Saturday, July 26th
Eureka Valley Recreation Center
100 Collingwood
1:30pm – 3:30

Saturday, August 9th
Ella Hill Hutch Community Center
1050 McAllister Street
10am-12noon

Basically you mingle around at 10 or so local installer tables and a few tables from city initiatives like the dept. of environment and the PUC… then some speakers from the city to elaborate on the new subsidy (the people in the picture).

Here’s a picture from the last one that was at 1800 Oakdale Avenue:

Get the Word Out

There are a few changes between the original draft and the new ad final version of the solar program that is now written into law. Here is my best attempt at clearly explaining those differences:

(btw, with the varying subsidy levels, some based on geography, income, installer location, it can get damn confusing, but just know that except for the special new “low income” incentive, they are all mutually exclusive. That means you only get one, so it’s either $3000, $4000, $5000, or $6000. Just figure out the highest number you would qualify for and that is the one you get.)

1. The $5000 “Environmental Justice Districts” was extended to low income individuals. It now includes not just zip codes 94107 and 94124, but also anyone who qualifies as “low income” by the Mayor’s office of housing (MOH), or anyone who qualifies for the PG&E CARE program. To qualify at the MOH you must make less than $63,350 for a household of one up to $97,700 for a family of 5. The MOH may also be able to help you with low interest financing for a solar project. The MOH website is here. These loans are generally 3%. Wow. I’ll scan their handout when I get back from out of town.

2. An Additive Low-Income subsidy of extra $5000 - all of the other subsidies are not additive and are mutually exclusive, except this one. If you qualify in the same manner as above (by qualifying as low income from the MOH or through the PG&E care program) you can get an additional $5000 to install solar. That’s pretty huge.

3. The addition of the $6000 workforce development incentive. Personally, I’m not pleased with this addition because it makes the subsidy confusing and makes people think they have to wait when that may not be the case. Don’t be fooled by any marketing from installers concerning who can offer the $6000 and who can’t, because it’s a brand new program and hasn’t even started yet (Starts in July). The positive note about it, though, is that it trumps the “local installer” incentive so that it gives out-of-towner installation companies a chance to compete, and competition is good for the consumer, and solar in general.

So how does it work? Well basically, a solar installer must hire a worker from this San Francisco Workforce Development Program, like one from Citybuild, and then use him or her on the installation on which the subsidy is being applied for. It’s relatively simple, but it’s new and there are kinks to be worked out. Personally, I feel like installers should also be able to hire them to do work other than installing, such as clerical or warehouse work, but it’s a great start.

4. Qualifications for the $4000 “Local Installer” incentive have changed. The wording used to require a “business license with an SF address.” That part has not changed, but now that business address must be your “principal” office.

(To establish a principal place of business in San Francisco, as distinct from an office, a business must demonstrate that the majority of its principals are based in the San Francisco office, and that it pays San Francisco payroll taxes on at least 51% of its total payroll. See here.)

5. The Non-Profit Pilot Program - in addition to the original subsidy, a $1.5M pilot program with very hearty subsidies for non-profits was passed. These include an uncapped $1500/kW incentive for non-profits, and $4500/kW (capped at $30,000) for multi-unit non-profit housing. These are big incentives.

NEW THINGS, NOT CHANGES, CONCERNING THE POLICY:

Solar Fairs - The Department of the Environment will be hosting what is more or less “open houses,” for solar installs where different installers and experts will be there to field your questions and provide you with materials. Here are the first two:

Saturday, July 12th
Southeast Community Facility
Alex L. Pitcher, Jr. Community Room
1800 Oakdale Avenue
10am-12noon

Saturday, July 26th
Eureka Valley Recreation Center
100 Collingwood
1:30pm – 3:30

New date for receiving applications - The solar incentive program will begin accepting applications July 1st.

If you have questions, add them here and I’ll try to answer them:

“Can I install a PV system for each of my tenants in an 8 unit building and receive 8 per meter incentives?”Yes you can. One incentive amount per meter. All solar systems in California are completely isolated per meter.

