all the san francisco public utilities commission to order. we have a roll call, please. president paulson here. vice president rivera here. commissioner maxwell, commissioner jaime and stacy are both excused from today's meeting. you have a quorum. okay. thank you, i'd like to

announce that the san francisco public utilities commission acknowledges that it owns and are stewards of the unseated lands located within the ethnohistoric territory of the ohlone tribe and other familiar descendants of the historic, federally recognized mission san jose verona band of alameda county. the sfpuc also recognized that every citizen residing within the greater bay area has, and continues to benefit from the use and occupation of the molecular ohlone tribe's aboriginal lands since before and after the san francisco public utility commission's founding in 1923 1932, it is vitally important that we not only recognize the history of the tribal lands on which we reside, but also we acknowledge and honor the fact that the moloka'i excuse me, malekula ohlone people have established a working partnership with the sfpuc and our productive and flourishing members within the greater san francisco bay area communities. today we hear the first item

please. first item is item number three. approval of the minutes of march 26, 2020. for any comments or corrections to the minutes. can we open this to public comment, please? remote callers, raise your hand if you wish to provide comment on item number three. do we have any members of the public present wish to provide comment on this item? seeing none, do we have any callers with their hands raised? madam secretary, there are two callers that wish to be recognized callers. this is for the minutes of march 26th. okay. let's let the first person in. if they're talking about item three. do we have any callers with their hands raised? madam secretary, there are no callers that wish to be recognized. thank you. okay. thank you. so can i get a motion? and second, to approve the minutes of march 26th move to approve second roll call, please. president paulson,

i mr. vice president rivera i commissioner maxwell, you have three eyes. okay. so now, number four general public comment. members of the public may address the commission on matters that are within the commission's jurisdiction and are not on today's agenda. remote callers, raise your hand if you wish to provide general public comment. do we have any members of the public present to provide general public comment? commissioners. today i want to stress a very important thing for the bayview-hunters point area chronologically, we have to get the empirical data about the state of affairs when it comes to health in our community. we

and we need to tie it to the sap, puc for resources. so as an environmental issues and being one for over 55 years and i've had the opportunity to travel all over the world and i can see the disparity in the bayview-hunters point. so i formed some teams to hand over the experience, the wisdom from the elders. and we are using the contracting center because it's underutilized. and today we also had a meeting at 1550 evans where steve robinson and ben poole were there. and i've

shared a document, a written document, and given it to steve robinson so that he can see in writing what we have and what we can do with the contracting center. if you commissioners approve of it, it will be a blessing. we have to think outside the box, but we have to think with a vision. a vision that's viable and sustainable. thank you very much. thank you. are there any more speakers in the in the room? see? no more. speakers in the room. do we have any members with, remote callers with their hands raised for remote, general public comment. madam secretary, there's one caller that was to wish to be recognized. thank you. caller, i have unmuted your line. you have

two minutes. commissioner this is jacob evans, an organizer with california. thanks so much for the opportunity to comment remotely. i really appreciate it , i wanted to share a note in response to the decision made last month in sasuke's lawsuit against the state water board over the implementation of updates to the bay delta plan. as you know, the stock losses, lawsuits. the suit was centered on the claim that increased freshwater flows to the bay would endanger the agency's water supply. but this recent court ruling reinforces the importance and legitimacy of increased freshwater flows through the bay delta. low flows to the delta have caused some populations to plummet, sending the ecosystems that depend on them into crisis. the fishing industry and communities that depend on the delta for their livelihoods are facing these impacts head on. for example, 90% of people from disadvantaged delta communities eat fish from the delta four or more times per week. the cdc must acknowledge the need for higher freshwater flows, as the sfc considers either accepting or appealing this decision. central california would urge the commission to accept the

decision. appealing it would waste more ratepayer dollars and would further tie the sfpuc to anti-environmental policy that will harm vulnerable bay delta communities. whatever decision the sfc takes, we ask that these conversations be made public. this lawsuit has been paid for with ratepayer money, and san franciscans deserve to be privy to sfpuc conversations about whether they will continue to invest money in environmentally harmful legal action. thank you. thank you. madam secretary, there are no callers that wish to be recognized. thank you. general public comment is closed. okay. thank you. can we have item number five, please? item five is report of the general manager. thank you. madam secretary, item five a is an update from our chief diversity officer regarding racial equity and inclusion in this initiatives, chris bijou will be presenting. good afternoon, commissioners. again, i'm historically bad at these

microphones. they make me sound funny. but good afternoon to you all. and again, this is going to be an oral presentation. i really come to give you an overview of what we have been doing as an agency, as a team for the past nine months, in my role. and i'm primarily going to talk about three things and mainly three things that are all connected and integrated relationships, professional development and rethinking and reimagining our use of data. and so within the construction of this role, serving as the chief diversity, equity and inclusion officer of the agency, you know, it's important that i provide some some context. and i think this is the very first time that i'm getting, you know, in front of you to provide that context in a way that i should i have historically and have often said i don't do equity, inclusion and diversity work. i am a community enhancement and community development type of person with a foundation that the core focus of what we do should always be rooted in the outcomes is positively for communities. and as an agency, we have a, you know, an external obligation to

the communities. and so what that means for us internally is that we have to start doing things differently. it's not enough to just think outside the box. we have to act outside the box as well. right. because thinking can become very passive. and over the course of using traditional dei frameworks, we can become very passive. and what that looks like and how we measure and evaluate success as you all know, more than four years ago, the agency committed much time, energy and resources to creating a document that provides the blueprint for how we're going to move forward in the creation of the racial equity action plan. this voluminous document, while great, can be overwhelming at times, and because of that overwhelming nature, we have very internally engaged in discussions on how do we start to concentrate the work in order to truly make the necessary advances that we really want to, both for our internal community and the external community? and so with that, the first core component of that is focusing on relationships. we forget at times that diversity, equity and inclusion is prioritized around

relationships. our relationship with the staff, our relationships with our external community, and what that means for us within those relationships and where folks really get stuck around this equity component, is that the core aspect of relationships means we need to ensure that people feel valued. we need to ensure that people don't feel dismissed, and we need to ensure that they don't feel dehumanized in this process. our work internally has been spent in the past nine months of making sure that this component of making our staff feel valued and it's truly prioritized. and how did we do this? well in the first few months of my tenure here, we went around to every location across the agency to meet with everyone we de-prioritize starting at headquarters. why? well, because we're closest to the to the decision making. we went around to every agency my team and i, mainly so we can interact with the people, to hear them, to listen to them, to understand the gaps that they're identifying for us, taking

ourselves and our perspectives outside of the situation, and just truly understanding so that they can feel valued so they can feel less dismissed so that we can rehumanize this process. the work around equity is a humanizing process, and whether we want to acknowledge it or not . there are times when our staff do not feel truly humanized or valued in this process. and so what we have done is to prioritize those relationships, actively listening within that. actively listening is the understanding that they know that they can always come to us. and that is not going to be easy, right? this work is premised on trust and what we are trying to do as an agency is really confront some societal challenges where we have more than 4 to 500 years of fractured trust and so the success is not going to happen overnight. and so that's the first thing that we have been doing. and you don't have quantitative outcomes to back this up. we can't produce quantitative outcomes to back this up. but we know over the past nine months things feel differently. right? it just feels different. and if you ask

