with power as well as water and wastewater. the fourth thing we would urge as the commission gets into the retail power business is to keep all the data on the customer load by unit size, by weather, and by type. all the historical data will be very useful when it comes time for the next examination, potentially as we move toward having more we tell customers. all this data makes forecasting better and easier. a few final thoughts, as was mentioned before. the redevelopment areas are a very small sliver, maybe 1% to 2% of the budget. because of that and because there are no current customers there, our process has been easy. if you look over our minutes, we have not one word of public comment. there are no existing customers being affected by this.

it was a very easy process. we have also noted that the redevelopment areas are at or above cost service. these rates do not relate subsidize the general fund rates or the excess sales of power. there are contracts with modesto and rates for the enterprise from the airport. the green is very commendable. finally, the community choice aggregation is moving down a path. that will be a much more difficult and much more controversial process for you and for the rate fairness board, but we are up to the challenge. we think this is a nice starting point for the process. it will be a much more contentious issue. with that, i will take questions or defer to staff. president vietor: i want to thank you for all your work. express our thanks to the entire

rate fairness board. we really appreciate your hard work on this and your recommendations. commissioners, and the questions? -- any questions? vice president moran: i would like to echo that. i think your last two slides were a couple taking us beyond the line-by-lined critique of what has been proposed and to keep up for us some issues we need to watch for overtime. that is very helpful. >> we are happy to do so. president vietor: any other comments or questions? anything else on the right issue at this time? any public comment? >> good afternoon. my name is wells lawson. i actually worked here for the

office of economic and work force development, and have been talking briefly with the rate fairness board about some of the proposals. after today, after talking with todd earlier this week, i have a greater appreciation for the complexity of the policy we have to talk about. as the project manager, i am here with tiffany, who is also a project manager on the shipyard hunters point redevelopment project. i want to weigh in on a couple of issues and let you know we are interested in being engaged in the conversation. the reason for that is that in august that we approved the candlestick point hunters point shipyard project, a historic win for the city, and a real lift. now we're starting to contemplate what it takes to get those businesses out there that will create 10,000 jobs in the commercial portion of the hunters point shipyard. we have initial studies that have been completed, and the

landscape for attracting tenants is a tough world. we have very limited tools right now available to us. we have the enterprise zone credits and deductions. we have potential payroll tax exemptions. otherwise, we are very limited in what we have. we are obviously great proponents port support for new clean-tech companies. that is 3 million square feet, the next frontier in terms of economic development. to the board process and process with the redevelopment agency, we have weighed in collectively as to the future of hunters point shipyard and what we expect it to do for the city. our thinking around this is effectively that applying a discounted power, as

recommended, to the geography of the shipyard instead of a tenant-by-tenant basis would be powerful and helpful for us in attracting tenants to the shipyard. i am not sure how we do that. i appreciate the complexity for the conversation. i think we are looking forward to talking with todd, the rate fairness board, and the commissioners in the future about how this works. the other point i wanted to make is, generally speaking, the green power capital fund -- i like the idea of that being redirected to the redevelopment agencies. we are trying to attract clean energy and clean businesses out to the hunters part -- the hunters point shipyard. we have a lot of work to do as a city to get there. it is more of an invitation right now to work with folks going forward.

i think if you could consider the needs of the project area, i noted it was number of four in your strategic plan objective. you do not want to forget the work force development objective. i am happy to answer any questions that commissioners might have. president vietor: any questions or comments? we appreciate your reminding us of these issues. we hope you'll come back as opportunities arise to see how we can help. it would be great to develop the work force and provide as many opportunities as we can out there. >> if i may, i did a back of the envelope calculation reminding you that phase one is approximately 1200 homes. the remaining 10,500 homes have yet to be built up. there is a lot of high-density development, ranging from towers 35 stories tall to a very big

projects. i did a back of the envelope to regulation of the projected energy to create 10,000 jobs, you are looking at something like the $125 per year subsidy per job to facilitate the attraction of those businesses. that is one ankle and one way to think about it as we move forward. president vietor: thank you very much. next item, please. >> next item -- discussion of possible action authorizing the general manager to request approval from the board of supervisors to accept and expand congressionally directed project funds from the 2009 omnibus appropriations act, as administered by the department of energy, for the fats, oil and grease to biodiesel project, currently in the process of demonstrated -- of demonstrating

technologies to recover greece to be converted into biofuel including biodiesel. president vietor: is there a motion to adopt this item? any public comment? all those in favor? opposed? the motion carries. next item, please. >> item 14, discussion of possible action to approve the selection of esa+orion jv, a ward of the -- award of the hetch hetcy moccasin facilities upgrade, and authorize the general manager to negotiate and execute the professional services agreement. >> i have a question. that is whether this project is ready. what i am thinking is as we go

