>> >> >> >> >> >> >> good morning, and welcome to the joint meeting of the san francisco public utilities commission and local agency formation commission. my name is john avalos. this meeting is

brought to you by sfgtv staff. call item no. 2 please. >> roll call. avalos present, breed present, commissioner mar? present, schmeltzer is absent and leah pimentel is absent. >> president torres, commissioner cane present, commissioner moran, and commissioner courtney is excused today. >> mr. chairman, we have a quorum. >> very good. thank you very much. if you can call item no.

3, please. >> item 3: opening remarks and discussion of expectations for the joining meeting. sf lafco chairperson john avalos and sf puc president art torres.sf 31234 >> thank you very much. as chair of local agency formation commission, i would like to thank you for joining us at this meeting. we are at a very critical juncture now to approve the water program. we have received a lot of information from people across san francisco and even across california that we are an approving a shell contract today and that is not the case. we are here to approve a rate for clean for sf program. it's well within the ability to negotiate a contract for our

clean four sf program. what we have here today is well within the parameters of the program. it's very significant that that vote that we had in september wast by the majority of the supervisors and the concern of people in san francisco. not everyone in san francisco, 27 roll -- we have the roll out of the program. not everyone will stay with the program. we don't expect that we'll have necessarily unanimous support from anybody to approve parts of the program. but we do know that there are san franciscans who welcome the ability to have clean power that is generated publically whether it's a combination of bundled power and recs. and the people that sign onto the program because we believe that moving forward on reducing greenhouse gas

emissions is an important goal to do and important thing to do for the future of this city and future of california and we have to make our mark in that effort and there are many san franciscans who want to do that. today is a very important part of that process. we have an opposition that has come from p g and e and we have to make sure that this small group of people that try to influence what we do here today don't necessarily prevail that what we have to move forward knowing that we would face this kind of opposition in trying to approve our clean power sf program. this is one step of the process. we are looking to approving the sealing for the sf program, we believe the rate will be somewhat below that. i

do know the pucmgs -- public utilities commission staff, and we can have a high level of the clean energy and supported by many people in san francisco to make the program work and that we will also have funding available to build out our own generation system and we start maybe smaller than expected but we'll build something bigger and a great example for the rest of california and perhaps the nation as well. thank you. >> okay. we can go on to our public comment. item no. 3. opening remarks. we'll do two

minutes per person, please. item 3: opening remarks and discussion of expectations for the joining meeting. sf lafco chairperson john avalos and sf puc sf 31234 item 4: general public comment: members of the public may address the special joint meeting of the san francisco local agency formation commission and the san francisco public utilities commission on matters that are within their respective jurisdictions and not sf 41234 >> one of the most important things to remember when we are talking about what we are talking about clean power is to address the carbon foot print. it's not as if we don't have energy in san francisco. we do have. and the public has to be informed how much we get from pittsburg 400 omega watts. how can from p g and e. we have to define and the quality of that power and how is it going to

contribute to the diminishing of the carbon foot print. today if you look all over san francisco, we have huge buildings using huge amounts of concrete that contribute more to the pollution and contamination of san francisco. today in san francisco we have over 4,000 toxic hot spots which the city and county of san francisco has not addressed. today in san francisco we have over 200,000 tons of methane gas spewing in the air which we need to address. your remarks are very general, and maybe you intend them to be general but somewhere there should be some data of how you are going to contribute to the progressive and betterment of san francisco. thank you very much. >> thank you. our next item,

please? so we had general public comment open now. any public wish to address any item related to the puc? please come forward. let me call the name. francisco decosta. >> again in this process, i attended a lafco meeting and was shocked to witness and see before my eyes a survey where the most those areas where most people were impacted were not surveyed. we have to look at it this way in san francisco. the south sector is where all the

pollution takes place. so when we try to mitigate whatever we have to mitigate, we have to pay attention to the by view hunters point the south sector which some of you just pretend it doesn't exist. if you do a survey in the sunset area far away from the bay view and you say we want whatever power they want, that's fine with them. but the people that are most adversely impacted should be also attended to which wasn't done in that survey. after that survey, we saw no mitigation, no abatement, we saw no process to approach the community and do meaningful outreach which means go door to door and say these are the types of things we want to do for you. can you

