served? you are out of luck if there is no bike left? >> as i said earlier, as bicycle sharing individual tend to be safer than your average or rogue warrior. in terms of educating users on how to use the bicycles, how to ride bikes on the street. with our annual members, we will definitely be sending the material. there will be materials on our website. they are limited to pretty much what we can convey to them at the kiosk. but we will have safety information available. helmets is not something you brought up. home and use one not be required for this system. it is not really practical. people who rent bicycles

usually rent elements as well, but there is a person there to make sure that the helmet fits, that it is not damaged. short of a vending machine, which could be in development, there is not really a practical way to do it. i think people would be reluctant to put on a home and worn by so many other people. what has been done in other cities is members are offered -- they are steered to a local retailer for a helmet. you can buy a fully useful helmut for $6. it does not need to be an expensive model. we will make them affordable for those that want to use them. to remark on the incident that happened on the embarcadero. my sense is the collision happened with someone at random and red light and ran into a pedestrian. i do not think that will be your

typical bicycle sharing user. a phenomenon that we have seen worldwide, definitely in this country, again, counter intuitively come as the number of cyclists on city streets increase, safety also increases, and definitely in terms of the collision right. what we're also seeing in other cities is the number of overall collisions also go down in places where you have high bicycle youuse. by inviting more bicycles, you may think that we are inviting more trouble, but time and again, research out there has proved what we call safety in numbers. >> my second question was, is it a first-come first-served or do you reserve? when you go to that station,

when you punch whatever do at 80 am station, you have a code or something. how do you actually get the bite? >> i am sure technology exists to reserve the bikes, but my sense is a first-come, first- served basis. in terms of making sure they are available, when they're needed, peak times -- is literally a balancing act. i think we are fortunate to not be the first city rolling this out and we can learn from other cities. washington, d.c., for example, after a successful rollout, the first wave of expansion was not about putting more bikes on the street, but more stations. we can learn from other cities. we will be hiring a vendor that had done this summer else, so they have all the experience

that comes with that. a lot of it is just paying attention and acting quickly. >> any more questions? commissioners? thank you very much. a very exciting program. i am looking forward to the outcome. thank you. >> item 11. new business. >> is there any public comment on new business? >> item 12. public comment. >> we do have some speaker currents. curtis lynn. >> i represent some of the pier 38 tenants. we are trying to work with the port for a resolution of pier 38 issues to try to save the largest business and job incubator on the west coast.

we would like to become the developer of pier 38. we would like to do the following. we would immediately repair all of the code and safety problems. we would deliver the required plans and proposals to the ports. we would enter into a long-term agreement with the port. and we would develop new maritime uses. we have experience, financial capability, and the business tenants, which means immediate income. we understand there are problems which include code and safety violations, pier apron replacement, bcdc issues, the ada issues, and other issues. we would also consider repairing the 1.2 $5 million loan to the state department of waterways. -- $1.25 million loan to the state department of waterways. >> thank you.

>> hello. i represent a lot of petitioners. i started a petition to save pier 38. when i started to mention that it was going to be close, it raised a lot of concern with people. they have been looking at pier 36 for a decade and they are murren that we are going to end up with another location like that. these are some of the questioner that the petitioners raised. there is a space where the company used to occupy. that space, according to my knowledge, has been done with all of the permits, inspected by the port. the latest rumor i have heard is there are toxic gases trapped in the walls. can you answer what kind of

gases you suspect? we had pg&e expect a place for gas leaks and other toxic gases. they could not find anything. another question is why did the port close the rolling door on the south side of the public access area? why did the port direct offenses on the north side to limit public access as well? another question i have is why the port has done absolutely nothing about safety problems in a timely matter. most of it is easy to fix. the original report came out on august 16, 2011. town hall meetings took place september 11. notice of repairs came out on to the 212011 but the report patrician started to install on a september 26. why did it take 40 days, media attention?

those immediate problems needed to be addressed. my question is, are we tenants on the waterfront a casualty of the legal problem that the port has? those are the questions that come up when i speak to petitioners' spirit it would be nice to have those questions answered. >> thank you. is there any other public comment? ok, no more public comment. can i have a motion to adjourn? >> motion to adjourn. >> second. >> all in favor? aye. meeting adjourned at 4:26 p.m.

there is really, only one boy... one girl... one tree... one forest... one deep, dancing ocean... one mountain calling... one handful of sand through our fingers... one endless sky overhead...

and one simple way to care for it all. please visit earthshare.org and learn how the world's leading environmental groups are working together under one name. earth share. one environment...

