensive Plan.

• Jeanne said that the outreach and education investment can lead to accountability,

citizen involvement and community change • Caroline described the process of voting on impact level of the quadruple bottom line

charts for each project on the wall. The committee voted on impact levels of their preferred projects

• After voting the committee discussed the following: • Further investment in the recycling program should not be part of the EECS funding.

Although recycling is important it is not the most efficient use of these EECS funds. Recycling should be part of the education and outreach program work. The recycling program in Shreveport is very positive.

• Jeff asked about G.I.S. and stated that it should be a component of all

projects/initiatives. Ian asked how G.I.S. saves energy. The problem is access to G.I.S. • Murray expressed that G.I.S. is a fundamental tool for achieving success with the

EECS. We should make certain that we have advocacy to the city to gear up to use G.I.S. for the comprehensive EEC plan. G.I.S. must be available to the stakeholders

• Caroline summarized and suggested that as part of the CEECP we have a strategic

doing group around G.I.S. to address access issues • Jeanne suggested we combine investment in urban forestry and urban agriculture. The

committee agreed • Ian explained the idea/concept of an EEC incubator and that several of the project ideas

could be included: revolving doors, alternative financing and possibly some programs of education/outreach. (This could be part of a learning center-CERT center-concept)

• The committee agreed on all projects remaining on the wall: Comprehensive EEC Plan;

Bike Ped. Plan; Urban Agriculture/Forestry; Outreach/Education; EEC Incubator that could include alternative financing /revolving loan programs; Government Buildings, Audit/Retrofits; Codes & Inspections, Residential/Commercial Building Audits and low and moderate income energy retrofits

• Bruce will prepare a recommendation on EECS funding allocation on accepted

projects. This will be submitted to the committee for comments, revisions and acceptance

Meeting Adjourned at 6:25 P.M.

10

Activity: COMPREHENSIVE EEC PLAN See frame work document Energy savings H Greenhouse gas emissions reduction H Funds leveraged H Cost savings H Jobs created/retained H Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients H Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

11

Activity: RECYCLING PROGRAM Develop programs to reduce overall waste by outreach programs to reduce use of plastic bottles; incentivize government & commercial waste reduction & recycling practices combined with education program for all citizens on the benefits of recycling. Energy savings H Greenhouse gas emissions reduction H Funds leveraged L Cost savings H Jobs created/retained M Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients H Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

12

COMPOST PROGRAM

Develop a community wide composting operation(s) that will divert yard waste, food waste and other compostable materials to a compost facility. Energy savings H Greenhouse gas emissions reduction H Funds leveraged L Cost savings M Jobs created/retained M Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients H Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

13

BIOFUEL PRODUCTION Development of a program to reclaim cooking oil and grease trap waste for conversion into some form of Biofuels. This will not only create an opportunity for a renewable energy product but will aid the city in reducing the amount of material that is introduced into the waste water stream Energy savings H Greenhouse gas emissions reduction H Funds leveraged H Cost savings H Jobs created/retained M Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients H Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

14

HAZARDOUS HOUSEHOLD WASTE COLLECTION Development of a household hazardous waste collection program that can also accept these materials from the schools and some common items such as light bulbs and batteries from businesses. This may be expanded to electronics collection and recycling in conjunction with the Caddo Jail and staffed with inmates Energy savings L Greenhouse gas emissions reduction M Funds leveraged M Cost savings L Jobs created/retained L Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients H Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

15

Activity: GOVERNMENT PLAZA BUILDING ROOF RETROFIT

Government Plaza Building needs HVAC and roof replacement. This can be accomplished with a mix of renewable technologies such as Geoexchange, solar thermal powered AC and PV integrated roofing materials

Energy savings H Greenhouse gas emissions reduction M Funds leveraged H Cost savings H Jobs created/retained L Long term sustainability M Coordination among other local EECBG recipients M Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

16

SHREVEPORT GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS AUDITS/RETROFITS?

