SR 07-25-2017 3C
Ci ty Council
Report
City Council Meeting : July 25, 2017
Agenda Item: 3.C
1 of 8
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Susan Cline, Director , Public Works, Office of Sustainability & the
Environment
Subject: SCE Charge Ready Program, Electric Vehicle Charging Equipment and
Services
Recommended Action
Staff Recommends that the City Counci l:
1. Award RFP# 119 to ChargePoint , a C alifornia -based company to install t hree
single -port and 2 6 dual –port smart electric vehicle chargers and provide charging
as a service ;
2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with
ChargePoint , for an initial capital cost in an amount not to exceed $22 9 ,077 for
one year (including a 15% contingency) for the purchase and installation of smart
EV chargers and an amount not to exceed $13,075 per year for four years for
ongoing operating costs, for a total amount not to exceed $281,377 over a five
year period with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval;
3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute the necessary documents
to participate in the SCE Charge Ready Program.
Execu tive Summary
The City’s public infrastructure for electric vehicle (EV) charging is inadequate to meet
the growing needs of City fleet and private vehicles. In order to increase the number of
EV chargers, staff ha ve applied to Southern California Edison’s (SCE) Charge Ready
pilot program to receive free electrical infrastructure for new EV charging stations . As a
requirement of that program , the City must select a vendor and ‘smart ’ charging
equipment . On May 19, 2017 , staff released a request for proposals (RFP) to procure
equipment and services for installation, operation and maintenance of EV charging
stations to be sited through the Charge Ready program. Staff recommend selecting
ChargePoint to provide equipment , installation and ongoing maintenan ce of t hree
single -port and 26 du al -port smart electric vehicle chargers . The purchase and
installation of the chargers for the Charge Ready sites is estimated at $22 9 ,077 ,
including contingency . Once purchased, SCE will provide a rebate equivalent to 25% of
2 of 8
the SCE approved Base Cost of $88,605 ($1,611 x 3 single -port station s and $3,2 22 x
26 dual port stations) for a total of $22,151 . Once completed, the project would yield a
net increase of 55 charging ports. Staff will evaluate the possible replacement of the
City’s 75 existing ports with ‘smart’ chargers at a later date when funding is available.
Background
Santa Monica has been a leader in adopting low emission vehicle technology and
providing public charging infrastructure.
On November 8, 2011, Council he ld a study session on electric vehicle (EV)
infrastructure , per Attachment A . Staff presented the challenges to accommodating EV
charging for residents, visitors and employees as well as the pending installations of
charging infrastructure.
Since then, t he City has expanded its public charging infrastructure from 20 charging
ports to 75 throughout the city. This total includes 7 dual -port chargers at the Civic
Center Structure that were provided by UCLA through a grant -funded research project.
Nine chargi ng stations at City Yards are used exclusively for the City’s vehicle fleet ,
which now includes over 130 electric vehicles.
With the advent of the Chevy Bolt and Tesla Model 3, EVs will continue to increase.
Additionally, increasing EV charging will be es sential for the City’s carbon neutrality
goals. Staff will return to Council with an EV Action Plan in fall 2017 . The EV Action
Plan w ould provide a comprehensive strategy to increas e EV ownership and charging
infrastructure through policies, programs, pro jects and pilots. This item is being brought
forth now so that the City can participate in the SCE Charge Ready pilot program to
receive free electrical infrastructure for EV charging.
Discussion
SCE Charge Ready Program
Deploying public infrastructure fo r EV charging can be a complicated and expensive
process. Existing electrical and site infrastructure in public locations throughout the city
3 of 8
are often inadequate to support additional electrical demand from EV charging. Design,
engineering and constructio n that includes electrical infrastructure upgrades necessary
to facilitate the installation of EV chargers typically cost two to five times the cost of the
charger itself, which often make s the installation of EV chargers impractical .