“I’ve heard horror stories about passing st electrical inspections…are there any provisions in the new program that will facilitate the process?
often the electrical work is performed by non-union electricians.. Which leads to some wired politics..building officials seem to lean on the non union jobs a bit harder making it difficult to pass inspections and racking up costs to the purchaser..what has anyone heard about this? Is this rolled into the ” streamlined” process?”

The permitting for solar has already been streamlined to eliminate structural permits, if the installers is using approved mounting equipment.  As for the electrical permit, there seems to be one inspector who is particularly picky, but this shouldn’t impact you.  Your installer simply has to do whatever the inspector says to get it signed off, before they get the rebate assigned to them.  The only way I could see a difficult electrical inspector being an issue is if you hired a very small or budget operation that only did the install itself and left you with all the paperwork.

Get the Word Out

If you are interested in having your home or business evaluated for solar energy, please see the links on the right or click here.

I want to personally thank everyone who called or wrote their supervisors to ask for this to pass. It was a long journey, and congratulations.

From Wade Crowfoot of the mayor’s office:

All,

Thanks for your tireless advocacy over the past months on behalf of solar in San Francisco. Almost seven months after Mayor Newsom and Assessor Ting first proposed a citywide solar rebate program, it has been approved for implementation.

Today, the Board of Supervisors passed at the second and final reading the full 10-year solar rebate program by a vote of 8-3. This program, which Supervisor Dufty guided through the final Board process, will utilize $3 million of funding available immediately to implement the program. In a key development, Supervisor Mirkarimi’s amended his legislation to be complementary rather than competitive to the long-term program. His legislation allocates an additional $1.5 million in funding for low-income residents and non-profits to install solar. All told, $4.5 million in funding was in essence approved for solar rebates in the coming year by today’s votes.

I will get back in touch with everyone to let them know the specific date in the coming weeks in which the rebate program will start. I plan to organize a meeting with the PUC and local installers so that installers and interested residents can learn how to access these rebates as efficiently as possible.

Thanks much,
Wade

From the Assessor-Recorder’s office:

Great news: the ten-year solar incentive program passed out of the Board of Supervisors today. As you all know, this has been a long and arduous process and we would not be here if not for the hard work and dedication of the our City partners (Mayor Newsom’s Ofc., SFPUC, SFE) and all of you tremendous advocates for solar that have been visiting, writing and calling members of the Board of Supervisors encouraging them to pass this legislation.

Thanks again. We will continue to be in touch as things move forward.

Get the Word Out

Friends,

Great news for city solar!

On Tuesday at the full Board of Supervisors, the full 10-year Solar Incentive Program proposal passed on first reading.

The proposal, led by Supervisor Dufty passed with six additional votes coming from Supervisors Alioto-Pier, Ammiano, Chu, Elsbernd, Maxwell, and Sandoval.  (Daly, McGoldrick, Mirkarimi, and Peskin voted against the proposal.) No doubt this result is due to devoted advocacy on the part of our supporters.  Thanks to each you who called or emailed a Supervisor.

Of course it’s not over yet.  For the Solar Incentive 10-year program to become law, the proposal must pass a second reading of the full board next Tuesday.  Oh, it could become muddled again. (While legislation authored by Supervisor McGoldrick to disallow rebates was defeated, a competing scaled-down pilot program proposed by Supervisor Mirkarimi will also be considered at next week’s meeting.)  

We just need our seven votes to hold until next Tuesday and the program can likely begin in a month.  So thanking the supportive supervisors is critical.

Can you send a thank you email or phone call to the Supervisors who supported our solar program?

To send an email click here:

To call:
Michela Alioto-Pier, District 2
(415) 554-7752
Tom Ammiano, District 9
(415) 554-5144
Carmen Chu, District 4
(415) 554-7460
Bevan Dufty, District 8
(415) 554-6968
Sean Elsbernd, District 7
(415) 554-6516
Sophie Maxwell, District 10
(415) 554-7670
Gerardo Sandoval, District 11
(415) 554-6975

Onwards,

Claudia and the Vote Solar Team 

The Vote Solar Initiative
300 Brannan Street, Suite 609
San Francisco, CA 94107
www.votesolar.org

Get the Word Out

Excellent news on the solar front:

The full solar rebate program that we all have been working to pass was approved by the Board of Supervisors today at first reading.  This is a huge accomplishment, and one that comes thanks to the tireless advocacy of so many of you.  Assessor Ting deserves enormous credit for convening the Solar Taskforce that came up with the idea and for his steadfast leadership throughout.  As well as so many indivduals who called and emailed Supervisors in the last several days.