to the budget process, one of the things i want to talk about is the nature and pace of this program. i am wondering if we have the project will one of defined to put into the environmental review process -- we have the project well enough defined to put into the environmental review process. >> commissioner, i think there are a number of facilities that need to be upgraded. i am not sure that we have a project totally ready to start right now. the contract would not begin until march. we can explain. >> go ahead. [laughter] >> michael karlin, deputy general manager. we think this whole program is maturing all our facilities. as part of the budget process,

we will take you through some of our facility needs outside of san francisco. we are building 525 golden gate. but our staff is currently working out of moccasin. we would like to upgrade those facilities so they have the equivalent of what people in san francisco have. we have been studying it. we have layouts of facilities we want to of great and what they entail. -- we want to upgrade and what they entail. we want an environmental consultant in place as we take the project forward. we think we are ready. >> i am not going to object to this. i am just putting everybody on notice. >> we have several specific slides just to talk about how much we would be spending on facilities. president vietor: any other comments on item 14? is there a motion to adopt item 14?

any motions? item 14? second? hearing none, what do i do? to table it until -- continue it to the next meeting, until we have more information and can look at the slides? >> is there any time line when the bid runs out, anything like that? president vietor: i don't think so. hearing no objections, i would like to continue -- can we please continue this to the next meeting and get more information at this time? next item, please. >> item 15, discussion and possible action to approve the selection of hdr engineering, harry tracy water treatment

plant long-term improvements project construction management services staff augmentation, to authorize the general manager to execute the professional services agreement with hdr engineering not to exceed $16 million with a duration of five years, subject to board of supervisors' approval. >> julie labonte, executive director. do you have questions on any specific items? president vietor: any questions or comments on this item? is there a motion to adopt item 16? i am sorry -- 15. is there a second? hough -- public comment on this item? all those in favor of adopting

item 15? opposed? the motion carries. >> item 16, discussion and possible action to approve the plans and specifications of the water enterprise water system improvement program, crystal springs pipeline number to replacement project to the lowest qualified responsible bidder, ranger pipelines, to provide improvements that will add seismic reliability to the northern peninsula. >> i want to point out that this item shows we are continuing to benefit from a very favorable bidding environment. in this case, we were able to save $13.80 million with the lowest bid, which represents 30% of savings from our budget. >> and ranger pipeline, as i recall, is a san francisco firm

located in bayview. >> they have done very good work for us so far. president vietor: public comment on this item? all those in favor? opposed? next item, please. >> madame president, i believe we are coming to the end of the regular calendar. >> there are no closed session items today. if you could take those off calendar and move to item 22, if the commissioner has any additional new business items? president vietor: any new business items? >> move to adjourn. >> let me put a nail on the to buy four.

we are talking about issuing debt and for the first time ever against our credit. we are talking essentially about giving a rate to one part of the city that would be at the end of five years 20% below market rates. we are also talking about building facilities. that picture bothers me. we are heading into budget season. that would be the time to talk about that. there are significant bears -- significant issues there we need to look at. president vietor: thank you, commissioner moran. that is helpful. i heard the motion to adjourn. the meeting is adjourned. thank you so much. 4:15.

>> thanks for coming today. we are announcing are temporary homeowner's property tax reduction program. this is what most assessor's up and down the state are doing.

homeowners are reliable -- of all property owners are eligible for a temporary, 1-year property-tax assessment reduction if they believe or if we believe dave -- the assess the value has fallen above their market value, which means that the value would be lower than the market value. in general, homeowners who are eligible, chances are, they purchased homes after 2003. we do get applicants who have owned homes since 1995 or earlier. in general, anybody who is owned their home prior to 2003, they are doing well, which is good news. chances are the market value is higher than the assessed value, meaning the property appreciate it. people we are able to offer little relief for, the sad news is, their homes have depreciated. there will be a little bit of relief for them.