To help alleviate t his issue, Southern California Edison (SCE) developed a pilot
program called Charge Ready. Charge Ready offers site hosts the opportunity to
receive free electrical infrastructure – including design, permitting and construction – to
support a minimum of 10 charging spaces per installation location and a rebate for the
purchase cost of the EV chargers . The site host is responsible for the purchase and
installation of the EV chargers once the electrical infrastructure has been installed .
In order to qualify for the SCE Charge Ready program, the site host must purchase and
install ‘smart’ EV chargers that comply with SCE’s requirements and agree to SCE’s
program terms. SCE released a Request for Information (RFI ) with technological
requirements, including usa ge data management and utility communications capabilities
for EV chargers , and pre -qualified 13 vendors from which the City can choose.
The terms of the program include an easement for the electrical equipment and
participation in SCE’s future demand res ponse events, which could ‘throttle back’
charging when the need and cost of energy is high. This would reduce the rate of
charge by a nominal amount; however, if aggregated across a number of chargers, the
reduction in electrical demand can be significant . As a best management practice, fleet
vehicles will be directed to charge mostly in the afternoon or evening, when the cost and
demand for electricity is low.
In November 2016, staff applied to receive support through SCE’s Charge Ready
application porta l and identified two sites for City fleet charging and public charging for a
total of 55 charging ports , as detailed below in Table 1. These sites were determined to
be the most feas i ble after considering parking capacity, ADA access, and anticipated
charg ing demand at a variety of potential locations .
4 of 8
Table 1 . SCE Charge Ready Installations
Location Type of
Charging
Dual -port
Stations
Single -
port
Stations
Total
Available
Ports
Beach Lot 5 South Resident, Visitor 1 1 2
24
(2 ADA
accessible)
Civic Center Parking
Structure (roof) City Fleet 15 1 31
Total 2 6 3 55
Under the Charge Ready program, SCE w ould design, engineer and construct the
electrical infrastructure necessary to provide EV charging at the proposed sites at no
cost to the site host (the C ity). The infrastructure involved would be electrical cabinets
with transformers , and electrical panels and an electrical conduit that connects the
cabinet to the EV charging spaces. SCE will manage the entire construction process
and coordinate with City staff as needed . Based on SCE’s $12,000 per charging port
project budget, t he total estimated in -kind value of t h e design and construction costs of
these project s is over $600 ,000 . An additional benefit of the program is the significant
reduction of projec t delivery time.
Once the City purchases the equipment for the Charge Ready sites, it will receive a
25% rebate against the purchase of the equipment from SCE. SCE has prequalified
eligible equipment, their base cost and the maximum rebate amount. This am ount is
estimated at $22,151 (Table 3) and is expected to be received in FY 2017 -18. This
rebate will be deposited into the City’s Energy Revolving Loan Fund.
Table 2 . Proposed Equipment Cost and Rebates
Equipment Total Stations SCE Approved
Base Cost
Re bate Available
Per Station
(25% of base cost)
Level 2 Dual Port
Station 26 $3,222 $805.50
Level 2 Single Port
Station 3 $1,611 $402.75
5 of 8
TOTAL 29 $22,151.2 5
Smart EV Chargers
As more EVs enter into the market, smart chargers would allow the City to r ec over costs
associated with operation , e nforce turnover , m onitor activity and issues in the field , t rack
and report data , m inimize energy costs and impacts to the utility grid , c reate and
manage user groups , m anage chargers remotely and establish operating hours , and
p rovide a real -time map of all public chargers .
Smart chargers would also provide benefits to users including the a bility to locate, check
availability and reserve a charger , receive notifications and have more fr equent access
to the chargers.
Vendor/Consultant Selection
In order to implement its Charge Ready program, SCE released a Request for
Information (RFI ) with technological requirements, including usage data management
and utility communications for EV chargers , and pre -qualified 13 ve ndors. As a
requirement of participation in SCE’s Charge Ready program, the City must select a n
SCE pre -qualified vendor to install chargers at its two selected sites.