participate in this deliberation. it's very easy to fit far away from the area and remote control say we are going to do this and that and something else. it's very important to do door to door outreach which hasn't been done by those people who produce that survey. thank you very much. >> thank you, any other member of the public who would like to comment? >> seeing none and no more cards. we'll close public comment. >> for the record i would like to note that sf puc received a number of notes to this commission in favor and were

submitted. >> yes. we also received some e-mails and all were welcomed with different points of view. >> next item. >> item no. 5. item 5: cleanpower sf >> may i say something? so first of all good morning puc and lafco commissioners. i'm with the public utilities commission. for number of years we've been working together and the development of the clean power sf program. i would like to think that we made a lot of progress with our collaboration. in the last year there have been significant advancement and modifications to the proposed program which you will hear about shortly. there have been many elements

driving these changes, such as the fluctuate ion of the renewable and pg & e program. this will allow the puc roll out through power sf. further our staff conducted a work to refine the program based on a policy direction based on the board of supervisors and our commission. these policy directions are balance trade off in three areas. one is to set fair and competitive prices so the program is attractive to potential customers. so we lowered the not to exceed rate that you will hear about shortly. the second is that have the program as green as possible while we are achieving these changes are able to

sustain a renewable product and the third item is to make sure we have funding to support this product and create jobs. these three have been very challenging to balance and what we bring forward is the best program that achieve these three policy issues. at this point we feel that is a policy decision that we are moving forward and with that i would like to bring up another person that we brought on this year kim malcolm, the director of puc sf. >> good morning supervisors. thank you for having us. i would like to briefly give you an update. there is a memo in your packet that highlight these three rather small events. one is that the

california public utilities commission -- by pg & e the right to retain an option to create an organization that would market against cca's the commission rejected the proposal on the basis that it wasn't in compliant with the commission order. the commission order says you tell us that you don't intend to market against cca's or tell us how you would set up an organization in order to do that fairly. i haven't heard whether pg & e intends to file anything sooner or later. are there any questions about that? no. also the staff received approval for an implementation plan for the public utilities commission in november. that sort of -- we do have a duty to

provide those implementation plans to the commission so they understand our business plan and how we will protect consumers, but they really don't have direct authority over the commission in that regard. this commission. >> finally you are all aware that pg & e and a number of other parties filed a settlement that would create a green tear off of pg & e service and that will need to be heard whether they will adopt the settlement. >> first on the first item to market to cca's. it's kind of interesting to note that we spend -- and now it's silent to

campaigning against cca. but there actually hasn't been silence. there has been a lot of e-mails that we have received, the shell shocked campaign and many people believe that it's acting on behalf of pg & e. there are a lot of people who believe that and i wonder if there is any consideration at the puc that there is a connection anyway between what they feel is between ibw and pg & e against cca. >> the california puc does have rules in regard to marketing in a cca environment. i'm not aware that the puc has conducted an investigation and inquired about the puc's role and campaign or any other

behind-the-scenes or open activities. >> it seems like there is a great deal where now this past week my daughter was actually looking at a youtube video justin beeber and there came up shell shock. i was stunned to see it and surprised that it was not being done with pg & e and collaboration between the two. i know a lot of people feel that way. the puc, isn't that their role to look at that? >> it might be. i think that c puc would probably look at others to ask for some kind of inquiry. we haven't asked for that kind of inquiry. >> okay. just for the record, my daughter does like justin beeber. >> i'm more of a joanie

mitchell fan. >> okay. commissioner mar? >> can you talk a little bit about the green tariff that pg & e is subsidizing the rate and it's competitive. can you talk about that? >> yes, the san francisco is that it supports the tariff to offer to customers. when we analyzed it however there are settlements that suggest that other rate pairs would be subsidizing that product in several ways. the settlement itself is not very clear about how the rate would be