Review and rank all recommended measures in the audits performed on Shreveport Govt. buildings. Select the most appropriate measures and institute or install

Energy savings H Greenhouse gas emissions reduction H Funds leveraged H Cost savings H Jobs created/retained M Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients L Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

17

Activity: RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS AUDITS Creation of a continuous and inclusive program to eventually perform energy audits on every building in the city. Energy savings H Greenhouse gas emissions reduction H Funds leveraged H Cost savings H Jobs created/retained M Long term sustainability M Coordination among other local EECBG recipients M Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

18

Activity: REVOLVING LOAN PROGRAM Development of a revolving loan program for EEC measures, renewable energy systems and other improvements to reduce energy consumption, increase general efficiency or reduce materials use or waste. Energy savings H Greenhouse gas emissions reduction H Funds leveraged H Cost savings H Jobs created/retained H Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients M Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

19

Activity: CARBON OFFSET PROGRAM Development of a carbon offset program to create a pool of money that can be used to help pay for other EEC measures and programs Energy savings L Greenhouse gas emissions reduction L Funds leveraged M Cost savings M Jobs created/retained L Long term sustainability M Coordination among other local EECBG recipients H Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

20

Activity: ALTERNATIVE FINANCING STRATEGIES Development of alternative methods of aiding in the financing of renewable energy systems and extensive retrofits or energy equipment upgrades. These could include buyers cooperatives, city directed financing or utility buy in to programs Energy savings H Greenhouse gas emissions reduction H Funds leveraged H Cost savings H Jobs created/retained M Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients H Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

21

Activity: NATURAL GAS-BUSES/FUELING STATION Study of the conversion of buses to natural gas, development of the fueling stations and the option of providing access to the public to the fueling stations Energy savings H Greenhouse gas emissions reduction H Funds leveraged H Cost savings H Jobs created/retained M Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients H Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

22

Activities: BIKE /PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Development of a strategy for increased walkability and better biking options, trails, paths and increased use of for general transportation within the city. Installation of more bike racks, development of a rent-a-bike or free bike Share program. Installation of things such as showers, changing rooms etc to increase use of bikes for commuting. Development of incentives to promote more biking for commuting, getting to school and general transportation needs. Energy savings M Greenhouse gas emissions reduction M Funds leveraged L Cost savings M Jobs created/retained L Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients H Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

23

Activity: EMPLOYEE FLEX TIME Development of flex time for city and other employees to reduce congestion, encourage car pooling and other passive methods of reducing vehicle use Energy savings H Greenhouse gas emissions reduction H Funds leveraged M Cost savings H Jobs created/retained L Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients M Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

24

Activity: CODES AND INSPECTIONS Adoption of latest EE codes and the tools for enforcement and incentives. Adoption of State Energy Building Codes, training for inspectors to be certified in the HERO program Energy savings H Greenhouse gas emissions reduction H Funds leveraged M Cost savings M Jobs created/retained M Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients H Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

25

Activity: GIS SYSTEMS Upgrade and completion of GIS systems for the city Energy savings M Greenhouse gas emissions reduction M Funds leveraged M Cost savings M Jobs created/retained M Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients H Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

26

Activity: DISTRICT HEATING/COOLING Feasibility study for the implementation of a Combined Heat and Cooling Power District for the Downtown area that will incorporate as much renewable energy technology as possible to fuel things such as absorption/adsorption cooling, space heating, chilled air reheat and process hot water Energy savings H Greenhouse gas emissions reduction H Funds leveraged H Cost savings H Jobs created/retained H Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients H Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

27

Activity: LIGHTING RETROFITS Feasibility study, and implementation, of conversion of traffic lights and signals to LED Energy savings L Greenhouse gas emissions reduction M Funds leveraged L Cost savings L Jobs created/retained L Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients M Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

28

Activity: OUTREACH/EDUCATION Develop an education outreach program that includes: weatherization programs to educate savings goal of $20 per month per household; awards program for energy savings and information resources available to citizens (web based, churches, CERT). Energy savings H Greenhouse gas emissions reduction M Funds leveraged H Cost savings H Jobs created/retained M Long term sustainability M Coordination among other local EECBG recipients M Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