folks like to demonstrate, to show you we won't be able to do that yet. and indeed, we may not be able to do that for you for a couple of years, but we know it is resonating in how people feel and how we communicate. we can walk around and engage in these conversations that in the first few months we didn't engage in. so the relationships is a core component because it is foundational to professional development. in a very early days, we had conducted prior to my arrival the racial equity surveys, the employee voice surveys, which have in turn really solidified what we come and know to understand that there are gaps in professional development. this isn't, you know, unique to the puc. this is an issue that every organization struggles with. we need to be continuously better about how we provide professional development . however, we need to integrate professional development. and it can't just happen in isolation. and so what we have done internally is create our own unique professional development curriculum, rooted from the foundation of community development enhancement, contextualized around equity and inclusion. so what does that

mean? first and foremost, this conversation can't just be top down and it cannot be bottom up. it has to be a both and not an either or internally. as an executive leadership team, we have started having our own dedicated monthly conversation around prioritizing equity and what that means to the community . so essentially, conversations that we need to have and how we challenge each other, what we think about the issues, how that resonates in policies, how that resonates in practices are impactful and so we haven't, at least to my understanding as an agency, had this kind of conversation. the fact that we are committing our time, energy and resources as an executive leadership team to doing this once a month is an enormous foundation and a great start, because now we are able to understand different perspectives and what that means for the various staff across the agency. more importantly, it allows us to understand our gaps where policies may not be as effectively designed as they could. just because something is policy doesn't make it right. and i think that is also something that we have to

challenge both the challenge to us, the challenge to the commissioners and the challenge to the community. you know, i often say to staff in several different settings, and i state this very bluntly to you all. slavery was also a legal policy and institution often did not make it right. right. the discriminatory and predatory mortgage lending algorithms and the lending practices were also, you know, sponsored by policy, the practices that didn't make them right. and so how are we challenging how we understand policies and the, the, the enforcing practices that keep things in a state of unequal ness of inequities? we are dedicating our time to understanding what that means for us, an exploration of how our policies right can be improved in order to benefit the communities. this is rooted in the relationships, but it's directly connected to how we are providing and how we are going about professional development. and we are also in the process of, you know, revising managerial and supervisory professional development for all managers and supervisors within throughout the agency that

allows us to make the work sustainable, because what ultimately ends up happening is you get champions of racial equity, diversity and inclusion. and once those champions transition and they move to new positions, they leave an agency, eye, you start to regress in the work. and so now there is no sustainable framework in order for this work to truly be prioritized, we have to make the work sustainable. well, how do we make it sustainable? we make it less about individuals and more about the organization, even if we root it in everything that we do throughout the organization, it's likely to outlive any single one of us. and that's what we are committed to ensuring that this work outlives any single one of us, because the communities that we're responsible to you know, trust us to do this. and the last part is around rethinking and reimagining our use of data. look the national narrative around the limitations of dei is that we can't quantitatively prove it works, that that is a national limitation, but i know it works. i may not be able to

quantitatively prove this to you, but i can qualitatively prove it in many various and various ways. and so part of the limitation around how we think about and how we present that is we're always looking towards metrics and numbers to say something is successful. but in regards to this work, the frameworks are limiting. we have very traditional we evaluated the success of dei from contemporary white eurocentric logic models. it no longer works. we cannot have this type of logic dictate our course of success. and so we are reevaluating and rethinking what that means to us as an agency. you won't see fancy numbers moving forward in our reports, but the data we are going to prioritize will be very intentional. it will be very selective, and it's going to be connected to the policies and the enforcing practices. right. we are also going to leverage a lot more of the qualitative data, because in order to understand that this works, it takes time. we cannot try to essentially repair and transform

4 or 5, 600 years of racial discrimination, of prejudice within our society that's rooted in our institutions and things. within 4 or 5, six years, we're going to get there. this work will take time. and while i am preaching time in some regards, we are moving forward with urgency, and the urgency is exploring some of those policies. and what that means and exploring some of those practices. and what that means. challenging our own conventional wisdom, challenging our biases and decision making, and what that means having these transparent and external conversations as an organization , but also ensuring that we can have these transparent conversations with the community because there are no communities , this one singular community, and we are all a part of that. and so once we begin to look at this thing in the ways in which we should, we believe that the commitment, the time, the energy and the resources that we are committing to this work will truly be beneficial and impactful and will have long lasting impact on not just the puc, but the communities that the puc serves. and with that, i

will conclude. thank you. thank you very much for that, what i would say is a very dynamic report, i think it's as a commissioner, this is the first time i've, i've seen you, you know, present to us in depth and, and i guess i a couple of comments that i have is that, one on it's exciting to hear you say that there's all this internal development that's happening, starting with the agency itself, so that's that sounds important. you know, you're not going to wander out with new plans unless, you know, you have a team buy in and there is some type of a consensus, i guess partly for me, especially since you're emphasizing, you know, lengths of time and quantities versus and qualities and metrics and what have you, everything i've heard right now, even though it sounds absolutely, exactly what we want to have happen after we've put together the metrics or not the metrics, but the, the, what's it called? you know, the list of, of equity issues that we came up

with years ago, as you referenced, that we actually do see, you know, something maybe a little bit more substantial about what is exactly happening, a work plan or or something along those lines. i know that, you know, people that are in, in management ideas and whatever, no matter what the idea, they they, you know, they write journal articles about it and, and do whatever else. i guess for me, as a commissioner, the general public, i would, like to see at least a couple examples of what exactly you might be doing. i really appreciate it. and i'm excited about the fact that you're hired and that you're doing all the things you're saying about. i just hope sometime that there is going to be a piece where you can say, well, here's one thing we did at a management meeting that we really think sort of changed the narrative about how we think about about equity and what that means in the community. so i know that wasn't very specific in terms of an ask, and i'm not trying to make a specific ask out of this, but i just somehow or another, this is a good start to here's what we're going to

do, and this is what the commission is going to be pushing forward, hopefully that you will in your next, presentation to us have, for example, we did this, this and this would be part of the part of the report. so anyway, thank you very much. and thank you. and i can add yes, this there are things that we can immediately share, for example, the creation of our own internal professional development guide serves as an example for any agency. right. and we have that. we've listed out our topics, our discussion points, materials and resources that people can go to. and so it allows for a foundation of how this work should be guided. and we can pinpoint. and we've connected our curriculum to our organizational competencies. right. so is it helping move our competencies in one area versus another. and we are preparing some sort of reports. if you will, internal reports on what that means and what's driving us forward. we're just being very selective as opposed to seven pillars. we're now prioritizing four. we are very intentionally looking at hiring and recruiting , retention and promotion, mobility and professional development and organizational

