CC_Minutes_2015_0126 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,January 26,2015 Page 21 Mr. Culveradvised that the solar panels would be designed for half the size of the roof, allowing for maintenance of the roof and/or training by moving the array from one side to the other versus total removal. Councilmember Laliberte questioned disposal issues for solar panels, and any laws, rules and/or costs for their disposal. Mr. Culver advised that the life cycle of solar panels was currently between 25 to 30 years; and the majority of the material was made of glass and aluminum or other recyclable materials. Mr. Culver advised that staff continued to investigate that, as well as inverter maintenance and other special maintenance requirements that would need to be addressed in any agreements. Mr. Schwartz advised that none of the solar equipment or materials were consid- ered hazardous, but it was just yet to be determined how much was recyclable and where those markets may be. Mayor Roe noted that, within the next 25 to 30 years, someone may find a way to recycle all of those materials, creating more demand for the materials. Councilmember Etten noted design costs and recommendations by staff that TruNorth was a better long-term option for the City, as a third party, tax equity partner, but questioned if they had access to grant monies unavailable to a munic- ipality that would play into the deal to bring City costs down. Mr. Culver responded affirmatively, clarifying that the Newport Energy proposal also included that option, but overall staff thought TruNorth provided the better overall proposal, with the City not required to put down any cash and advantages of having TruNorth as an tax equity partner as well. Mr. Culver noted that financ- ing was a complicated component with the different players, and how it interacted with the SPPA lending. Mr. Culver advised that the end result with the refined TruNorth proposal was that the tax equity partner owned 40% of the system, with the City owning 60%,but overall getting better benefits. Mr. Schwartz advised that, at this point, staff was only seeking authorization for the grant application, which did not bind the City to construct a project; with fur- ther refinement needed as well as City Attorney review prior to any request for agreement or contract approvals from the City Council. Mr. Schwartz noted that additional design and roof structure analyses would be needed prior to any con- struction. Councilmember Willmus expressed appreciation that the systems could be physi- cally relocated on existing roofs.