On May 19, 2017, the City issued a Request for Proposals directed at the pre -qualified
vendors to furnis h, deliver and install smart electric vehicle service equipment (EVSE, or
EV chargers) for replacing its existing chargers and installing new chargers at the
Charge Ready sites, and for ongoing management services, such as networking and
maintenance, in accordance with City specifications. The RFP was posted on the City’s
on -line bidding site, and notices were advertised in the Santa Monica Daily Press in
accordance with City Charter and Municipal Code provisions. 10 proposals were
receive d and publicly opened on June 14, 2017. Of the 10 proposers, 6 were invited to
present and participate in interviews. Staff from the Parking Division, Information
Systems Department, Street & Fleet Division and Office of Sustainability & the
Environment ev aluated the proposals and conducted interviews. Bids were evaluated
6 of 8
based on the criteria in SMMC 2.24.07 2 including price, previous experience, ability to
deliver, quality of product, and compliance with City specifications .
Table 3 . Proposals Evaluated
V endor Ranking
ChargePoint 1
BTC Power 2
EV Connect 3
Tellus Power 4
EVSE LLC 5
Greenlots 6
Lily Pad EV 7
National Car Charging 8
Bryden Electrical 9
Verdek 10
ChargePoint is not the lowest bidder but is recommended unanimously by the review
committee as the best bidder. ChargePoint was selected based on its experience,
strength of existing network and user base , integrated product and services, and value
of services.
Experience – ChargePoint has 10 years of experience and is a large and well
established company that is financially stable and can be expected to operate
and maintain its EV charging equipment well into the future . ChargePoint also
has the most experience in managing Low Carb Fuel Standard credits, a
requirement of this RFP.
Stre ngth of existing network and user base – ChargePoint has one of the
strongest and most prolific networks of charging statio ns and EV drivers in
California and the United States. This is important for frequent users who drive in
and out of Santa Monica and are able to access the ChargePoint network. This
idea is simila r to the use of Social Bicycles – wh ich operates Santa Monica’s
bikeshare system – in other cities within a regional bike sharing area so that
system continuity can be established across city b oundaries . Currently, EV
drivers must carry multiple radio frequency identification (RFID ) cards and
maintain multiple accounts to access varying brands of EV chargers within a
single area. Most new EV drivers are given a ChargePoint access card when
7 of 8
they purchase or lease a new vehicle and have familiarity with its system.
Integrated product and services – Of the companies evaluated, ChargePoint is
one of two p roviders that manufactures and operates its own equipment and
provides site host services. The ot her company, Tellus Power, did not have as
robust of a software program or customer service presence. Most other
companies either specialize in only manufacturing hardware or only providing
software as a service. This provides value in that there would be one entity ,
ChargePoint, responsible for the entire supply chain and operation that is
involved in providing EV charging equipment and services.
Value of services – ChargePoint offers comprehensive turnkey services from
procurement and installation to on -b oarding, network and user customization and
maintenance services. Rather than one hardware firm and one software firm
coordinating services, ChargePoint provides a seamless experience that would
enable staff to minimize downtime and management burden. Char gePoint’s
charging equipment and web -based solutions also provide a high level of
performance, customization, management capabilities and polished aesthetic
that is required. Its management software was judged by the review committee to
be superior to all of the other bidders. The software would enable staff to
customize operating hours, user group access settings, monitor activity and
outages, and provide real -time updates and reports.
Warranty – ChargePoint offers a free one -year warranty that is superio r to the
other vendors in that it covers vandalism and accidental damage to its EV
charging equipment in addition to defects in materials or workmanship.
ChargePoint wo u ld provide EV chargers for the City’s 29 new stations (55 ports) at the
Charge Ready s ites . ChargePoint would also provide services for installation,
construction management, networking, charging for public and City fleet vehicles,
revenue generation, Low Carbon Fuel Standard credit management, maintenance and
repair.