culture. right. all of those things are connected. and once we, you know, combine everything that we are doing, what are 1 or 2 key and clear things that it's had an impact on regards to organizational culture in regards to hiring as opposed to the 92 various action items, because that can allow us to, you know, unintentionally get lost in what we are tracking and what we're prioritizing. great. great point. good to hear. thank you. commissioner rivera. yeah. thank you, president paulson, thank you for the, update, i just wanted to point out a couple things. i absolutely agree with you that just because a policy is a policy does not make it right or moral or correct, that we constantly have to look at a lot of these decisions and, you know, what were the circumstances? they were made under? i can't tell you how many times i've heard, hey, that's the way it is. that's the way it's always been. that's the way we're always

going to do it. and that's not a good enough answer. so i really appreciate that you are, looking introspectively throughout the sfpuc and our policies and, you know, potentially looking for some, updating the other thing i wanted to state was, i thank you so much for going and reaching out to like, all the rank and file. i think one of the things, especially as an employee to be heard is like one of the, highest honors someone could get, you know, to have their voice and be able to say, well, this is what i'm feeling. this is my, perception of, you know, what's going on. so thank you for doing that, i'm just kind of curious. is there was there any, like, redundant answers that you were getting from rank and file of, like, how they're feeling, whether positive or negative? i would just like for you to share that, please, thank you, commissioner. and there definitely were, look, in regards to feelings, you will

find some staff that feel invalidated, that feel dismissed. but i guess when you balance that out with the staff that are identifying that things are improving. look, we have some work to do and we acknowledge that, right? any organization does, we are constantly trying to improve. so when we hear folks are saying things are not as good as they could be, here's where we need to improve. what is the clarity in the hiring process? i openly maintain, as an outsider to your city, that you're hiring and recruiting process is very convoluted, and i'm being very kind in my words and saying that , it's a chaotic process and you lose a lot of talented folks in this chaotic process. and so sometimes those folks, their lives and their livelihoods are dependent on us making timely decisions. and so when folks are saying, what is the timeline for hiring and recruiting? that is something that we have to take very seriously. and it's also, you know, it's almost a, a, a kind, almost challenge. if you will, to even the commissioners. and how are we collectively thinking about addressing this issue? right. it takes too long

and people have to survive, not many people can even afford to live here, let alone survive. right? so they are asking very directly about that, there are issues where. yes, again, as i stated, our policies may not be correct with the times, right? but also we have to be very specific and clear about what that means. and so we are exploring where those policy gaps are and how we can improve. but i would say what we are hearing overall is improvement in management skills and understanding what that means. how do you lead? how do you conflict, resolve and what are when it comes to hiring and recruiting? what are the processes like to transparency and proving that aspect? so there are some things that we can do internally, but surely there are some external things that that we can collectively work on as well. thank you. commissioners. anything else? commissioner maxwell? yes, i want to thank you for your honesty and your courage and,

and giving people the staff and opportunity to be honest and have courage as well. thank you. thank you and thank you, commissioners. anything else? thank you very much. thank you. and look forward to seeing you next time. can we open this up to public comment please? remote callers raise your hands if you wish to provide comment on item number five. a do we have any members of the public present to provide comment on? five a. missioners. recently there was, an article by doctor kerr, doctor kerr is a is a famous doctor who is a good friend of mine who having said what he wanted to say, was fired from

laguna honda. he sued laguna honda and is the only person who won his case. i like the man because, he's a real good investigative reporter. the sf puc has about 2000 employees as the sf puc has suffered a lot of, a lot of the people have suffered because of the pandemic . during the pandemic, the sfpuc hired a lot of temporary workers , and most of them did pretty good at their jobs. but because we have a hr system that is smithsonian, they couldn't be made permanent. as human beings.

i put it, having worked for many years in the federal system, i say good leaders know the way, show the way, and go the way. but most importantly, aren't. your heart has to be in the right place so that you can take others to a better place. so this interaction in our workplace has to be one of uplifting one another. being kind to one another in in short, good actions. my time is up. i could have given you a sermon. thank you. any more? folks, for public comment in the room, let's go to the lines. do we have any callers, raise your hands if you wish to speak to item five. a madam secretary,

there is one caller that wish to be. or two callers that wish to be recognized. thank you. caller i have muted your line. you have two minutes. my name is hello commissioners. my name is jennifer viteri. i spoke at the sfpuc meeting two weeks ago regarding the pier street outfall. i'm sorry. i'm sorry. before i could this item is regarding five a the report of the general manager and the presentation from staff on the diverse, chief diversity officer . okay. do you wish to speak to that item? no, i have public comments. okay. general, public comment has been closed. we're on item five. a the phone didn't pick up. thank you. caller. next caller, please. caller i have unmuted your line. you have two minutes. madam secretary, there

are no callers that wish to be recognized. thank you. public comment on item five a is closed . that, report and engagement, thank you, mr. president. that concludes my report. okay. okay, well, let's go to the, consent calendar, please. item six is your consent calendar. commissioners, is there anything from item a through item j that you would like to have a comment or pull, please? commissioner maxwell, question six d and e. okay. it looks like, mr. freeborn and mr. cantu are listed as, on the agenda for, possible answers. so go ahead and we'll find out who answers. go ahead. commissioner, do you

have a question? yes sorry. yeah, i was i was wondering about the, it says that we're replacing the water main. i mean, yeah, main replacement with earthquake proof pipes. correct. so can you explain earthquake proof pipes? and then we're also doing the same thing on e. but you don't say that you're using the same kind of pipes and. okay, go ahead. yeah. so, contract wd 2720 is the last of six phase projects from college hill reservoir to san francisco general. and those are all using earthquake resistant ductile iron pipe, that was manufactured in japan, the kubota pipe. so that pipe has been tested and has shown to be

able to withstand large magnitude earthquakes because of the pipe material and its joints . and so, i noticed you didn't mention that on e eight inch and 16 inch. so is there somebody else? so, so e does not have earthquake resistant ductile iron pipe. it has, the standard ductile iron pipe. okay. well, my question was why, so that area is not part of what our planning department has determined is so those are transmission mains. the, the other agenda item that deals with college hill. so that's for water transmission, and it's part of our seismic backbone. so that we're able to, have pipelines that remain in service after an earthquake and then the other project, the 16 inch, which is a transmission, is not

part of our seismic backbone. okay. is it because this one goes to the hospital and. yes. yes. all right. so and then since the other one isn't, it's okay if it breaks. i mean, we're not trying to you know, it's not it's not in a area that is known to be, like a seismic hazard. so it's still uses upgraded joints. it's, less likely to, to break. i see, i see, so it's because of the location, the location. and then the, the level of service goals to make sure that we're able to keep san francisco general, operational. okay all right. thank you. yeah any further questions? okay. thank you. maybe she's going to add something, but thank you very much. good question. yeah. thank you, ryan, for that explanation,

katie miller, director of water capital projects. and i just wanted to follow up that we, the , project in six e is it six e is that has the earthquake resistant, ductile iron pipe is in very intentional pilot project. it was a series of five contracts to install this kubota pipe. it's about twice as expensive as a regular, american made ductile iron pipe, so we wanted to try it out. and this is kind of so we can evaluate the cost and the value added while providing the seismically reliable backbone directly to san francisco general hospital, which is one of our trauma centers. so now we'll take a step back and really look at the costs and the, extra time, for installing this pipe and consider where we want to use it in other parts of the system. in general, we view our backup seismic backbone that ryan spoke

