this discussion with the re- branding began in 2006. we started to talk with the assistant advisory committee, and what we saw was the top five teams suggested by staff, delineating what we do here at our agency. it has been simmering all this time. we reached this point where our involvement in the branding and redesigning our website have brought us here right now. thinking along the lines of trying to reduce -- this is the opportune time to do it. to incorporated into the existing activities. to give you an idea of our

existing web site -- it is on the screen. it is pretty bad. you really cannot find anything. you cannot find what you are looking for. this is an example of what we are transitioning to, this new web site. you are providing the key services that people are looking for. so, what is in a name? i will follow that up. that which we call our rose by any other name will smell as sweet. this is from " romeo and juliet." juliet loved one romeo because of the personality, not the name associated with romeo. his family name. we have a new agency will,

which is a really delineating and identifying the services we provide with the icon -- taking elements of our existing puc lobo to aid in continuity. you see the lightning bolt and the raindrop. umass them all together and really -- you mash them all together and really identify this as an icon that illustrates very clearly what services we provide. i have this next slide. we are talking about a identifying the services that are provided by the san francisco public utilities commission. you see the services of the sentences the public utilities commission.

and we developed some treatment on the back of these business cards. the operator of the hetch hetchy water system. and we've combined the is to find opportunities to learn from. -- and we have combined these to find opportunities to learn from. for our in-city customers, their needs are a little different. so, what we are proposing is a regional business card look, outlining the hetch hetchy water system again, the san francisco public utilities commission. and then, we have space for our regional emergency number. for example -- the 24-hour hot

line. we have an example of our emergency card. we have the letterhead. san francisco water, power, sewer. the icon is in the corner, and the general manager of listed in the right hand. instead of highlighting the services -- we move to the bottom for the services of the san francisco public utilities. this is really a low-cost transition. that was a big concern. all this was done in-house by

our communications staff. it is great we got them on board. i want to thank our graphics design team for all their hard work. you see, we are not only talking about an electronic template change. the business cards, the letterhead. we intend this to be a gradual transition. we are, in effect, still the san francisco public utilities commission. if we run out of those cards, we will transition over. and the other cost would be the gradual replacement. and again, we are talking about a gradual replacement over a long period of time. that is when the new decal would

be added. our implementation plan would be reaching alex to staff. we want to continue -- we would be reaching out to staff. we want to continue those meetings. this fits into our longer-term figure. this is -- again, the end all, be all of outreach and communications. this is a way for us to brand ourselves in the public. we are scheduling a meeting with the fiscal advisory committee next week to talk about our long-term communications. with that, i will take pot shots for questions. -- or questions. [laughter]

commissioner courtney: i do not know why we need new id cards or letterhead. why do we need that? >> we began a process last year, and we were already moving away, so we were trying to tiny and now while we were doing that. if this were the time -- commissioner courtney: was it really expressed by the rate payers that they wanted a new look for the puc? >> i think it was inspired by people not really knowing who we are. commissioner courtney: as long as i am flushing my toilet and it goes down and getting my

water, i am happy and the rates are competitive. i do not think the rate payers have even asked if they were -- >> supervisor, commissioners -- a completely get your point. and in some ways, i inherited this. that in 2006, there were discussions. i got somewhat involved. it was either let's just do it or let it fester. i was ordering business cards, and i realize, as you did, they were incredibly costly. so, why are we ordering business

cards like this when we have the production bureau which our city employees -- which are city employes to do it. that brings us back to something that no one has ever done. could we not do it all? it was either say, and not done, make it go away, it was a long time subject of discussion at the puc. commissioner courtney: i just saw this as a of waste of personnel and resources that we could have used to educate the public instead of working on our letterhead. [laughter] >> i was hoping the tragedy of

runyon and juliet would not come into play. -- romeo and juliet would not come into play. there is also an additional effort that it takes to educate the public. commissioner courtney: my point is, that is your responsibility and that responsibility should be utilized by the staff. a lot of people do not know what we do, and rightly so. if we change the letterhead on a state department, a state agency -- have a different card. it does not make sense. i would expect a better utilization of our resources. president vietor: commissioner courtney? commissioner courtney: i am

looking at page 11, and i really like orange. i am not sure what color that is. the power part. but it is not too late. all maurer, deeper, more powerful orange? >> it is a gold-ish color. president vietor: thank you commissioner courtney -- thank you, commissioner quarter. i have a lot to say about this. we deal with water and power and sewage, and i pictured chicago. you feel very strong.

and i feel this new logo is too light weight. it is amusing. i have trouble with all the colors. it is not strong. it does not make a stance. christopher is putting the logo on our letterhead. to send out a letter head with a picture behind the prince -- print. i like the idea of how he worked it altogether. it does not look serious. it looks like a toy company instead of what we are, which is a very strong utility. >> i really do not mean to

prolong this forever. there is a lot of people within the agency who do not like the current logo and current letter head. are you suggesting another different one? commissioner caen: yes. commissioner torres: i do not understand the priority of employees, that they do not like the letterhead. where are they getting that from? >> there have been feelings about this for quite awhile. commissioner torres: those were different times. these are different times. commissioner caen: you know, what i really do like though -- i like this idea of "water,

power, and sewer." that gets the attention. we talked about changing the name of the san francisco public utilities commission. >> changing the charter of the city is not of interest to me. commissioner caen: but this tells what we are. president vietor: commissioner moran? vice president moran: i had a common myself, but i was not going to say anything. [laughter] the discussion shows how powerful images are. that is the reason we went through reprinting exercises -- rebranding exercises even though it is always hard for me to take

them seriously. these are very powerful images that people respond to. moreover, and the process of coming up with these, it can be used as an organizational, development tools to focus on who you wore, what we believe in, and as an internal tool i am not hostile to it. this really does talk about who we are. the sioux were siou the sewer especially.