29

Activity: TRANSIT EXPANSION Expand the ridership and improve the efficiency of public transportation through programs such as: connect commuters with computers; explore new ideas for public transportation at employment centers; bike racks to buses; increased frequency of bus service; custom designed bus shelters and express lanes for buses or light changing preference. Energy savings M Greenhouse gas emissions reduction M Funds leveraged M Cost savings M Jobs created/retained L Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients M Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

30

Activity: PARKING POLICIES Develop parking policies and incentives to reduce parking requirements; cover parking with “green and solar collectors and absorption coolers and provide priority parking for small, fuel efficient cars and bikes. Energy savings M Greenhouse gas emissions reduction M Funds leveraged L Cost savings M Jobs created/retained L Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients M Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

31

Activity: URBAN FORESTRY Establish an urban forestry program that includes: increasing tree canopy; promoting xeriscaping; land conservation; and promoting greenways and open space. Energy savings M Greenhouse gas emissions reduction M Funds leveraged L Cost savings M Jobs created/retained L Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients M Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

32

Activity: LOW AND MODERATE INCOME ENERGY RETROFITS Leverage/supplement HUD weatherization programs in low and moderate income communities. Create programs that address the lack of resources for low income home owners to implement energy savings beyond weatherization; create Entrepreneurship programs and policy changes including charges for waste that crates incentive to recycle “pay to throw” program. Energy savings H Greenhouse gas emissions reduction M Funds leveraged H Cost savings H Jobs created/retained M Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients H Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

33

Activity: URBAN ARGRICULTURE Develop an early agriculture program that includes taking urban gardening to scale; local food supply by local farming; land use policies to promote urban agriculture; inner city urban farming and urban farming education programs such as “local food/local schools”. Energy savings M Greenhouse gas emissions reduction M Funds leveraged H Cost savings H Jobs created/retained M Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients M Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

34

Activity: ENERGY EFFICIENCY & CONSERVATION INCUBATOR PROGRAM Establish an incubator and think tank for energy efficiency and conservation that includes: create business clusters for alternative energy and conservation; provide business/financing assistance for entrepreneurs; provide design resources for companies and convene business academic government interested citizens for think tank development of ideas and opportunities for EEC. Energy savings M Greenhouse gas emissions reduction M Funds leveraged H Cost savings H Jobs created/retained H Long term sustainability H Coordination among other local EECBG recipients H Any other tangible and intangible benefits PROPOSED ALLOCATION

4


DATE: Thursday, November 5, 2009 TIME: 4:00-6:00 P.M. LOCATION: 333 Texas Street, Suite 1200 MHSM Office AGENDA ITEMS:

1. Review minutes of October 29, 2009 meeting.

2. Review Draft EECS Report

3. Review & Discuss the “Potential Stakeholders” list for the CEECP Working Group


MHSM #0907.00

NOVEMBER 5, 2009

Steering Committee: • Greg Coates [email protected] • Ian Webb [email protected] • Jeanne Hamming [email protected] • Stuart Crichton [email protected] • Joe Pierce Jr. [email protected] • Lee Jeter Sr. [email protected] Committee Members Absent: • Roy Griggs [email protected] • Leia Lewis [email protected] • Jeff Welborn [email protected] Other Attendees: • Kim Mitchell [email protected] • Bruce Hoffman (by phone) [email protected] • Patti Trudell [email protected] • Murray Lloyd [email protected] • Caroline Majors [email protected] • Lola Kendrick [email protected] • Wes Wyche [email protected] • Tim Wachtel [email protected] Cc: • Sharon Swanson [email protected] • Richard Lane [email protected] • Gala Daftary [email protected] • Mike Strong [email protected] Caroline convened the meeting at 4:10 p.m.

The minutes of the October 29 meeting were approved, with one change made by Jeanne which she had posted to the website.

Bruce reported on the trip to Washington. He and Kim met with the VanNess Feldman law firm and with DOE officials, including Joanna Zetterberg and Mark Johnson. He reported that DOE was impressed with the City’s approach to the EECBG program and that Shreveport was the first city to request such a meeting with the DOE. He said that

they have been given access to the website. He noted that they offered the DOE’s “technical assistance program” to the City, which could be beneficial to the City and which is not readily available to most communities. He will provide access to scientists at the various DOE labs such as the National Energy Research Lab, Oak Ridge Lab.