8 of 8
After the first -year capital cost of $229,077 for the purchase and installation of the
chargers, the annual operating costs are estimated not to exceed $13,075 per year for
four years. This brings the total not to exceed agreement amount to $281,377 over a
five -year period. Fu ture year funding for ongoing operating costs is contingent on
Council budget approval.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
The agreement to be awar ded to ChargePoint is for an amount not to exceed $2 81 ,377 .
Funds of $22 9 ,077 are available in the FY 2017 -18 Capital Improvement Program
budget and in the FY 2017 -18 budget in the Public Works Department.
The agreement will be charged to the following accounts:
C019157.58900 0 $186 ,690
014261.555850 $42,387
Total $22 9 ,077
Future yea r funding is contingent on Council budget approval.
Once the City purchases the equipment for the Charge Ready sites, it will receive a
25% rebate against the approved base equipment cost from SCE. This amount is
estimated at $22,151 and will be deposited into account 01426.404050.
Prepared By: Garrett Wong, Sustainability Analyst
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Nov 8, 2011 Staff Report (We b link)
B. ChargePoint Oaks Form
C. Written Comments
1
Vernice Hankins
From:William Claiborn <wclaiborn@hotmail.com>
Sent:Monday, July 24, 2017 11:56 AM
To:Clerk Mailbox; Rick Cole
Cc:Paul Scott
Subject:EV Charging Proposal
To the Mayor and Members and City Manager:
Here are my thoughts about the proposal regarding EV charging plans.
1. It is appropriate for the City to set rates for charging that are close to the cost of electricity. To charge higher
rates is to discourage the use of the public chargers.
2. Having a couple of charge rs in the beach parking lot is ok, but, at this time, resources should not be focused on
this, as most of the existing city chargers are already in parking lots in the ‘downtown’ area.
3. It is not a good use of money to scrap the existing chargers at this time, bu t rather it is better to expand
availability of chargers to residents who can not install charging equipment in their rental unit, or condo, or who
use street parking. It would be better, in my view, to place chargers in residential blocks around the city, where
apartments and condos exi s t, expanding available resources to our own residents. There are already examples
of ‘street light’ chargers in other cities. Over time, ‘smart chargers’ can replace the existing ‘dumb chargers’.
Santa Monica should be proud that it moved to install EV charging equipment available the public several years ago. I
hope the City will continue its leadership and move dec i sively to address the needs of its residents.
Bill Claiborn
2035 4 th Street
Item 3-C
7/25/17
1 of 10 Item 3-C
7/25/17
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Berta Claiborn <bertaf@hotmail.com>
Sent:Monday, July 24, 2017 12:25 PM
To:Clerk Mailbox
Cc:Ted Winterer; Gleam Davis; Tony Vazquez; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Sue Himmelrich; Pam
OConnor; Terry O’Day; Rick Cole; sunpwrd@gmail.com
Subject:City Clerk- Please add to item 3-A for Tuesday's 7-25 City Council Agenda.
Item 3-A
Dear Council Member,
I have been an EV owner for the last 6 years and been impress ed with Santa Monica's forward thinking about providing
charging stations for both tourists, s hoppers and residents of our city on the streets, in parks and parking lots.
The issues for the city to continue to consider are:
how to support and encourage EV ownership through the increase of easily accessible and reasonably priced
chargers for both tourists and residents.
to encourage businesses to provide chargers for their employees and consumers .
Therefore, please reject the proposal for the EV chargers at Beach Lot #5 for the following reasons:
access to the lot is far from the major residential areas
parking lot fee is high
lot closes at sunset
A better location for 24 chargers would be Parking Lot #7 on Euclid street near Wilshire. The area is densely populated
and the lot is available 24 hours a day.
Please do not waste funds on charger s that will get very little use when there are other options.
I would also suggest considering installing electrical outlets at the base of street lights thro ughout the city to inexpensivel y
provide power to EV owners when parked on streets.
My recommendation is to arrange for the new 24 chargers to be located in Lot #7 and set the rates for electricity,
to be no more than the City's costs for electricity.
As to the other proposal by City Staff to remove all of the City's char gers and replace them with ChargePoint Smart
Chargers at a cost of about $300,000. I feel the City would make better use of that money by adding 30 or 40 more
chargers.