we also call ourselves the please water program. sewers are what people understand. as far as continuing to make the point that we clean up water and protect the environment, that is something that we do in all three enterprises. that is something that we can deal with as part of our educational mission. that does not lead anywhere. for emergency vehicles, where you have the trucks, they respond to a variety of emergencies, not only water but seismic emergencies. caughare we talking about recalg

trucks? >> no. as part of the budget saving recommendations, one with suggestions was that we only have white vehicles. there is a very visual impact for emergency response. they are not emergency responders. >> the trucks that we have are blue. they had a yellow and orange trucks. that was the power coloration.

this is a long and sordid history of color coding in san francisco. >> will this be back to us at some point? >> what i'm hearing is that this is not of great interest. i'm also hearing that if we did some work to satisfy the concerns, there is no opposition to doing something. >> given the fact that this fossilizes resources, you can educate the ratepayer about what we are doing. >> labeling the organization is helpful and it would be a very low-cost way to do it. "we're talking about the question about the longer term plan. you said that there is the meeting with -- and they live

quite valuable to a certain extent. there is a team that advised the city on specific projects. part of this task to do with the greater communications piece that we are engaged in. i find the website extremely and accessible. i think that that ties in with the social media world. this is a little bit of a sidebar, this rebranded and logo. perhaps this can be the resourced or the consultant which can help to advise the commission and the staff on what should happen as far as the logo

development goes and whether it seems to make sense, what the risk and benefits are. >> does that make sense? maybe there is a time that after that meeting you could come back to the commission and report where it might fit, if they can provide some advice and counsel on where this would fit into the larger communications strategy. >> i would be happy to do this as will not accused of wasting your time. >> we could have this in the context of the communications strategy overall.

how this would fit in with our communications strategy. >> thank you. >> is your any public comment? >> a brief comment on the solar installation work. we're happy that there has been confirmation in light of the ruling on solar that the city calls this and it will be rebid. this offers more opportunities. this is to and implement the new ordinance.

we respectfully ask that this will go back to bid as well. thank-you. >> we have no other speaker cards. >> the even speak about this? >> we talked about two projects that had already been awarded and two that had been advertised but pulled back. these were advertised and the others were awarded some time ago. to cancel those would be costly to the puc. it was before any of this discussion started to bubble.

they were awarded the contracts. the word goes out and a lot of work gets done before it gets obvious. >> my question is probably would be given the change of circumstances with respect to the determination made by the department of standards that this work is now being questioned as being that of a multi craft. is there an appropriate way to revisit the survey information on these? we are completing the design phase. the workers have not hit the job site yet. in all likelihood, they have not even been hired.

>> for the chinatown public health center, the design is complete. they are staged to begin work. we have asked them to hold off because we had heard that some action was going to be taken at the state level. once we saw with the action was and this does not address the create an occupation immediately available to us, it appears that it is per pre to go forward without a contract as awarded.

were we to terminate that contract, we would incur costs. we would have a claim against us. >> how much would it cost? >> it depends on how long it takes to do the work. this depends on when we cancelled the contract. >> that was one of the questions we asked, are we able to stop that and could that be the case? there is really no new information that is actionable right before us.

do we go ahead and incur a cost and stop a project or do we try to work and get some agreement with who does the work? the state has not clarified who does the work. >> given the fact that -- is not bound by the local hiring ordinance, is that a correct statement. >> this was awarded over a year ago but they have said that they would comply with it. >> was a 50% or 20%? >> they indicated 20% as what they would work for in consultation working with the unions they have agreements with. >> they do have an agreement with both be electricians. the area that has cost us concern is the fact that they

have an agreement with both entities but there is an overlap. what this new decision that comes from the state seems to address this the overlapping jurisdiction. i guess -- i'm curious given the fact that for whatever reason, they feel like it is a good idea even though the ordinance does not apply to them. they would comply at least with the initial threshold of 20%. that would beg the question, given the fact that a decision has been made, whether it is the absolute most a binding decision remains to be seen but there is the decision that has been made and it tends to address the controversies that have existed and i would be curious to know

if a conversation was appropriate given what took place last week because i think that it benefits as far as cost is concerned. that is what i want to know. did we have those conversations with that contractor? >> we do have regular communications with them, they were preparing to begin construction. we asked them at that time to give us more information. we were hearing that some action by the state was imminent and we were talking internally about the need to perhaps put the project on hold. now that we have seen the outcome from the state, it does not seem to alter the approach

that would be taken on projects until after the occupation. the state rep we spoke to indicated that would take between six loves and a year- and-a-half. we put that particular contract on hold. we would be looking at the higher end of those claims of cancellation or deferral of the contract. i believe this conversation started with public comment. this is a project that has not yet been awarded. this is a contract to which we will see some federal funding. it has the added complexity of having to parse out