>> to you have an ipad? >> no, i do not. >> good afternoon. balkan to the public utilities commission meeting, brought to order. -- welcome to the public utilities commission meeting, brought to order. please call role. >> commissioner moran, commissioner caen, commissioner tores, commissioner courtney,. commissioner vietor is excused from today's meeting. >> i believe that mr. shepherd as a substitute language? >> an alternative language is the redline copy in the folder,

paragraph three, just a clarification that shows a significant a larger change in clarifying the understanding of what was said. following public comment and after additional comment, the commissioners address for wholesale customers through 2018 and beyond, there was recognition that the relationship with wholesale customers was contractual and long-term supply issues would have to be dealt with under the terms of a large supply agreement. customers represented by the bay area water supply and conservation agency, under an agreement as to how the short and long-term water supply needs can be met. this changes the post from the vice-president. >> thank you.

this was a less formal meeting than most. we were struggling to put together something. if there are any other thoughts on that? and if not, i have a motion and a second. commissioner for me? all of those in favor? >> aye. >> the minutes of the september 13 regular meeting. any comments? >> ok. i have a motion to approve. >> second. >> those in favor? >> aye. >> unanimous. mr. secretary? >> item #four. public comments. members of the public may

address the commission on matters that are within the commission's jurisdiction and are not on today's agenda. >> do we have any public comments? next item, please. >> the next item is communications. letter summary options and print summary is available for public review, as requested by the commission. items held under written report, this is the time to bring those matters up as well. >> commissioners, anything that you would like to comment or question? >> yes. we all received the letter on september 14, from the russian group association regarding the reservoir. >> the reservoir in question is down on bay street.

we have not used it for a number of years. if you drive by it, it appears to be a part. if you drive down the street where the cable cars are, you can see that because the reservoir is not being used anymore, we have had discussions for years about what to do with it. typically supervisors in the area would like it to be turned into some kind of a park. we do need some kind of value of of it. we got the letter and will send a response to all of the commissioners. >> thank you. >> that is up for discussion at some point. >> at a number of points with of this commission, you will see the discussion as part of the land use policy, and the times that -- the kinds of views. i think that what the neighbors

are looking for right now is a fairly quick fix to a roof that they considered dangerous and unsightly. what i would just like to comment on the living management -- >> i would just like to comment on the living management program. it was compelling and the kind of thing that helps to make sense of those comments. >> that was mr. ritchie. >> next item. >> the next item would be -- pardon me. other commission business. we have a certificate of recognition. please read the recognition.

mr. moses de los reyes, if he could come forward to be recognized. he is the general manager small firm advisory committee, honoring him for his distinguished public service in years of civic leadership. driving changes to increase leadership in regional water system construction. >> it is here? >> perhaps there is a twist in the communication? [laughter] >> thank you. many things regarding your service as well.

>> any other new business? commissioners? >> the next item is the report of the general manager. >> before we start, just an announcement. in april we will receive a request for $25 million in state grants to fund the department of wildlife resources. particularly to help to fund the cesar chavez management improvement. you may have noticed that staff has recommended that. the director will have that on friday to make that decision. we expect to receive that decision before too long. a very good, large size grant from the agency. it tends to go to smaller, rural agencies with violations, so that is a good thing. next, we have our federal

lobbyist legislative outlook. did you want to introduce the topic? our assistant general manager, julie ellis. >> good afternoon, commissioners. historically we have brought our federal lobbyists and state lobbyists to the commission to pretty much in role in basic for you all about focusing priorities on the behalf of the federal and state level. many of you have not had the opportunity to meet our federal lobbyists, they're owen. today would be a great chance to show what he can do at the national level with regards to priorities. as a kind of introductory meeting with him. i look forward to the

opportunity. i have had a chance to work with him for the last two days. darryl and his team have gone deep into water with power, beginning to take priority for the upcoming years. >> thank you. thank you, commissioners. i am joined today by adam ingles. he joined a couple of years ago. this is the first time that we have requested the commission at the same time. he is a welcome addition to the team. it was suggested that i give you a short history of the relationship here as to why you have federal lobbyists. getting down to some more specific issues back in washington.