of as the transmission lines that are 24in and greater that provide water to the greater part of san francisco. and then the smaller pipes are distribution pipes that are important because they bring water to people's homes, but they're not the primary pipes that bring it, you know, distribute it throughout the city. so we're focusing our seismic improvements on those larger pipes to make sure that we can get it to the areas. there's about, i think, about 100 miles of those larger pipes. so it's already a significant investment. and then the smaller pipes, we're still using a very high quality pipe with very strong joints. so most of those pipes that are new will survive an earthquake, it's just not the proven technology of this earthquake resistant that's about twice as expensive. i see, because my next question was going to be, is there any way that this price of this pipe would come down if there are

more manufacturers involved? so one of the really great things that you just mentioned is that la la, dwp, department of water and power as well as san francisco, through this pilot project, brought in this kubota pipe to try it out. since then, many more water agencies have also tried the kubota pipe and two three of the primary ductile iron pipe manufacturers here in the united states have now developed a seismic joint. so that is bringing the cost down. it's still expensive because it's a high quality, joint, but we think that the price will continue to come down on this and be more accessible. and with the expense of it warrant, because it would be very expensive if it weren't there, if we didn't have water in an earthquake going to san francisco, how much would that cost? oh, absolutely. general. yeah absolutely. an incredible amount of loss, especially for fires after earthquakes. yeah

yes, yes. that's true. good. thank you. that was informative. commissioner rivera. yeah. that was that was a great question. and i just wanted to mention thank you very much for the explanation of the kubota pipe, in my previous life, i worked with the manufacturers of the kubota pipe. they came out here and did a great presentation for the city distribution, division, and we learned a lot about what happens over in japan. and the flexibility of this pipe is unbelievable, and you're right, it is very expensive. it's proprietary, but i think it's a great value add for the sfpuc and for all of our citizens to have that in there. and i'm so glad that we're moving forward, with this piping. and i look forward to seeing more of it, throughout our system. thank you for bringing that up. thank you. okay. thank you. anything else, commissioners on the consent

calendar. okay. seeing that, let us open the consent calendar to the general public, please. remote callers, raise your hands if you wish to provide comment on item number six. the consent calendar. do we have any members of the public present to provide comment on this item? seeing none, do we have any callers, remote callers with their hands raised on item six? madam secretary, there are no callers in the queue. thank you. public comment on item six is closed. okay, so can i have a motion and a second to accept the consent calendar, please? i moved to accept the consent calendar. second, we have a roll call. please. president paulson. hi. vice president rivera i, commissioner maxwell, you have three eyes. thank you. the consent calendar items pass, item number seven, please. can you read? item seven is public hearing to consider and possible action to approve the scope, schedule, and budget of the

march 2024 proposed revised water system improvement program and direct staff to send a notice of change report to the state water resources control board and the alfred e alquist seismic safety commission. good afternoon, commissioners. i'm katie miller, director of water capital programs, and i'm here today to request your approval of changes to program and project level scope, schedules and budgets for the water system improvement program proposed today and herein as the march 2024 proposed revised water system improvement program. and for your direction to send a notice of change report to the state water resources control board and the alfred e alquist seismic safety commission and compliance with california water code. as a reminder, the water system improvement program or program is a $4.8 billion multi-year capital program consisting of 87 projects. the program is now 99% complete,

with only three remaining active projects. state legislation requires advanced public notice and a public hearing for consideration of any changes to this program. the program was last modified in 2022, extending the program schedule to the year 2027 and revising some project scopes, schedules, and budgets. since 2022, three projects have been completed. also since 2022, progress on construction of the two remaining active water supply projects alameda creek recapture project and regional groundwater storage and recovery project has resulted in some necessary refinements and changes as the regional groundwater storage and recovery project has, requires minor modifications to scope and schedule, but no change to budget. the alameda creek recapture project, which you

recall will be redesigned and rebid after pond f two. erosion repairs have been completed. this requires a schedule extension to june 30th, 2032. in addition, the project's budget will be increased by $5 million to support planning and redesign of the facility. earlier this month, we met with bay area water supply and conservation agency bosca staff to discuss these proposed changes. you have subsequently received their comments on these changes. we generally concur with their comments and wish to highlight their observation that another notice of change is likely to be necessary in the future, due to the potential additional changes to the alameda creek recapture project, since the $5 million additional budget likely will not be sufficient to complete the project, we agree and acknowledge that we plan to request additional funding for

this important project when the costs are better understood, and that this will trigger one more notice of change for the program. and i'm happy to answer any additional questions. thank you for letting us know. we hear about the alameda creek all the time. so, any other questions? commissioners let's open item seven. to about this up to the general public, please. remote callers, raise your hands if you wish to speak. if you if you wish to provide comment on item number seven. do we have any members of the public present to provide comment on this item? seeing none, do we have any callers with their hands raised? ma'am? secretary, there's one caller that wish to be recognized. thank you. caller i have unmuted your line. you have two minutes. thank you very much . good afternoon, commissioners. nicole san leborska, ceo. i just

wish to speak in support of the recommended staff action before you today. and i appreciate, the time that the puc staff has taken to meet with my team to talk about these proposed changes, and we look forward to working with you further. thank you very much. thank you. caller. madam secretary, there are no callers that wish to be recognized. okay. public comment is now closed. so on item number seven, can i have a motion a second to approve the item please. motion to approve. second the motion in a second. can we have a roll call please? president paulson i vice president rivera, i commissioner maxwell, you have three eyes. okay. item number eight and nine, should be read together. connected. so could you read those, please? item eight is public hearing to consider and approve the water. water miscellaneous fee schedule, which includes the revision of

existing fees, elimination of certain fees, and adoption of new fees and charges related to the provision of water service within and outside the city and county of san francisco. if approved, the proposed fees will become effective july 1st, 2024, and will remain in effect until revised. item number nine public hearing to consider and approve the wastewater miscellaneous fee schedule, which includes the revision of existing fees and the adoption of new fees and charges related to the provision of sewer service within the city and county of san francisco. if approved, the proposed fees will become effective july 1st, 2024, and will remain in effect until revised. good afternoon, president paulson. commissioners and the members of the public. my name is christina venice. i'm a rates analyst for the financial planning team and i'm here today to present the proposed updates to the water and wastewater miscellaneous fee schedules. the proposals brought forward to you today were a product of the sfpuc. s 2025 miscellaneous fee study, which

conducted an agency wide bottom up evaluation of the current existing miscellaneous fee schedules. as such, there is a lot of material and fees to review for the next ten minutes. therefore, i will be providing a quick run through on the scope, timeline and methodology of the study before getting into a high level overview on the proposals to supplement this presentation, we've also provided a technical memo to refer to. for more details on each fees, proposed update and specific calculations . i'm happy to take questions after the presentation or during it. if commissioners would like any immediate clarification. first, what is a miscellaneous fee? miscellaneous fees are commission approved charges that are billed to an individual customer and recover costs for performing services outside of standard utilities for the water and wastewater enterprises, most miscellaneous fees charge for customer requested services. however, a handful of fees also

