Town hears energy performance contracting pitch; wastewater plant and battery storage flagged as priorities

Steve Botita, with Verigee, and Sam Marotta, a development architect/engineer, presented an energy performance contracting (EPC) model to the Grand Island Town Board in Workshop No. 3. The consultants described an RFP-driven procurement under New York State’s Article 9 that they said allows municipalities to fund energy-focused capital replacements from operational dollars rather than voter-approved capital levies.

"We've reached the point of, we know there's an opportunity for the town of Grand Island," Botita said, introducing the firm’s scope and recent experience. Marotta explained the EPC model: consultants perform a feasibility analysis, identify energy savings tied to capital replacements and produce an engineered, guaranteed-savings plan that can be packaged for municipal leasing or other financing.

Marotta highlighted the town’s wastewater treatment facility as a primary candidate for work, noting the plant’s capacity constraints and energy use. "One of your biggest assets and liabilities is your wastewater treatment...the plant itself," Marotta said, and he characterized the plant as a likely candidate for renewable energy and storage evaluation. The presentation referenced a 2,500,000-gallon plant as operating near capacity, which the consultants said limits near-term development unless infrastructure is addressed.

On procurement and legal structure, presenters cited Article 9 as the vehicle that permits the town to use operational dollars and avoid a public capital-vote step for certain EPC arrangements. Botita described the typical next steps: a preliminary (no-cost) assessment, an RFP to select an energy services company under Article 9, a detailed energy analysis by the selected firm, contract negotiation, and then construction and commissioning. He said bundled EPC projects often move to construction within a 9–15 month window once contracting and detailed engineering are complete.

Board members asked about battery storage, local ownership and revenue opportunities. One council member asked whether the town could own battery units at the wastewater or water plant and sell excess power; the consultants replied that ownership is possible but depends on the project’s ROI, interconnection costs and whether the arrangement is town-owned, leased, or structured as a third-party operation. "The simple answer is yes. The complex answer is what is the ROI?" Marotta said, emphasizing the need for a site-specific analysis.

Presenters also explained how EPC firms typically recover fees—largely through construction and project implementation rather than purely from engineering studies—and stressed the importance of procurement language, subcontractor preferences and best-value evaluation to protect municipal interests.

There was no formal vote or commitment at the workshop. Board members and staff generally signaled interest in pursuing a preliminary assessment and developing an RFP; members emphasized aligning any EPC candidate projects with the town’s capital plan. Next steps the board discussed were to refine capital-planning priorities, authorize a preliminary assessment or RFP drafting, and return to the board with recommended scope and procurement language.