Bruce noted that he was putting together a program to be submitted for the DOE’s Retrofit Ramp-Up grant program. The program would be a collaboration with St. Tammany Parish, and would include the development of the Petroleum Tower into a “net-zero” energy project.

Rachel described the Safe Routes to School grant program offered by the DOT. She said the grant would award up to $300,000 ($25,000 of which for infrastructure). No match is required. Grant applications will be due March 1. Caroline noted that the grant could be used to implement the bike master plan, which is one of the projects recommended for EECBG funding by the committee. Rachel noted that anybody can apply, but a government body must sponsor.

Patti noted that she and Rachel will be working on finding grant opportunities to leverage funds for EECBG projects.

Caroline distributed the draft EECS and noted that the committee’s final report to the City was due on Friday, Nov. 13.

Caroline asked the committee for assistance in language for the Executive Summary. Jeanne offered some suggestions for the opening paragraph that Caroline noted.

Stuart suggested some historical context language be included in the Executive Summary. He provided a sentence to be included in the introductory paragraph.

The Committee decided to hold a meeting next Thursday, November 12, 2009 to review the final draft.

Stuart suggested bolding some key points in the Executive Summary.

Ian suggested some language discussing the support of the City Council and Mayor and the new direction this program provides for the city.

Stuart suggested that some pictures should be included (e.g., azaleas from Norton, bicycles, tree lined street, or others.)

Bruce presented his recommendations for allocating the EECBG funds

Bruce asked for additional input from the committee about the bike/ped master plan and the urban agriculture program. What are the metrics related to energy that Bruce should use? What are the energy impacts?

We don’t have number of riders, and other metrics. Both urban agriculture and the bike master plan metrics will come from smart

growth examples.

Caroline and Kim will help Bruce research metrics for each of these activities. Joe mentioned how we could increase the benefits of tree canopy by more

underground utilities and common trenching. Bruce reviewed the remainder of the suggested allocations. The revolving loan program ($400,000) will likely be leveraged up to 10 times.

Caroline reviewed the updated draft of the CEECP Framework. She asked for review and additional comments from the committee. Comments should be submitted to Caroline by Monday, November 9, 2009.

Ian suggested that we explain how and where the 14 eligible activities fit in the 7 focus areas.

Stuart suggested that colors should be warmer and friendlier. Jeanne suggested that color pallet of graphics be more consistent through the document.

The language in the current document is to lofty. It needs to be friendlier and easier to understand.

Ian suggested that the graphics and language should be more integrated. We should also attempt to explain in simpler language.

Joe suggested that the listings should be bulleted to read more clearly.

Lee asked that the final report be posted online and be made fully accessible to the public.

There was a suggestion that a power point and a more accessible “How to” document should be developed.

Caroline requested that the committee carefully review the roles of participants to make certain we are clear in expressing the roles.

Caroline also requested that the committee review the stakeholders list. We need to categorize the list of names currently under “other.”

Ian suggested that we have more description of public involvement.

Ian suggested that the participants section be moved closer to the front between 1 and 2.

We should include more language to describe how citizens will get involved. Explain that stakeholders list is an initial list and will be expanded as more people learn about the process and networks are expanded.


DATE: Thursday, November 12, 2009 TIME: 4:00-6:00 P.M. LOCATION: 333 Texas Street, Suite 1200 MHSM Office AGENDA ITEMS:

1. Review minutes of November 5, 2009 meeting.

2. Discuss feedback received on the EECS draft.

3. Review materials to be submitted & approve to the city on 11/13/09.

4. Revise/finalize proposed Stakeholder List.

5. Discuss next steps.

1


MHSM #0907.00

NOVEMBER 12, 2009

Steering Committee: • Greg Coates [email protected] • Jeanne Hamming [email protected] • Stuart Crichton [email protected] • Leia Lewis [email protected] • Jeff Welborn [email protected] Committee Members Absent: • Joe Pierce Jr. [email protected] • Roy Griggs [email protected] • Ian Webb [email protected] • Lee Jeter Sr. [email protected] Other Attendees: • Kim Mitchell [email protected] • Bruce Hoffman [email protected] • Patti Trudell [email protected] • Murray Lloyd [email protected] • Caroline Majors [email protected] • Wes Wyche [email protected] • Rachel McGee-Johnson [email protected]

Cc: • Lola Kendrick [email protected] • Tim Wachtel [email protected] • Sharon Swanson [email protected] • Richard Lane [email protected] • Gala Daftary [email protected] • Mike Strong [email protected]

• The meeting convened at 4:15 p.m.