serve as penalties or deposits. these miscellaneous fees are separate from the water and sewer rate process. the revenues collected from these fees go into the enterprises non-ops funds and help decrease the need for increasing retail rates. furthermore, charging miscellaneous fees helps enhance equity between ratepayers by ensuring that the cost of providing a benefit to a customer is only collected from the benefiting customer. therefore it was vital for the sf puc to reevaluate its existing miscellaneous fee schedules to align with the latest updates and costs. the miscellaneous fees study began in the fall of 2023. the financial planning team held review sessions with department managers to confirm the need for these fees and, if so, develop our initial fee calculations through a standardized methodology. this methodology was screened and reviewed with the executive team in the winter, which i can provide more color on in the future. slides during the start of this

calendar year, we updated our analysis analysis with the newly adopted by annual operating budget and prepared collection and implementation strategies with customer service and it, before again reviewing our final recommendations with the executive team. today, we are presenting our proposals for water and wastewater miscellaneous fees, but will be returning on april 23rd to discuss our power proposals in preparation for the. for these rate hearings, public hearing notices were posted on the sfpuc website. the sf public library, and published in the sf examiner on march 22nd, 24th and 27th through 29th to notify the public again if adopted. these proposed updates will become effective on july 1st, 2024, unless otherwise stated in the schedule. when adopting our proposals, our methodology included three key steps. first, calculating the cost of providing the service. second, applying adjustments based on

policy and third, obtaining final staff review details around the methodology in each fees calculation can be found in the technical memo, but in general, the cost of providing service calculations follow industry standard guidelines that totals the labor costs. the enterprises associated overhead rate, and additional relevant materials and equipment. this step is crucial because, as mentioned earlier, most of the miscellaneous fees are charges for requested services and are therefore set at the cost of providing that service. however, there are some cases where other considerations are incorporated into the calculation of the fee. which brings us to step two policy screening as legal and regulatory frameworks that pertain to miscellaneous fees are different than those applied to water and sewer rates. there's more latitude to adjust the price of fees based on policy objectives and concerns in ratepayer equity. in the cases where a fee serves as penalties or refundable deposits , adjustments were made to the fees calculation to incentivize

compliant behavior for, for example, the sfpuc charges a refundable meter rental deposit for customers who request a temporary hydrant connection. this fee is calculated at the cost of coordinating the service and the meter, but also increased by 50. to incentivize customers to return the meter on time and with no damages. the other case where policy screening is needed is if the calculated fee raises concerns about customer affordability or rate impacts on customers, then the sfc may recommend that we lower those cost barriers. for example, the manual meter test fee is charged below the cost of service to limit rate shocks and impacts on customers. our final step is our review with department managers and the executive team, which is vital to help confirm those adjustments, align with broader sf city and sfpuc objectives. here's just a quick example of our calculation methodology,

where we summarize where we compile our labor costs. and then, compile also our material costs. so for this case, a material cost for a58 inch meter, as this fee did not raise any policy concerns about customer affordability or raised a need to directly incentivize behavior, we rounded down the fee to the nearest ten for a clean charge, and are proposing to charge this fee at 460. the standard process was repeated and reviewed for every single fee we evaluated. and here is every single fee we evaluated. this slide shows a comprehensive list of all the water and wastewater miscellaneous fees we evaluated broken out into buckets based on our proposals. starting on the left, the first two buckets simply named fees that escalate by cpi, or fees that will have no changes, are mostly fees that are set through the city and county administrator code, or are calculated and determined

through separate processes such such as other rate studies conducted by different departments. those are distinguished there by asterisks . therefore, there is no direct update or action needed for these fees, since since the commission has adopted them previously as either being adjusted by cpi or to incur no change in the next bucket in the middle column, these fees listed under fees updated with new cost data, were updated using the latest information from department managers to recover the cost of providing each service or at the discretion of policy decisions. these fees will showcase an update in fee amount, and the main drivers of these updates are, differing costs and labor and materials for instance, a service may now require different or multiple staff members not previously accounted for, due to operational changes or business processes. changes and are now incorporated into the proposed fee. the next bucket differs

slightly in that these proposals update the fee structures, as well as the fee amounts. for example, the meter test fee is currently assessed as one flat fee, but at the recommendation of staff at water city distribution division, this fee was restructured into a tiered fee based on meter size. this recommendation is to better align with the cost recovery of each service. since the service process and the staff needed varies by meter, size. in addition to updating the existing fees, we are also proposing to add new fees and to eliminate certain fees as these capture some of the biggest changes, i'm going to go into the those proposals in the next slide. so in summary, the sfpuc is recommending that the commission adopt a new backflow inspection fee as a part of the new water service installation process, which for context is administered through a formal application process. this flat

fee will be charged per applicant requiring that requires a water service inspector to perform a backflow inspection prior to receiving a new service. installation currently, about 7,075% of new service installation applicants require this service, and it's currently being provided without charge. so this new proposed fee is set to recover the labor cost to perform that inspection. the second new fee is the after hours temporary service shutdown fee, which provides a temporary water shutdown on three inches or larger water surfaces and is usually requested by customers who need to do inline plumbing repairs, when they need to do in-lining sorry, inline plumbing repairs, yes. when the service is requested to occur during normal business hours, this is provided without charge, so this fee specifically is set to recover the overtime cost of turning off the water service

and waiting till the repairs are finished, during after hours. therefore, it's structured in the same way. overtime hours are accommodated, which is 4 or 8 hour increments. lastly, the sfpuc is recommending that the commission adopt the elimination of the following fees. first, the flow restricting installations fee, which is a penalty on non-compliant water users usually when they're excessively wasting water. this fee recovers the cost of installing and removing the device. however, the sfpuc recommends that we remove this fee since it has not been in effect for a long time, the pending shut off notice fee. this fee is charged to customers who have missed payments and are notified that without preventative action, may be subject to a shut off. this fee covers the labor work to print and physically post this notice to the customer's property, and it is our recommendation that we eliminate this fee, as the

service is no longer regularly performed and that there are major affordability concerns, that this fee will just further burden customers who have trouble paying bills on time. that concludes the overview of our updates, overall, the water and wastewater fee proposals do not garner a significant amount of revenue, but they are very important, as they reduce this revenue requirement for retail rates and ultimately ensure that the cost for providing a benefit to a customer are collected from those specific customers, thank you. and i'm happy to take any questions. thank you for whittling down a bunch of fees into a presentable, report. so thank you very much for that. i have a general question, and i don't know if this is easily broken down, but how many of how many of these customers that would be paying any of these fees, just in aggregate, would be residential versus commercial? do you have a general breakdown of that? i don't have any different fees.