Thank you for considering my thoughts.
Berta Finkelstein
2035 4th Street
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Item 3-C
7/25/17
2 of 10 Item 3-C
7/25/17
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Paul Scott <sunpwrd@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, July 24, 2017 12:50 PM
To:Clerk Mailbox
Cc:Ted Winterer; Gleam Davis; Tony Vazquez; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Sue Himmelrich; Pam
OConnor; Terry O’Day; Rick Cole
Subject:City Clerk- Please add to item 3-A for Tuesday's 7-25 City Council Agenda.
In regards to the proposal to install EV charge stations in a beach parking lot, I urge a no vote. Coming from one of Santa
Monica’s most vocal EV advocates, that might seem counter ‐intuitive, but the reasoning is sound.
With limited resources, it’s important to place chargers where the people who need them can use the m. The beach lot
closes at sunset eliminating their availability for approximately half the day. It’s also far away from the bulk of the multi ‐
family housing found elsewhere in Santa Monica. A better lot has been identified on Euclid just north Wilshire (lot 7).
There are thousands of residents who li ve in apartments within easy walking distance of this lot. These are the people
denied the ability to charge in their own homes because of a provision in AB 2565 disallowing rent control apartments
from installing charging stations.
I applaud any action that increases the ability of citiz e ns to switch to clean electricity as their vehicle fuel of choice, but
it’s important to carefully consider the locations so that more people actually use them. By the way, those who drive gas
burning cars send tens of millions out of our city every year buying gasoline. We can save that money from leaving our
commu nity by using locall y ‐generated clean electricity instead.
Thank you for considering my recommendations.
Paul Scott
Santa Monica
310 ‐403 ‐1303
sunpwrd@gmail.com
Item 3-C
7/25/17
3 of 10 Item 3-C
7/25/17
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Mallory King <mallorymking@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, July 24, 2017 11:53 AM
To:Clerk Mailbox
Subject:Please add to item 3-A for Tuesday's City Council Agenda
City Clerk,
Please reject the proposal for the EV chargers at Beac h Lot 5. This location is not easy to get to, too
far from the major residential areas where there are virtually no chargers, cost money to gain access
to and closes at sunset.
A perfect location for 24 chargers would be Parking Lot 7 on Euclid street near Wilshire. This area is
densely populated, has many opportunities to s hop and the lot is available 24 hours a day.
Please do not waste funds on charger s which will get very little use when there is a great alternative.
Please instruct your staff to a rrange for the new 24 chargers to be located in Lot 7. Also, when you
set the rates for electricity, please do not price it at more than what the City pays for electricity.
Thank you.
Mallory King
Santa Monica apartment resident for 17 years
EV driver for 6 years
Item 3-C
7/25/17
4 of 10 Item 3-C
7/25/17
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Alexandra Paul <aep@alexandrapaul.com>
Sent:Tuesday, July 25, 2017 8:20 AM
To:Ted Winterer; Gleam Davis; Tony Vazquez; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Sue Himmelrich; Pam
OConnor; Terry O’Day; Clerk Mailbox; Rick Cole
Subject:EV chargers
To whom it may concern:
I am a long time EV driver and am very concerned about the allocation of monies for public chargers in Santa Monica.
Putting chargers in pay beach lots means that many Santa Monica residents who don’t have charging in their apartment
buildings do not have real access to cha r ging their cars.
Which means they won’t purchase electric cars.
Which means the air in Santa Monica will be that much dirtier.
And the chargers you put in those beach lots will go mostly unused (what tourists rent electric cars, really?).
I hope you can allocate chargers in par king lots wh ere RESIDENTS can best access them. Parking lots open 24 hours,
ideally. Parking lots where the cost of entrance is not prohibitive. Parking lots where residents do not have to pay
exorbitant amounts at the charger.
Santa Monica residents should not be subsidizing charging stations that are not used to the max.