• There were no corrections to the 11.5.09 meeting minutes.

• Greg stated that he preferred the original graphic on the core group graphic.

• The strategic doing comparison to strategic planning graphic is not legible.

2

• Stuart suggested graphics to represent the impacts of the EECS projects. These graphics could represent savings, spending, employment, and dividend reinvestment. Greg volunteered at Bruce’s request to prepare a chart / graph.

• Bruce reviewed each of the project activity sheets.

• #2 Technical Consultant Services activity sheet: Stuart and Leia asked what obligation the City has to follow through on the recommendation to spend savings and on specific planning activities. Bruce explained that once the EECS is submitted the City is bound to use funds as submitted. If there are changes DOE must approve.

• Stuart asked that funds be in a dedicated account for planning. Rachel suggested that a specific dollar amount be assigned to each of the planning projects. Leia asked that urban forestry and urban agriculture be listed as separate items, and as plan / programs. An explanation should be added to describe the funding stream for planning.

• Jeff asked concerning the #8 Codes and Inspections activity sheet, if there are HERO inspectors in the area. Bruce indicated that there are approximately 16 in the state.

• Wes mentioned that to be eligible for many DOE grants, including the retrofit ramp-up, it is mandatory to commit to energy code adoption.

• In reviewing #3, Audits, Bruce stated that he could not verify whether local utilities provide free audits, or not.

• Leia asked if new codes will require existing businesses to immediately come into compliance. Bruce stated that this applies to new buildings and renovations.

• Activity sheet #5 Energy Efficiency Retrofits: Bruce described how a portion of leveraged energy savings funds are allocated to pay for planning activities. Bruce explained the HERO and PACE programs.

• Wes expressed concern about the City committing to a bond sell. Bruce explained that leveraging dollars shown do not commit the City to sell bonds.

• Rachel said the following are finance mechanisms that could be considered for retrofits in addition to zero interest bond programs.

- State Revolving loans.

- 3rd party loans.

- Energy Savings Performance Contract

- PACE

- On bill repayment

• Bruce confirmed that the leveraging is not a commitment to DOE but is the expectation based on DOE formula.

• The tax credit strategies should also be included on the #5 activity sheet. Bruce will develop an example that will increase the leveraging for this activity.

• The next reviewed activity is #4, Financial Incentive Program.

3

• The Technical Consultant activity sheet was next in the order. This item was reviewed earlier in the meeting.

• The Education and Outreach activity sheet was reviewed next. There was discussion on the energy camp proposal. Jeanne asked that some of the EECS funding be used for additional curriculum development to ensure the energy camps emphasize a balanced perspective on energy efficiency and alternative energy sources.. Patti indicated that the curriculum is already developed and will be customized by CERT. The CERT Committee currently includes BPCC and SUSLA and school systems from 7 parishes.

• The Incubator activity sheet was discussed and Stuart commented that it would be desirable to have a building for the programs. The funds allocated are for a staff position dedicated to EEC. This person would work with other incubators and academic institutions. A longer term strategy for a specific facility can be developed by a working group focused on a business / strategic plan for the incubator.

• Bruce commented that it is important for the city to adopt the energy codes. Not adopting will be a barrier. This comment should be included in the code activity work sheet.

• Wes reviewed next steps:

- Activities sheets, with a cover sheet, will be turned into the City on Friday.

- All reports should be submitted to the Steering Committee, Mike, the Mayor and City Council ASAP for review prior to DOE submission.

- The City intends to submit a complete report to the DOE on December 5, 2009.

• The meeting adjourned at 6:40 p.m.

Uic Strategy

Technology

Transcript of Uic Strategy