there's so many different ideas. but how many, you know, would go to me at my house, for example, over the course of whatever i'm doing in my house versus the commercial stuff? do you have that breakdown? yeah, i don't have a direct percentage breakdown on that, but, the majority of the water and wastewater fees do apply to commercial customers was, the ones that do apply to residential customers are often in the w44 schedule, which are for billing and accounting. so those are more so pertain to things like, like billing services or personal requests about, something with their account, rather than like a service to go out and provide temporary water service through a hydrant, so yeah, i think the majority of them do pertain to commercial customers. thank you, commissioner maxwell, actually, i was going to ask the same along the same line, that question. but i do have another

one. and that is, with the backflow inspection fleet fee. my question was going to be who would need that fee, who would be exposed to that speech? and i'm assuming then it's commercial or. yes, development fees or sometimes it is, development like housing development, customers and the fee particularly pertains to customers that have, sometimes like a recycled water system that like, uses greywater, so sometimes it's again, it's commercial customers, but mostly only, reuse or recycle. so, so then that would be rec and park. do we charge rec and park those fees? i mean, since they use recycled water, i would have to defer to our managers who are more, on the ground with that. but i do, from just the information that i have with. oh, yes. thank you. so these

fees would apply to all of our city departments who are requesting similar services, just as they'd apply to members of the public, in the case specifically of the backflow fees, that's any time there is a risk that there could be backflow. that applies to systems with non-potable usage and potable usage in the same building, but from my understanding, there's also other times that, you know, there could be a fire system that could have backflow. we could be concerned about the layout of the plumbing. so it really is something that the water quality folks monitor very closely. so when you say backflow, you mean that, would you explain that? yeah. so that's trying to make sure that we don't get dirty water into our potable water system. so any time there's either a sewer system, a non potable system, or even just something that's on the customer's end that we don't trust their plumbing necessarily , there's a risk that there could be backflow of that water into our water mains. and so the backflow prevention setup is various things that they install

in order to make sure that doesn't happen. and they're going out there when there's a new installation to make sure it's installed correctly and functioning. thank you. and then, would you give me an example of inline service fee? what do you mean by inline and the service fee if you have to cut off, if somebody is, so that pertains to like plumbing repairs, so if a property owner wants to, make repairs to their plumbing lines, they request the sfpuc to come in and basically temporarily shut down the water. so they're not they can make that repair there, so in line in terms of, it's more of a standby fee, it's just to turn off the water, wait for them to finish the repair, and then to turn back on service. and so that's basically then at the street. yes. okay. i'm getting a whole lot of. yes. okay. thank you. so it's basically at the street. it's not like you can just turn it off. gotcha okay. thank you.

any other questions commissioners. again thank you for that. report. so let's open, items eight and nine to the general public, please. public comment. remote callers, please raise your hand if you wish to provide comment on items eight and nine. do we have any members of the public present to provide comment on these items? seeing none, do we have any callers with their hands raised? madam secretary, there are no callers in the queue. thank you. public comment on eight and nine is closed. okay, but we will take a we'll take each item separately. so can i get a motion. and second to approve item eight the water fees motion to approve item eight. second there's a motion and a second on item eight. can we have a roll call, please? president paulson hi. vice president rivera, i commissioner maxwell, i you have three eyes. okay. thank you. and

on item nine for the wastewater fees, can i have a motion and a second to approve that item, please? motion to approve. item nine. second, there's a motion and a second, can we have a roll call, please? president paulson, i vice president rivera, i commissioner maxwell, i we have three eyes okay. thank you. item ten please. could you read it? item ten approve the terms and conditions and authorize the general manager to execute a purchase and sales agreement and easement deed with san mateo county flood and sea level rise resiliency district for the acquisition of a 1386 square foot easement for an aerial water pipeline crossing and associated footings and braces for $70,000. subject to the board of supervisors and mayor's approval. may i please have the slides? good afternoon, commissioners. i'm here today to seek your approval of a purchase

and sale agreement for the acquisition of a pipeline easement for the regional groundwater storage and recovery project, the regional groundwater storage and recovery phase two b contract was just awarded by this commission on february 27th, 2024. the contract is part of the greater regional groundwater storage and recovery project, which is constructing groundwater wells and well stations within the upper peninsula to provide an additional water supply during dry years for sfpuc customers. the groundwater phase two b contract is installing a groundwater pump system at the sfpuc. s south san francisco main, well shown here in this drawing in green as well as the pipeline shown in red from that well to el camino real and up chestnut avenue to carry groundwater to cal waters groundwater treatment plant. i want to pause here to point out a small error in our materials today. the pipelines actually an eight inch pipeline, not a 12 inch. and that's not material to the easement. so i've already

provided our commission secretary with an amended draft resolution for your approval. as noted. thank you. this particular contract will require the acquisition of easements at two locations. i'll begin with the kaiser properties shown here on the right. the pipeline will exit our property at the south san francisco main well, which we own and would cross property owned by kaiser hospitals, negotiate with kaiser still ongoing. they're just moving a little bit slower, and we'll return to the commission for approval once we reach an agreement with kaiser for the current acquisition. before your approval today is to provide for an aerial pipeline crossing over colma creek, shown here on the left. colma creek is under the jurisdiction of the san mateo county flood and sea level rise resiliency district, also known as one shoreline. for this transaction. negotiations are complete, and we're seeking your approval today, subject, of course, to the approval of the board of supervisors. you may wonder why we need a cross. colma creek aerial instead of

maintaining a straight alignment along chestnut avenue. and the reason for that is that chestnut avenue bridge is the chestnut avenue bridge across the creek. in order to cross the creek, we would have to attach the pipeline directly to the bridge. due to the age and unknown condition of the bridge structure, this alternative presented significant structural concerns, and additionally the south south san francisco intends to either rehabilitate or replace the bridge at an unspecified future date, which would present a future risk to our facility and require that we relocate our pipeline to accommodate their project. sfpuc staff worked with folks at both south san francisco and one shoreline to identify mutually agreeable alternative moves for crossing the creek, and this alternative before you today was determined to be the best for all parties. in order for the pipeline to cross above ground, the contractor would construct concrete footings and braces on each side of the creek to

stabilize the pipeline. what you would be approving today through your adoption of the amended resolution, is a purchase and sale agreement for the purchase of an easement between the city and county of san francisco through its public utilities commission and the san mateo county flood and sea level rise resiliency district, also known as one shoreline. the purpose of the easement is for a perpetual right to install and maintain pipe footings and an aerial pipeline crossing the easement would be comprised of approximately 1386ft!s of property, parallel and adjacent to chestnut avenue in south san francisco, and the purchase price for the easement would be $70,000, which is equal to the appraised value as determined by an independent third party appraiser. at this time, i'm happy to answer any questions you might have. thank you. commissioners maxwell, i was wondering, what goes into the

decision to decide to have a pump? i know that, you know, we're having a lot of pump issues. a lot of fish are dying. i know this is not that particular situation, but i was just wondering what goes in to the decision to decide to pump, as in a groundwater? well, yes. to install the well, i will have to defer to somebody else. you're speaking about the location of the groundwater wells? yeah. and i'm thinking about pumps because it just seems like the more pumps we have that that's going to have a problem. it's going to be a problem at some point. i mean, i know we maintain and we do a great job of it. of course. but then sometimes, things happen and it seems like we're doing more wells and so we're going to have more pumps. so yes, it is it is complicated. we have 13

wells in the regional groundwater system, those were those locations were carefully selected. and, a lot of it is to spread the pumps and the wells across the basin so that you don't over pump the aquifer in any one location. that being said, it creates quite a bit of, complexity because now you're operating 13 wells instead of 2 or 1, and this has been acknowledged by our operation and maintenance staff. i'm sorry . all have pumps. oh, sure. yeah. you have to bring the water up through the ground so it all. and not just pumps, but treatment facilities as, you know, a lot of water quality equipment, backup generators, security systems. it's a big deal. they're very expensive facilities. so. but the locations were chosen very carefully in order to optimize as the basin yield and not overdraw it at any one location.