in the mid-1980's, when i was still running for u.s. senate, puc was negotiating a new power contract. one of the district went to the local congressman and got a provision for an appropriations bill that would have adversely affected our ability to charge for power. when i left it the senate in 1990, the commission was in a crisis proceeding at the irrigation district. the motion was that it would be useful to have someone prevent that from occurring in the context of a license procedure. initially it was a protective measure. licensing procedures proceeded just fine. results quite well.

in 1994, remember, newt gingrich and the contract with america. there was a proposal to raise the fee to 25 million. motivated mostly by antipathy toward san francisco more than anything else. it pops up periodically it in the second term. it is an issue that we are constantly monitoring back in washington to make sure that it does not get out of hand. it was more of an aggressive posture, more than anything else. in recent years we have become more entrepreneurial. more advocates. several years back we had a vision that allowed us to adopt a permanent office with various

agencies that were engaged in processing, the theory being that rebuilding the last of this vital piece of infrastructure, while operational, we could not afford to fall behind. we could not afford to miss states as everything had to be so carefully sequenced. from what i have been told, it has been operated well and has been very useful as a model that congress and others are increasingly choosing to follow. the trip out here over the last few days has been extremely useful. the enterprise apartment has got together with local, state, and federal lobbyists to make sure that we are all communicating with each other and not missing opportunities to pursue the

agenda of the commission. we had a very useful meeting with the corps of engineers. we have been working with them for a couple of years. as you know, they have suffered some pretty serious erosion out there as a result of winter storms. we are working towards each repel -- replenishment program in this environment, and it is pretty tricky. you can no longer do your marks. we have had to work on a problematic level in order to get the project past. we have lucky -- we are lucky to have gotten out. it was very meaningful to be with them for a couple of hours yesterday going forward. as far as watching right now, it is pretty much what you would believe. we are all but broken back there.

over the last few years our elections have come to be known as a wave of elections, with radical swings back and forth between who has been sent to washington. years ago there were 60 members of the democratic blue dog caucus. they are now down to 20. they are on their way to single- digit. we have the tea party in washington. they came to town, committed to everything that was said. they have noticed a change in the debate in washington. we have to give them credit. they are determined to make these changes. the result has been that we are all fiscal, all the time. we start of the budgetary analysis earlier this year. holdovers from the previous congress. we went straight into the debt

limit discussion. recently, we had another flare- up over issues to keep the government functioning. now i am on the so-called super- committee. deficit reduction by thanksgiving, or there will be a massive recession that takes place under spending levels, fairly well having consumed the agenda in washington. items that we could have worked on in the past, climate change or energy legislation, spending levels -- discretionary spending continues. funds are extremely scarce. there is more demand for them than ever. which is why i hope it makes the ocean side property so key in yesterday's suspicions. but i think that meaningful financial support for the kinds

of things we have seen in the past with other entities in the past will continue to diminish. it will be a very lean talk in that respect. of all of the leads we have had out here this week, they were extremely useful as we were about to reach the point where we would need to reach our professional representatives to make sure that they were aware of the status of that. certain things happen. we are about to reach a mid- stage crescendo and we will have to do outreach with delegation members. that is one of the discussions we have had. it has been extremely useful to be out here, from my standpoint. i would love the chance to answer any questions you might have.

>> commissioners? >> i want to make it clear that the tea party is not a populist movement. it was started by dick armey and funded by the insurance companies. what ever happened after that, i do not know. i find it absolutely ironic that the entire movement was based around objection to the obama health care plan, funded by the very people that would be regulated. to me that he party represents nothing more than a cup -- corporate elite, g grassroots movement. how did you enjoy that work? >> it was a fabulous job. it may be the best job i was ever going to have. the problem with those jobs is that you just burn out. >> i understand. given