| Ian: How would you say decarbonization fits into the overall work of the Housing Authority?
Stephen: I think our focus is based on a desire to ultimately reduce costs for our tenants and for the properties that we manage so they can remain as deeply affordable as possible. With the rise in utility costs over the last decade or more, utility costs have become a much bigger component in determining housing affordability for both the tenants and for us as a management agent and/or owner trying to have the properties break even with these increasing costs. We do that by looking for ways to make the properties more efficient. To the extent they can go from natural gas to electricity that can obviously not only help our environment, but it can simplify maintenance issues at our properties. We’ve done solar at quite a few properties to again reduce the cost of those monthly bills for our tenants.
Ian: Would you say that this decarbonization effort, to help reduce costs, has percolated throughout the organization as a whole? How are those decisions driven at the organizational level?
Stephen: We’re looking at every property we manage to find ways to lower our utility bill costs for the property, as well as for tenants. There are many opportunities to do that with the programs that are offered. When we first got into solar, we did several power purchase agreements. We found over time that those actually haven’t provided as significant cost savings as we’d hoped. So, now we’re focusing more on how we can reduce the energy usage of the units and buildings and also find ways to install property-owned solar rather than PPA arrangements.
Ian: That’s a really good insight. How would you say the financial incentives factor into that? Are incentives a deciding factor in choosing to decarbonize certain properties?
Stephen: They’re absolutely the deciding factor. We probably wouldn’t be doing it at most of our properties if it weren’t for the incentives because the properties don’t have sufficient operating income or even reserves to be able to afford some of these energy efficiency improvements, in addition to solar panels.
Ian: Are there any programs that have been particularly good experiences in terms of financial incentives that have been particularly useful? What sort of programs have you pursued? You mentioned LIWP, BUILD, and SOMAH. Have you looked into any others?
Stephen: Besides LIWP, BUILD, and SOMAH, we’ve done solar utilizing federal solar tax credits on properties that are owned by a limited partnership. The main programs we’ve used have been LIWP, SOMAH, and BUILD. We’ve appreciated how these programs have evolved over the years to become easier to access and less complex, which is helpful.
Ian: I want to follow up on the programs becoming less complex and easier to access. When did you start looking into decarbonization programs and what sort of complexities or barriers to access did you encounter then?
Stephen: It probably started about 10 years ago. We found the barriers to entry for some of the programs were much higher. There wasn’t as much technical assistance available. So, we ended up not utilizing a lot of those programs early on because of our lack of time and resources to be able to research them.
Ian: TA is definitely something that we highly recommend to folks while doing outreach on the programs. Could you maybe elaborate a bit more on the value of TA, the things that the TA has been able to help you with?
Stephen: We’re experts in managing housing and developing housing. We’re not experts in these programs. So having the TA to help us understand what incentives are available, how you qualify for them, what paperwork is required, and guiding us through the process on a step-by-step basis, has been tremendously helpful. We’ve also found it helpful for us to specialize with one person that can focus on those programs, learn the terminology and develop the relationships with the consultants and technical assistance to help us better utilize those resources.
Ian: What about TA beyond just navigating the programs, like understanding the various technologies and systems for decarbonization? Have they been able to help on the building science side?
Stephen: We haven’t done much yet on using these programs for new construction. It’s been mostly for rehabs, except BUILD. We’re already designing and focusing on how to reduce energy costs and make buildings more efficient. So, part of it is taking advantage of the resources or incentives available to help us be able to afford the greater efficiency in these buildings and trying newer technologies because the incentive is tied to that technology.
Ian: Are there any specific examples of technologies you’ve tried because of incentives?
Stephen: Heat pump HVAC type units is one that we hadn’t done in the past and we’ve been trying. We’ve put in more water efficient toilets, Energy Star type appliances. We do like to try newer technologies, but we don’t like to be the first one to try them. We had a negative experience dating back probably 35 years ago. Governor Brown had a program, the first time Governor Brown was in office, to put solar on affordable housing but it was a type of solar that was used to essentially heat up the water.
Ian: Thermal, yeah?
Stephen: Yeah, it was a geothermal type thing and/or solar thermal and we put it in one development. It ended up not working and caused many leaks. We ended up just disconnecting and taking the whole thing out after a few years. It was an example of technology that at that point wasn’t widely used, hadn’t been proven. We got burned by that. So, I think our organizational disposition is to not be cutting edge on these things but to implement things that have a longer track record.
Ian: That’s a good point there. Would you say other housing authorities are in a similar position where there’s maybe that hesitance to do the latest, cutting-edge technology and wanting kind of to see more reliability in the marketplace before pursuing some newer technologies?
Stephen: I think that is a common perspective from organizations like ours. Quite frankly, we have enough challenges to deal with, with everything else that’s on our plate, then to have to deal with something that ends up not being reliable and requires extra maintenance. It’s just something we don’t need to have on our plate.
Ian: Do you think there are lessons that other housing authorities could learn from your experience in pursuing decarbonization programs?
Stephen: I think the main thing would be to just be open to trying the various incentive programs and using the technical assistance that is available. Like I said previously, it’s easier than it was in the past and can help ultimately reduce costs for everybody involved.
Ian: How did you all hear about LIWP?
Stephen: I honestly think we were approached. I’ve heard of LIWP before, but I think our most recent engagement was because you or somebody from your team had reached out.
Ian: What sort of expectations did you have about LIWP going into the program?
Stephen: Honestly, I think I was skeptical that it was going to be very helpful but, I was wrong. We’ve had some experience with these companies that go around and say “Hey, we’ll do weatherization and the utilities pay for it.” They end up causing problems at our properties because their work was substandard or not done according to what we’ve specified. So, I think we were a little skeptical because of that experience. That again goes back quite a few years ago.
Ian: How is LIWP different in that regard?
Stephen: I think there’s more transparency for what actually is covered, what will be done. I think we have more flexibility in picking and choosing what we want to do, which is great.
Ian: How important is it to rehab existing properties in terms of your overall mission to provide, maintain, and operate affordable housing?
Stephen: We have to constantly be thinking about rehab because the properties wear down. If you wait too long, you can get so far behind you almost can’t catch up. So, it’s important that we’re aggressive in making improvements to the properties to keep them high quality, energy efficient, and durable.
Ian: How disruptive would you say decarbonization or just rehab work in general is for residents? Is that something you take into consideration?
Stephen: If we’re already doing major rehab work and this is part of that then it usually doesn’t result in any additional disruption for tenants. If we’re not, and the energy efficiency work is not part of a major rehab, we do look to minimize disruption to the tenants and make it as seamless as a process for them as possible.
Ian: Are there specific steps that you take to help minimize that disruption?
Stephen: We make sure to provide adequate noticing to tenants. Oftentimes we’ll have tenant meetings to explain what type of work is being done, when it’ll be done, how long it will take, so the tenants know what to expect. They’re usually pleased with the result as long as they are kept informed throughout the process.
Ian: Are there any other specific accommodations that are given for residents during rehab work? Are they typically asked to move out temporarily?
Stephen: We only do temporary move outs when it’s major rehab. We plan in advance and hold units vacant so that we can have a temporary place for the tenants to move on site that doesn’t disrupt their kids’ schooling or require them to move out of the neighborhood.
Ian: Is there any education you do on how to best utilize the new technologies that are being installed, understanding how heat pumps work, or new stove tops?
Stephen: Our biggest focus on education has to do with when their tenants are benefiting from solar, understanding how the new utility company bills look, and the importance of still paying the monthly charges and not waiting for true up to pay them. |