and, steve, do you have anything to add? well. yeah. steve ritchie assistant general manager for water i think your question was about, you know, why pumping at all. you know, because pumps can be complicated and that's the nature of our system, actually, because it's the hetchy system is driven totally by gravity. so we have the luxury of that. everybody else in the world is pumping water, all kinds of different places. so we have to use pumps, you know, in the water system and in the groundwater program and in other treatment plants, because, because, you know, water only falls so far by gravity. you have to pump it up to make use of it. so in the case of the groundwater wells, you have to get it out of the ground into a different location. yes. and i recognize that. and i also recognize that there's a lot of problems with pumps depending on where it is, you know, like, say up country. we're having problems with fish

being caught up in all of the pumping and not up country. no. now people, the, the, the delta, for example, people refer to the pumps because they're pumping water out of the delta, that's because they're going to move that water several hundred miles away. and so unfortunately, that's that's a lousy place to have to pump water from, but they have to pump water to get it to the location where it's needed. and there's and they're stuck with that. yeah all right. thank you. any other questions commissioners. okay. let's open this up to the general public, please. item ten comment remote callers, raise your hands if you wish. if you wish to provide comment on an item. number ten, do we have any members of the public present to provide comment on this item? do we have any callers with their hands raised? madam secretary, there are no callers in the queue.

thank you. public comment on item ten is closed. okay, so item ten, can we get a motion and a second to approve item? i'm sorry, commissioner maxwell. i just wanted to thank all the folks who've been presenting. they've been new people that we haven't seen. and so i want to thank you. and you know, for your competence and your under pressure. you're quite good. so thank you all. great. thank you. commissioner okay. so again, let's can i have a motion and second to approve item ten. and i should note as admitted make sure that this is referring to an eight inch diameter pipe. yes motion to approve item ten. second we have roll call, please. there's a motion. second, president paulson, i vice president rivera, i commissioner maxwell, i we have three eyes okay. let us read item number 11, please. item 11

approve modification of the green infrastructure grant program guidelines to raise the maximum cost per acre foot of impervious, impervious surface area managed by grant funded projects from 930,000 to 1,035,000. and the maximum grant award per project from 2 million to 2,500,000 to account for inflation. revised funding disbursement requirements for city departments only, and revised program eligibility criteria and other program requirements. okay. good afternoon commissioners. my name is sarah bloom. i'm a senior watershed planner within the wastewater enterprise, and today i'm introducing several proposed updates to the pwcs green infrastructure grant program. since the program began in 2019, the puc has awarded 22 grants, totaling just over $23 million in funding. five of those projects. sorry, five of those projects have completed construction, and the remaining

are in the various planning and design phases. our grantees to date have included a mix of public and private schools, parks and artist cooperative. and just this last cycle, our first residential project. so we've been really encouraged by the results that we've seen over the last five years. our last program update came before this commission in march of 2022, and the proposed modifications to the grant guidelines in front of you today represent a collection of the lessons learned over the last two years of the program implementation, and are aimed at gaining efficiencies and maximizing the benefits of this program. a full list of the proposed modifications is provided to you in the agenda item, and i will highlight just some of the more substantial changes with you today, firstly, we're proposing to increase the maximum cost per acre that the program awards from 930,000 to $1,035,000 per acre to account for annual inflation and to continue to allow the program to cover the full cost for the

design and construction of green infrastructure facilities. we're also proposing to increase the per project maximum grant award from 2 million to 2.5 million, so that we can continue to award projects of a similar size as our cost per acre increased is. next, we are proposing to allow our grantees to request a grant amendment for additional funding. if, through the planning and design process, it's discovered that a project can manage additional stormwater performance for us, this will allow the puc to leverage its existing grant commitment to maximize the amount of stormwater that's captured per project. and as with all of our amendments, they will be at the discretion of the general manager and based on available program funding within the program eligibility criteria, we would like to expand the definition of eligible projects to include projects that may be located in the public right of way. we've received a lot of interest from community groups and other public agencies about projects that are either partially or completely in the public right of way, and this

expansion will open up new opportunities for stormwater management in partnership with those city agencies. and lastly, we propose to revise the grant disbursement process for projects awarded to other city department s to allow for more upfront construction funding so that city departments can follow their standard procedure of soliciting bids. with full project funds available, we will still retain 10% of the construction budget for city projects so that we can continue to ensure that projects meet all of our grant requirements as and this program operates under delegated authority from the board of supervisors to enter into these grant agreements in excess of 20 years. and so if the commission approves these modifications today, we will then submit these revised guidelines to the board, along with the request to extend our delegated authority, which currently sunsets in june 2024 for an additional two years through june 2026. with that, i will take any questions that you have. thank you, especially very good. to be reminded of this

program and for presenting the modifications, commissioners, any questions? seeing none. thank you very much for that report. let's open this up to the public comment, please. remote callers, raise your hands if you wish to provide comment on item number 11. do you have any members of the public present to provide comment on this item? seeing none, do we have any callers with their hands raised? madam secretary, there are no callers in the queue. thank you. public comment on item 11 is closed. item 11 to approve motion to approve motion. and second, can we have the roll call please? president paulson i vice president rivera i commissioner maxwell, i have three eyes. thank you. amendment modification approved. so item 12, can we read item 12, please? item 12 is discussion and

possible action on the process to recruit and select a new commission secretary. great. thank you. so as i requested at the last meeting, we put an agenda item together to discuss the process to recruit and select a new commission secretary, and i've requested that, sfpuc. chief people officer wendy macy join us to talk about the recruitment process and talk about how the city does this, recruitment process. and then we'll propose a selection process when she is finished. miss macy, thank you for coming. good afternoon, president paulson. commissioners wendy macy, chief people officer so the position that we call, director of commission affairs, it's an 0922, it was approved last week and it's currently posted. it's been opened and posted since april 5th. so anyone can find the listing in smartrecruiters as well as our sfpuc website, it's also being posted in a number of job boards

that we normally post to. it's dozens of them, many specialty sites as well as general sites, and we're also asking people to please, distribute it to their networks as well, we will keep the listing open, for a minimum of two weeks. but as long as it's necessary for us to, have a high enough pool of candidates that we can then screen, so that the most highly qualified candidates can move forward to the interview stage. so again, we will keep the announcement open until we have a sufficient number of candidates to interview. great well thank you, so i'm going to make a proposal that when you do get that short list of candidates that you could put in the pool, that you put the, your normal, recruitment or interview committee together, to do the interviews with those candidates. and i propose that

as president of the commission that i be on that that committee, to go forward and then once there is a candidate that's identified that we bring it back here for the commissioners to present the recommendation here to the full commission. so i'm making that proposal, right now, commissioners, if anybody doesn't have any, objections to that, i will i will call that policy commissioners. okay, then let us, then that's what we will do. so keep us informed about the list and, and let me know when you're ready to have the committee assembled. we will do so. thank you very much. okay. thank you very much for your work. okay, i guess we should. any other comments? commissioners if not, let's open this up to general public comment. remote callers, raise your hands if you wish to provide comment on item number 12. do we have any members of the public present who provide to provide comment on this item?