in general, last year, we saw 6400 applicants in comparison to four years ago when we had 248 requests. the form a simple. it is one page. name, telephone number, e-mail, and the address you are applying for. if you can give us sales in formation of similar types of homes, we do hope you can give us that. if you cannot come maternity leave blank and sign it. e-mail or fax it to us -- if you cannot give us that, leave it blank and sign it. e-mail or fax it was. tenderloin downtown, south of market, mission bay, and south beach. those were many of the new high- rise condominiums that went in to market the last four or five years. we have seen a significant amount of depreciation in those

areas. gaviria that has seen the largest value drop is -- the other area that has seen the largest volume drop is the outer mission, amazon, those areas have seen the largest percentage drop. it is where we have been hit hardest with foreclosures. we make sure that we take an extra look. we proactively have been reviewing every home that was purchased after 2000. even though we think eligibility is for people up to 2003, we review any homeowner who purchased after 2000. that was roughly about 15,000 homeowners. of that, reduced -- no one had to apply or call us. we did this on our own. we reduced 10,000 of those homeowners. roughly, you have 10,000 reductions that we did on our own. 1700 reductions were done through this application

process. 5000 time shares is how you get to the 17,000 number. just to give you a comparison, it is quite a bit in san francisco. these are huge numbers, larger than the dot com bust. alameda and santa clara did about 1000 come a tenfold. -- 1000, tenfold. we are doing better than our counterparts in other parts of the bay area. i feel fortunate. the tax reduction was about 21 million in taxes that were not collected. 21 million in taxes were not collected. that is a significant number. it is out of a $6.5 billion budget. overall, the difference to the city is still rather small compared to what it meant to many of the other counties in other areas. let me stop there and take

questions. >> [inaudible] >> 6462. of those, we actually reviewed only 4177. many of those were already reviewed. we have actively reviewed them. some of them were not eligible. >> [inaudible] >> anybody who has gotten a reduction, they don't need to apply. we will look at it again. if you have gotten a reduction through an appeal or through our office, they don't need to apply again. they will be reviewed. they may want to apply because maybe they want to give us information we don't know. they are free to do that. that will be reviewed as part of

that process. in general, they don't need to submit paperwork if they already got a reduction last year. >> [inaudible] >> well, i think because it is just flat, the market has not rebounded and gone up. we will probably see the same number of people deserve reductions last year. i think it will be comparable. traditionally, an economic recovery is like a v. this is more like a u. we're at the bottom of it right now. my feeling is we are going to see, you know, a very unusual real-estate market in san francisco. it will be flat and not appreciate a whole lot right now. the number people who are eligible is probably similar to

last year. i bet we will give about the same number of reductions this year as we did last year. it will not be that much different. >> [inaudible] >> anybody that was reviewed -- everybody in san francisco got a letter from us in july. they were told what their assessed value was. there were told that they got a reduction. if they got a reduction based on the letter, they don't need to reapply. what people do is we will review applicants. the deadline is march 31. all 17,000 who got reductions will be reviewed automatically. everyone will get notified again in july. we will not talk to anybody prior to that. everyone else will be getting the standard notification in july. >> [inaudible] you review these every year. >> every year.

the reductions we review every year. as the market appreciates, we may take their assessments up based on what the market value is. they may go all the way back up to the factor value. it may go up partially higher. obviously, that is what he would see. you would see a step over the years to include the appreciation based on what the market is feeling. right now, we are not seeing a whole lot of appreciation. chances are, the assessment will be a little bit different than last year. the original purchase applies plus whatever the inflation factor was on an annual basis. in general, up to 2%. we had a negative inflation factor for the first time last year. everybody got a reduction last year. >> [inaudible] >> this year, cpi based on the final number we saw, is.

5% positive. it is still well below 2%. -- is .5% positive. it is still well below 2%. the economy is still rather flat. >> [inaudible] >> everybody who does not get a reduction will get a .5% increase in their assessment. that is just a proximate. it will probably be pretty close to that. we can show you the website. we follow the same website. it is the state cpi. it is a tracking mechanism for the state. >> [inaudible] >> i think there will vote to finalize in the next month or two. i think the number is done. >> overall, when all is said and

done, what is the amount that you're going to receive [inaudible] >> for reductions, it will really just depend on how much your property might have depreciated or appreciate id. some areas where maybe there was a 5% or 3%, the good news in san francisco, we have not seen a few drops we saw in other parts of the bay area, like solano, or properties dropped 50%. you don't want that. you want your property to appreciate. that is the goal. it might be $50, $100, maybe a few hundred dollars. it and will not be anything huge -- it will not be anything huge. >> [inaudible] >> over last year, it was a $21

million difference. because of the temporary reductions in homeowners values, there was $21 million that was not collected by the county. let's put that in context of the $6.5 billion budget. >> [inaudible] >> the total property tax collected is about $2 billion. overall, we are doing quite well. >> [inaudible] >> overall, property-tax as have done extremely well the last five, 10 years. we have seen huge increases overall. >> [inaudible] >> no idea. if i did, i should be in las vegas placing a bet, or should be in new york making more money than i am here. the controller's office is

probably tracking it more than us. we don't know. we have seen -- we have seen several governments pumped $1 trillion into the economy. it is a huge amount of money. we have seen some improvements, but not the ones they were hoping for. great. ok. thanks, everybody.