Supervisor Dufty led the effort to pass the full program at the Board meeting and other Supervisors voting yes included Supervisors, Alioto-Pier, Ammiano, Chu, Elsbernd, Maxwell, and Sandoval .  (Supervisors voting against the solar program were Supervisors Daly, McGoldrick, Mirkarimi and Peskin.)

In order for the ten-year program to become law, the Board must approve the program at a second and final reading at next week’s Supervisor’s meeting.  (While legislation authored by Supervisor McGoldrick to disallow rebates was defeated, a competing scaled-down program proposed by Supervisor Mirkarimi will also be considered at next week’s meeting.)  We are so close to achieving the full program, and just need our votes to hold.  If we pass the legislation at second reading next week, the rebate program can likely begin within a month.

In the next day, please take an opportunity to thank those Supervisors who voted to support the full solar rebate program and tell them how much this means to the issue of renewable energy.  This will be critical to ensuring a positive vote next week.

Thanks much,
Wade

Get the Word Out

Friends-

It’s game-time.  On Tuesday, June 3, the SF Board of Supervisors will vote on the proposed San Francisco Solar Energy Incentive Program. 

There are 3 options on the table (you can see them all here: items 14, 15, and 16), but only one will result in any solar to speak of. 

• Option 1, sponsored by Supervisor Dufty, would implement the 10 year, $2-5 million annual program of rebates, as recommended by the task force and initially approved by the Board several months ago.  If your goal is to rapidly increase the amount of solar installed in San Francisco, and enjoy the workforce development and clean energy benefits that would result, then this is clearly the best option.  It would provide more solar bang for the buck, and put the city on a path away from fossil fuels and towards sustainable, renewable energy. (This is agenda item 15, available here (pdf))
• Option 2 is a measure sponsored by Supervisor Mirkarimi.  He proposes a 1 year, $1 million pilot program, of which $500,000 would go to multi-unit residential buildings owned and operated by non-profits, $250,000 to low-income residential applicants, and $250,000 to non-residential buildings owned by non-profits.  The problem with this option is that we don’t believe it will result in much solar.  To begin with, the pot of money is much smaller.  Secondly, three-quarters of the funds are reserved for non-profits.  Now, we love non-profits (as we are one ourselves) but note that non-profits can’t take advantage of the 30% investment tax credit, and multi-family residential units face ownership and metering challenges that make solar retrofits practically impossible.  In short, these rebates are targeted to very, very difficult solar markets, and we don’t expect much utilization of those funds.  If the funds aren’t used, the program’s ability to stimulate workforce development and reduce reliance on fossil fuels will be reduced accordingly.  (Supervisor Mirkarimi’s proposal is item #16 (pdf))
• Option 3 is a measure sponsored by Supervisor McGoldrick.  It would prohibit the SF PUC from providing funds to non-governmental entities-essentially, no rebate program at all.  It’s item 14 on the Board Agenda.

This is a policy decision for the Board.  In our analysis, the goal of rapidly increasing solar installations in city limits-with the benefits of developing new jobs, reducing reliance on fossil fuels, and helping the city meet its carbon requirements-is best served by option 1, the original Solar Task Force proposal.  While there are many policy considerations at stake, the other alternatives just won’t deliver.

There is no time to comment at Tuesday’s meeting, but certain Supervisors could be moved if you give them a call. 

We are reaching out to Supervisors Ammiano, Maxwell, Sandoval, and Peskin and asking them to support Dufty’s proposal. 

Can you make one last call?  It’s our last best effort to win this program through the Board of Supervisors.

Sophie Maxwell, District 10
(415) 554-7670
Tom Ammiano, District 9
(415) 554-5144
Aaron Peskin, District 3
(415) 554-7450
Gerardo Sandoval, District 11
(415) 554-6975

Polite calls are the most effective-

Get the Word Out

Thank you for all of your support and advocacy for the San Francisco Solar Incentive Program to date.  The program has not been approved by the Board of Superviors yet, but we are getting closer to that finish line.

