2016-01-26_PWETC_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

HIRV 309 At the request of Chair Stenlund, Mr. Kroll reviewed the pros and cons of the 310 system to ensure it was a win -win-win for Roseville. Mr. Kroll advised that Sundial 311 Solar had to guarantee the investor a certain amount of production to get their 312 bottom line and noted that Sundial was contracted by them to monitor and maintain 313 the system accordingly. Mr. Kroll assured the PWETC that the investor won based 314 on a minimum amount of production and it remained intact in the form of energy 315 savings guaranteed to the city as long as the minimum amount of production was 316 there; and the city would win through a minimum annual cash flow amount of 317 $7,000 plus depending on final credit calculations; and as the escalator goes up 318 annually and Xcel Energy approves the blended rate as allowed by the Public 319 Utilities Commission (PUC). Mr. Kroll reported that historical averages for Xcel 320 over the last 15 years were positive and the savings would be spread out to increase 321 each year for the solar array as designed. 322 323 At the request of Member Cihacek, Mr. Kroll reviewed the operating and 324 maintenance plan by Sundial for web -based solar monitoring 24/7 that would be 325 included in the PPA, and advised that if d should their firm no longer be around, 326 or sold to or merged with another, then tenance rates were standard across - 327 the -board from one company to another an aintenance also fairly standard for a 328 solar array system. Mr. Kroll opined that, if he city ever had to go to the market 329 on a needs -only basis for maintenance, they would probably get a better rate than 330 the investor would receive in the PPA, but as long as the PPA remained in effect, 331 noted this would never be a concern of the city, since the problem is the investor's 332 responsibility as owner of the syslem. If the City chose a buy-out option, Mr. Kroll 333 advised that the operation and maintenance would then become their concern to 334 contract out. Mr. Kroll advised that''Sundial Solar prided itself on making sure, if 335 anything like their demise shWkever occur and their clients fell to a successor that 336 tte successor would pick up Sundial's responsibilities 337111 qqw 338 the reques Mem ihacek, Mr. Kroll summarized the buy-out option 339 available to the ity after rst six years, per Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 340 requirements that the investo d to retain the system for the first five years and 341 could not exit the arrangement. If the city then opted to purchase the system they 342 could have it appraised, in accordance with PPA language, by a third party for the 343 city's purchase and discontinue the twenty-year agreement, with the investor 344 required to return the roof as found or the city purchasing the system. Given the 345 IRS requirements beyond seven years, Mr. Kroll advised that the buyout system 346 was almost negligible at the end of the twenty-year term. Under the structure he 347 proposed in his presentation, Mr. Kroll advised that the city could obtain a 3% 348 financing option from a variety of sources if it decided to gain ownership of the 349 system in year 7, and then become responsible for the value of the system and any 350 operating and maintenance. Based on the difference with city ownership, Mr. Kroll 351 advised that the major difference in the buy-out structure he had originally 352 presented a few months ago with the anticipated original investor he presented was 353 that this is an, industry -standard rate and structure with no creative loopholes of the