OnPoint proposes level‑3 fast‑charging sites in Caldwell under revenue‑share model

On Oct. 20, 2025, OnPoint EV Solutions presented to the Caldwell City Council workshop a proposal to deploy DC level‑3 fast‑charging stations in Caldwell under a site license and revenue‑share arrangement. Presenter Chris Graham said the company would pay the city $215 per parking space per month after a nine‑month ramp and take a 10% share of net operating income over a proposed 10‑year agreement, contingent on reaching an 8% utilization rate.

Graham said the company’s value proposition was a no‑capital‑outlay model for the city: OnPoint would assemble engineering, procurement and construction partners, handle permitting and operations, and provide revenue to the host. He outlined technical options including canopy‑mounted charging up to 400 kilowatts with dual connectors, a mobile app, site monitoring and prefabricated, scalable layouts designed for four to eight parking spaces (roughly six spaces in a typical footprint that includes canopy and infrastructure). Graham said average capital cost per site has been "about 1.3" (verbatim from the presenter) and that a multi‑site pool could involve roughly $10,000,000 in project funds for several locations.

Why it matters: high‑speed public chargers can attract visitors and support regional EV travel by offering faster fills than existing level‑2 stations. OnPoint argued the sites would be an amenity for Caldwell without requiring city capital spending, while also generating ongoing revenue.

Councilors pressed several operational and equity points during a Q&A. Councilor Dodi said she preferred installing new parking rather than repurposing existing downtown spaces because a single site could take six spaces and be occupied during large events. "To take up current parking spaces would cause me some concern," she said. Councilor Williams and others asked about existing stations, noting a recent Flying J installation; staff and Graham said some local chargers are private or tied to development and not always public, while one councilor reported four level‑3 chargers at the Flying J.

On competition concerns, Graham said current public fast‑charging infrastructure is limited and that new stations tend to attract drivers to an area rather than simply cannibalize private sites: "EV drivers are really just trying to find charging stations at all," he said. He also said OnPoint’s maintenance partner offers a 97% uptime service‑level agreement and typically monitors and predicts failures through a network operations center; onsite response time was described as commonly within roughly 48 hours.

Technical and financial details recorded in the presentation included an 8% utilization threshold for the revenue model, projected per‑space revenue described by Graham as "could be 30 to $50,000 per year" depending on deployment, and the company’s standard host agreement term of 10 years. Graham said OnPoint would arrange its own utility interconnection and billing rather than relying on municipal electric infrastructure; solar canopies were described as supporting low‑voltage systems (cameras, auxiliary loads) with battery storage available for larger installations.

No formal motion or vote occurred; staff said this is an early step and that OnPoint and city staff will continue discussions on a framework and site license agreement before any contract is brought forward.