This coming Tuesday, June 3, at their 2pm regularly scheduled meeting, the Board of Supervisors will take action to support or reject the solar program.  The budget committee has actually forwarded three seperate proposals to the full Board for a vote on Tuesday:

1) Advocates’ solar rebate proposal:  This proposal, supported by the Mayor and Assessor Ting and the full range of the environmental community, has had seven hearings at the Board.  As you know, it would provide between
$2-5 million per year to fund solar incentives ranging from $3,000-$6,000 for residents, up to $10,000 for businesses that install solar and up to $30,000 for non-profit affordable housing.  (Revenues come from the PUC power revenues– not from the City’s General Fund that goes to fund health care, police, etc.)  Supervisor Dufty has signed on as sponsor of this legislation and we are advocating strongly for passage of this version of the program. Supervisor Dufty is a key ally in this effort and we are grateful for his support.

2) Supervisor Mirkarimi’s solar proposal.  Rather than the full program, it creates a one-year pilot program.  This program reserves $325K for affordable housing developers, for $325K for limited income households, and $750K for multi-unit and single family residential buildings.  No funding is provided for commercial buildings or the greater non-profit community, thus defeating the purpose of making the incentive available to all of San Francisco’s 195,000 rooftops.  Considering the pent-up demand for solar incentives over the last several months, we are concerned that the $750K for residential buildings will be used up quickly and we will back before the Board asking for more funding in a matter of weeks.

3) Supervisor McGoldrick’s solar ordinance.  This ordinance prioritizes how PUC funding will be spent on solar installations, and effectively prohibits funding for incentives to local residents and businesses to install solar.
This ordinance reserves all funding for publicly owned projects and non-profit housing.  Considering the urgency of increasing our local renewable energy portfolio, this ordinance greatly limits funding to a very small portion of San Francisco’s rooftops that could install solar.

Considering that this is the last shot at the Board of Supervisors for approval of the program, please consider emailing, calling, or visiting the Board members and ask them to vote on the legislation that is the product of our collective efforts over the past year and a half.  Their contact information can be found here:
http://www.sfgov.org/site/bdsupvrs_index.asp?id=7271

When you do, please ask them to vote yes on the full program sponsored by Supervisor Dufty.  And if you talk to Supervisor Dufty, please thank him
for his sponsorship.   There will be no opportunity for public comment on
the proposals on Tuesday at the full Board (each has already received public comment at committee), so your feedback to the Board this week and early next week will be critical.  We do encourage you to come to the meeting on Tuesday to be a visible presence supporting solar.

Thank you very much for your continued advocacy.

Office of Assessor-Recorder Phil Ting
City and County of San Francisco

Get the Word Out

“…Second update is on the proposed SF solar rebate program. Yesterday, the Budget and Finance Committee discussed the measure for the 7th time. The upshot: the Committee refered, without recommendation, two options for the full Board’s consideration on its June 3 meeting. The options are:

• The full $3 million/yr for solar rebates, as recommended by the task force and initially approved by the Board several months ago;
• measure sponsored by Supervisor Mirkarimi, of which the exact details are hazy as of this writing, but we understand to be a $1.5 million pilot, with half the funds for unencumbered rebates, and half reserved for non-profits and low-income residential units of various sorts.

Now, we love non-profits (as we are one ourselves) but note that non-profits can’t take advantage of the 30% investment tax credit, and multi-family residential units face ownership and metering challenges that make solar retrofits practically impossible. In short, these rebates are targeted to very, very difficult solar markets, and we don’t expect much utilization of those funds. If the funds aren’t used, the program’s ability to stimulate workforce development and reduce reliance on fossil fuels will be reduced accordingly.
The third option, of course, is no solar rebate program at all. Supervisor McGoldrick has also introduced a measure that would prohibit city funds going for rebates on privately-owned buildings. Once we get the details, we will send out an update on next steps shortly.

Onwards-

The Vote Solar Initiative”

Get the Word Out