Council Adds $11.25 Million for Solar After Pushback That City Is Falling Behind on Carbon-Free 2030 Goal

The Pasadena City Council voted 6-2 on Monday, May 4 to add $11.25 million to the Fiscal Year 2027-2031 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for at least five additional megawatts of municipal solar to be funded in the Fiscal Year 2028 budget year, after multiple councilmembers said a staff plan funding only two megawatts of municipal solar across the next two fiscal years was inconsistent with the city’s policy goal of 100% carbon-free electricity by 2030.

The amendment came amid an acknowledgment from Pasadena Water and Power (PWP) that the city is currently at 86% carbon-free on an hourly basis — a figure Councilmember Jason Lyon said he was hearing for the first time, after the council had previously been told the city was on track to reach 92% to 93% by 2030 — and 97% on an annual basis.

Voting in favor were Councilmembers Rick Cole, Tyron Hampton, Justin Jones, Steve Madison, Vice Mayor Jess Rivas and Mayor Victor Gordo. Voting against were Councilmembers Lyon and Gene Masuda. Lyon said he was “not satisfied with the numbers” in the staff’s electric proposal, telling colleagues, “I don’t believe that it should take a year to get in two megawatts of solar,” and adding later in the discussion that he was “not happy with the proposal that’s before us and can’t support it” and “not particularly comfortable” with carving the electric segment out of the broader CIP for separate consideration. Masuda did not state a reason on the record at the time of the vote, but had earlier in the meeting told Pasadena Water and Power General Manager David Reyes, “I worry about making that date,” referring to the 2030 carbon-free deadline.

The exchange that drove the amendment began when Lyon pressed Reyes and Assistant General Manager for Finance Lynne Chaimowitz on why next year’s plan funded only two new megawatts of municipal solar.

“There was a time when we were saying that we were on target to be at 92 or 93% carbon free by 2030, and tonight’s the first time I’ve heard the 86%,” Lyon said. “We’re headed the wrong direction with that.”

After staff confirmed only two new megawatts were funded for the upcoming fiscal year, Lyon called the figure “inconsistent with the direction we gave you last time” and “inconsistent with meaningfully moving forward on the goal.”

Reyes acknowledged the gap, noting he had earlier misspoken about the figures. “On an annual basis, we’re still at 97%, so we’re there in terms of that annual basis,” Reyes said. Lyon agreed both numbers mattered but stressed: “So the 97, but 86 on the hourly.” After Reyes responded that staff was “working towards that,” Lyon added: “Which is the real goal.”

Cole built on Lyon’s questioning when the council took up adoption of the Fiscal Year 2027-2031 Capital Improvement Program, citing Glendale’s 4.9-megawatt phase-one municipal solar facility, which a public speaker had earlier in the meeting noted was sited on Glendale’s central library.

“My motion, and we can debate it, is that we add an additional 11.25 million to next fiscal year, sources to be identified by our staff to add an additional five megawatts of municipal solar in fiscal year 28,” Cole said. “Why five? Because phase one of Glendale is 4.9 megawatts, and with two years of running room, I think we can match that.”

Cole said funding could come from one of three sources: dollars already allocated for next year that staff could redirect, projects that may lag in construction, or reserves the city has been drawing on to mitigate rate increases. He noted Pasadena Water and Power has generated more revenue than estimated in each of the last two fiscal years.

“That’s what the staff is recommending — that we approve a billion dollars worth of spending for just the electric system,” Cole said. “And I’m saying in that billion dollars, we can find 11 million. And I don’t think that’s irresponsible.”

The city’s Optimized Strategic Plan calls for 20 megawatts of municipal solar and 75 megawatts of local battery storage by 2030. Pasadena currently does not own any of the kind of municipal solar contemplated by the plan, Reyes confirmed during the meeting. With Monday’s vote, seven megawatts — the previously programmed two-megawatt “first tranche,” for which construction had not yet begun, plus the additional five — would be funded toward the 20-megawatt target, leaving, in Cole’s words, “13 megawatts more to figure out in the next two years.”

Earlier in the meeting, Madison challenged the level of staff commitment to the carbon-free target, citing a previous staff-commissioned survey that asked residents whether they agreed with a policy the council had already adopted.

“That was insubordination of the highest measure,” Madison said. “The council under our charter sets policy and the staff implements it, period.”

Madison also pressed Reyes on the absence of city-owned solar parking-structure canopies. “Do we have a single one?” Madison asked. “The city does not own a single one,” Reyes confirmed.

Mayor Gordo, who voted for the amendment, cautioned at the time of the vote that the council was committing dollars without an identified funding source. “We’re allocating dollars that we haven’t identified is what I’m suggesting,” Gordo said. “I would prefer to have the dollars there, allocate them, and then appropriate them as we’re able to complete projects.”

Earlier in the meeting, Gordo had defended the city’s overall record on carbon-free progress. 

“How many other cities are at 86% today?” he said. “Very, very few that I’m aware of. And so we are and have been leading. It’s that final push that is the most expensive push.”

The council agreed to a quarterly check-in on the project, with the first review timed to the return of solar Request for Proposals (RFP) responses. The electric portion of the Fiscal Year 2027-2031 Capital Improvement Program was adopted with Cole’s amendment included.