seeing none, do we have any callers with their hands raised? madam secretary, there are no callers in the queue. thank you. public comment and item 12 is closed. all right. okay. are there any communications that need to be discussed or pointed out? commissioners seeing none. next item. any items to be initiated by the commissioners? commissioner maxwell. yes. thank you. you're up next week, and i will be my last commission meeting. and so i'm just i've enjoyed. well, it's been a well, you know, i'll talk about it later. thank you. oh okay. okay, okay. and city hall, that's all they know. okay. well, thank you, okay, i'm gonna leave it at that. thank you. are there any

other items that need to be initiated or comments or not? okay. seeing none. rivera i just want to say what an honor and pleasure it's been working with you. and while you know we're going to miss you, then thank you for letting us know. yeah, let's recognize a few seconds. this is a shock. and i don't really know what else to say, but if you're going to be leaving us, i'm going to miss working with you. i'm going to tell you that right now. but let's, unexpectedly. but let's open this up to public comment. remote callers, raise your hands if you wish to provide comment on item number 14. do we have any members of the public present to provide comment on this item? seeing none, we're getting callers with their hands raised. madam secretary, there are no callers in the queue. thank you, public comment on item 14 is closed. okay so on

that note, let us ask, donna, can you read the matters that are going to be read in closed session and then open that to public comment items to be heard in closed session? item number 17 conference with legal counsel proposed authority under civil code of civil procedure, section 998 to offer settlement of a personal injury claim with the city and county of san francisco to pay michael daniel 350,000, subject to approval by the board of supervisors. item 18 conference with legal counsel. proposed settlement of unmitigated claim for property damage resulting from a water main rupture with the city to pay jason shaw $33,384.31 in exchange for a full and final release. subject to final approval by the board of supervisors. item 19 conference with legal counsel. proposed settlement of unmitigated claims for property damage resulting from the september 10th, 2023 break of a water transmission pipeline at the intersection of fillmore and green streets with the city to pay the three

claimants the settlement amounts, as noted on the agenda each in exchange for a full and final release. the approval is under the delegated authority granted by the board of supervisors. item 20 conference with legal counsel. updated on update on existing litigation matters related to the december 31st, 2022 storm and item 21 conference with legal counsel. various unmitigated regulatory claims regarding san francisco's combined sewer system operations . okay. thank you, so can i get a motion on whether to assert attorney client? i need to see if. do we have any, do we have any callers with their hands raised? i'm sorry, we're not in closed session yet, do we have any callers? there are no callers in the queue. thank you. okay, now, number 16 closed. so item 16. i'm sorry, sfgovtv were not in closed session yet. please bring us live. item 16 is a motion on whether to assert

the attorney client privilege regarding the matters, listed. okay. can i have a motion on whether or not assert, motion to assert the attorney client privilege regarding the matters listed? second motion and second, can we get a roll call, please? president paulson. hi. vice president rivera, i. commissioner maxwell, hi. okay, we are back in open session, i would like to announce that the commission is recommending that the board approve the settlements that were referenced in item 17, 18 and 19, and no action was taken on items 20 and 21. so, read item 23, please. item 23 is a motion regarding whether to disclose the discussions during

closed session. okay. can i get a motion not to disclose? motion second, motion not to disclose. second. there's a motion and a second. can we have a roll call, please? mr. paulson, hi. vice president rivera. i, commissioner maxwell. hi three eyes. thank you. there's no more business. we are now adjourned. thank you everyone. thank you

[music] since the opening on third and mission in 2010 the grove is a epicenter. tis is part of the community. we bring tourist, we bring convention ears and have a huge group of locers who live here. we are their living room and love to see them on a regular basis and seek newcomers to the city of san francisco and serve them a good dose of san francisco hospitality. we make everything in house from scratch every dape we vahand carved [indiscernible] the chicken pot pie we serve probably a hundred thousand if not more. roasted chicken, prime rib,

salad[indiscernible] coffee cake and [indiscernible] all the pies are fresh baked. the home made cookies are done, once, twice a day, depending how fast they go. we believe in goold old fashion home cooked food. we want to be a welcoming, warm hospitable place for everyone to come and hang out. respond time with friends and family, meet new people. have important conversation. relax and enjoy, rejuvenate, get restored, enjoy one another and the at mus sphere the growth. the grove is over 730 to 830, 7 days a week, breakfast, lunch and dinner. >> [music] you are watching golden gate inventions with

michael. this is episode exploring the excelsior. >> hi i'm michael you are watching golden gate inventions highlighting urban out doors we are in the excelsior. pickleball. let's play pickleball! pickleball is an incredited low popular sport growing nationwide. pickleball combines tennis, bad mitton and ping pong. playod a bad mitton sized court with paddle and i plasticic ball. starting out is easy. you can pick up paddle and balls for 20 buck and it is suitable for everyone in all skill levels you see here. the gim is played by 2 or 4 players.

the ball must be served diagnoty and other rules theory easy to pick up. the game ends when i player or team reaches a set score 11 or 21 point bunkham win bright 2 pickleball courts are available across the city some are and others require booking ahead and a fee. information about the courts found at sf recpark. org if you are interested in playing. now i know why people are playing pickleball. it is so much fun you play all ages. all skill levels and pop on a court and you are red to g. a lot of fun i'm glad i did it. all right. let's go! time for a hike! there is i ton of hike nothing excelsior.

312 acres mc clarin the second largest p in san francisco. there are 7 miles of tris including the there was fer's way this spreads over foresxeft field and prosecute voids hill side views of the city. and well is a meditative quiet place in mc clarin p you will siendz labyrinth made of rock:now we are at glen eagle golf course special try out disk golf >> now disk golf! so disk golf is like traditional golf but with noticing disks. credit as the sport's pioneer establishing the disk ballsorption and the first standardized target the disk ball hole. the game involves throwing from

key areas toward i metal basket. players use different disks for long distances driver, immediateerate. mid range and precise shot, putters. players begin at the t area. throw disks toward the basket and prosecute seed down the fare way. player with the lowest number of throws the end wins the game. disk golf at glen eagle cost 14 dollars if you pay at the clubhouse. there is an 18 hole course this is free. du see that shot? i won! am i was not very good now i have a huge respect for disk ball player its is difficult but fun. thank you for joining me in the excelsior this is goldenate

adventures. >> all right, good afternoon, every one, thank you for your patience, welcome to the san francisco housing authority commission meeting for special commission meeting for today, monday, april first. can we call roll please. >> clerk: president joaquin torres. >> present. >> commissioner lindo. >> present. >> commissioner kim. >> present. >> commissioner pikes. >> present. >> [reading ramaytush ohlone

acknowledgment] >> thank you, president. item number 4 is general public comment. nor part of the agenda is--commissioner staff to be aware of that is not appropriate for commissioners not properly set in a properly noticed agenda. please send your communication