Thank you,
Alexandra Paul
310 ‐753 ‐754 5
aep@alexandrapaul.com
Item 3-C
7/25/17
5 of 10 Item 3-C
7/25/17
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Darrell Clarke <darrclarke@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, July 25, 2017 8:55 AM
To:Ted Winterer; Gleam Davis; Tony Vazquez; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Sue Himmelrich; Pam
OConnor; Terry O’Day
Cc:Rick Cole; Clerk Mailbox
Subject:Council item 3.C -- EV charging
Santa Monica City Councilmembers,
I’m writing regarding item 3.C on tonight’s City Council agenda. It’s fine providing electric vehicle chargers for visitors
parking at the beach, but this money would be better spent to address the much ‐more ‐central need of EV charging for
the 70% of Santa Monica residents who don’t have a house with a garage to cha r ge an EV at home.
I live that experience now as an apartment renter in downtown Pasadena on our third month leasing a Chevy Bolt. With
its over ‐200 ‐mile range one needs either a DC fast charger or overnight access to a Level 2 (2 40 volt) charg er. My
solution has been to use one of Pasadena’s two public DC fast chargers, which take about an hour to go from 20% to
80% full:
Item 3-C
7/25/17
6 of 10 Item 3-C
7/25/17
2
However these are already busy much of the time and nowhere near the charging infrastructure needed for growth to
California’s goal of 1.5 million EVs in 2025. Santa Monica is even worse with only one DC fast charger at all, at the VW
dealer, that is expensive and not even usable by Nissan Leafs du e to only a CCS port.
To mee t California’s GHG ‐reduction goals Santa Monica, Pasadena, and other cities need to quickly grow extensive
affordably ‐priced public DC fast chargers and overnight Level 2 chargers, located conveniently close to apartment
residents.
Darrell Clarke
Sierra Club Angeles Chapter Transportation Chair
Santa Mo nica City Planni ng Commissioner 1999 ‐2007
Frequent Santa Monica visitor to our son, daughter ‐in ‐law, and nearly ‐2 ‐year ‐old grandson!
Item 3-C
7/25/17
7 of 10 Item 3-C
7/25/17
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, July 25, 2017 12:49 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Item 3C: Support SM EV owners now, beach users later
From: paulrosenstein [mailto:paulrosenstein@me.com]
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2017 5:49 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>; Pam OConnor
<Pam.OConnor@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Tony Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>;
Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Gleam Davis <Gleam.Davis@gmail.com>; Sue Himmelrich
<SueHimmelrich@gmail.com>
Cc: David Martin <David.Martin@SMGOV.NET>; Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>; Garrett T. Wong
<Garrett.Wong@SMGOV.NET>; Susan Cline <Susan.Cline@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Item 3C: Support SM EV owners now, beach users later
A few weeks ago, I bought a Chevy Bolt EV. Now that I am gas station free, I’ve had a crash course in
charging issues.
With 70% of Santa Monicans living in multifamily buildings (tens of thousands of residents), if we are going to
encourage EV ownership, we need to quickly ramp up the installation of charging sta tions near residences.
Last week's staff report to the Planning Commission said: “For many EV owners and would-be owners, the
need for charging is immediate. Dedicated EV drive rs who cannot charge at hom e resort to using public
infrastructure at all hours, planning their schedules around charging. Others have resorted to using extension
cords that often run from building windows or garages across the public right of way.”
Agenda Item 3C does not help meet that need. Using grants, the staff proposal has the city paying over 1/4 of
the installation costs for charging ports that few residents will use. The beach lot is especially
problematical. Residents (mainly the adjacent Sea Colony) would have to pay to get into the lot, which they
could use only until sunset. In th e non-summer months, the chargers wi ll probably go largely unused.
The Council is scheduled to receive th e EV Action Plan in the Fall. There are 30 charging ports for city lots in
the planning process now. The city needs to expedite those and move ahead more quickly on meeting residents
charging needs.
