Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Clean Energy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council adopts labor, environmental and community criteria for Clean Energy project selection
Summary
San Jose approved scoring criteria for long‑term renewable energy procurements, adding workforce standards, project‑location and environmental stewardship factors after year‑long stakeholder input including labor and environmental advocates; council emphasized balancing affordability with additional criteria.
The San Jose City Council unanimously approved new project selection criteria for San Jose Clean Energy (SJCE) long‑term renewable and reliability procurements, adding workforce, workforce‑development, location, environmental stewardship and community‑engagement elements to the department’s evaluation framework.
What changed: Staff presented a year‑long stakeholder process that included labor unions (including IBEW), environmental advocates and the City’s Community Advisory Commission and Risk Oversight Committee. The new criteria add points for projects that: (1) have project labor agreements, (2) commit to local workforce hiring in Santa Clara County, (3) locate in California and interconnect to CAISO, (4) avoid sensitive habitats and commit to habitat conservation planning when applicable, and (5) demonstrate community engagement and investments in low‑income or environmental‑justice communities. SJCE staff will continue to weigh traditional metrics — cost, reliability and regulatory compliance — and will set precise weightings by solicitation to preserve flexibility.
Reporting and flexibility: Staff said project performance against the new criteria will be reported to council after a project reaches commercial operations; stakeholders asked for reportable outcomes within 90 days of operations. The department emphasized the criteria are scoring tools, not mandatory disqualifiers, and staff retains discretion to select projects necessary for portfolio balance, reliability or affordability.
Council conversation: Councilmembers praised the collaborative process and stressed that affordability must remain a central consideration so that adding criteria does not crowd out lower‑cost projects that benefit ratepayers. Staff said cost and regulatory compliance remain heavily weighted in scoring and that the department will apply the new criteria in a solicitation‑specific way.
Outcome: Council approved staff’s recommendation; staff will apply the criteria to future long‑term procurements and report on performance.