Paul Rosenstein
310-430-2475
PaulRosenstein@me.com
Item 3-C
7/25/17
8 of 10 Item 3-C
7/25/17
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Stephanie Venegas
Sent:Tuesday, July 25, 2017 12:49 PM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Item 3C - Actually, there is a way for Lot 7
From: kellyolsen@drive ‐electric.us [mailto:kellyolsen@drive ‐electric.us]
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2017 6:55 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Kevin McKeown Fwd <kevin@mckeown.net>; Pam OConnor
<Pam.OConnor@SMGOV.NET>; Terry O’Day <Terry.Oday@smgov.net>; Tony Vazquez <Tony.Vazquez@SMGOV.NET>;
Ted Winterer <Ted.Winterer@SMGOV.NET>; Gleam Davis <Gleam.Davis@gmail.com>; Sue Himmelrich
<SueHimmelrich@gmail.com>; Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Paul Scott <sunpwrd@gmail.com>; Bob Seldon <rseldon1@roadrunner.com>; Linda Nicholes
<plugpositive@gmail.com>; Alexandra Paul <aep@alexandrapaul.com>; Benjamin Kay <benjaminwkay@gmail.com>
Subject: Item 3C ‐ Ac tually, ther e is a way for Lot 7
Mayor and Councilmembers,
As former Mayor Paul Rosenstein just wrote to y ou: "Support SM EV owners now, beach users later."
After getting Staff's response to our proposal, we are now oppo se d to the entire RFP for 31 EV chargers at the Santa
Monica Civic Center parking structure (which are for City fleet vehicles only) and the 24 chargers at Beach lot 5 South.
However, there is a plan we support and will allow the 24 chargers to go in at Lot 7 on Euclid.
We have been made aware of the limitations of the SCE Char ge Ready program and that Sta ff is telling the Council that
the program will not facilitate our proposal for the chargers to be located at Lot 7 on Euclid.
We feel you have not been fully informed and that there is a way to put the chargers in Lot 7 and not cost the City any
more money. In fact, it will probably cost less.
Again, there are only 6 chargers anywhere remotely close to the dense multi-family areas of the City and even those have
night time restrictions on their use. This number has not increased in years.
The Staff proposal of adding 24 new chargers at Beach Lot 5 which are intended to serve the condo owners of the Sea
Colony (we received this statement from Staff Monday after noon) who already have private garages in their multi-million
dollar condos and a few beach visitors is an incredible misuse of public funds which will be in the range of $300,000 to
$400,000.
They will do nothing for Santa Monica and not encourage any Sant a Monica multi-family resident to give up their gas car
for an EV.
The 31 proposed chargers at the Civic Center, which will be onl y for City fleet vehicles, will cost an additional $400,000 or
more.
This means SCE rate payers and Santa Monica tax payers will be paying over $800,000 fo r chargers and will not add one
new charger to the limited 6 chargers currently available to the bulk of Santa Monica resi dents who need public chargers
the most.
We understand the limitations with the SCE Charge Ready prog ram and that the program will not facilitate chargers at lot
7 on Euclid.
Item 3-C
7/25/17
9 of 10 Item 3-C
7/25/17
2
However, the City will be spending more than $200,000 of City f unds for its share of the Char ge Ready Civic Center and
Beach Lot 5 chargers, which agai n will not benefit any residents.
Therefor, the City should simply take the money it was going to spend on the two locations in the RFP and instead use it
to install 24 chargers at Lot 7 on Euclid.
This lot will serve thousands of residents and be the impetus for several hundred Santa Monicans to give up their gas
vehicle for an electric vehicle.
Please do not approve the RFP and please direct staff to put out an RFP for 24 chargers for lot 7 on Euclid. The City will
spend less money and get more results.
Thank you,
Kelly-Richard Olsen
Santa Monica EV Policy Coalition
Santa Monica City Councilman, ret.
Santa Monica planning Commissioner, ret.
Item 3-C
7/25/17
10 of 10 Item 3-C
7/25/17
REFERENCE:
Agreement No. 10507
(CCS)