this is a very brief item. i will make it brief. it is a resolution that has a letter attached to it. the letter is to urge the commissioners as was the governor to move quickly to actually resolve one of the issues that we spoke about today, what will be the method for calculating the performance bond associated with the cca. it has been outstanding since legislation was passed. as discussed here today, there and others. >> commissioners, you have the letter before you. is there any member of the public that like to speak on

item six? public comment is close. this letter is an item that is both before the puc and lafco. with that, madam clerk? >> [roll call vote] >> the motion passes. >> if you could entertain a motion to approve? >> it is a resolution that refers to the letter. public comment? all those in favor? the post? -- opposed? it passes. >> item 7. >> public comment. >> is there any member of the

public that led to provide general public comment on any item that is not on the agenda but in the jurisdiction of the commissions? >> erica trucks with san francisco green party. it got touched on a little bit but it wasn't an action item for you today, and i think it is important for the lafco to take it up. i would like them to take of this issue of the fact that as you can see from the charts, the city agencies and other agencies are getting a really sweet deal on electricity. even though we need to support all those agencies, we need to figure out a way to increase what we are bringing in for electricity. the main reason for that is so that we can get ahead of the global warming curve, not to stop with cca, but a full build

out of not only electricity but electrified mass transit. so that we can really take a bite, even as the city, by ourselves, out of global warming. if we do it right, we can get the extra revenues for electricity itself while we are installing things like solar panels and efficiency measures for those agencies that are currently getting a deal on electricity such that their bills may not have to change that much. the idea is to start right now the figure out how we can get the extra revenues so we can start building out the efficiency. and figure out the big picture so that it does not cause pain to the agency's that have been

leading the deal that they have got, but still supports a really robust renewable energy system and electricity system in the city. some of us end up supporting public power in the city as well. i am hoping they will take that up so we can start figuring out a way to get a lot more revenue that is badly needed for the goals that we talked about today. >> any other member of the public that like to speak? public comment is closed. the next item is lafco specific. >> approval of minutes from september 23, 2011. >> you have the minutes before you. is there any public comment? we have a motion. can we take that without

objection? can you call item no. nine? >> executive officer's report. >> there will be no report today. >> public comment is closed. item 10. i'm wondering, president vietor and commissioners, whether or not we should try to set up a joint meeting for december to the extent in the event that this item is decided or action is taken at the board of supervisors in november. there might be in need for a joint meeting in december, and i am hoping that the clerks can maybe provide us with some possible dates so that we have something tentative schedule. >> it is probably a good idea.

>> winter recess starts on the fourteenth. >> it would be before that. >> december 2 or december 9. >> what time? >> normally at 2:00. >> commissioners, and of the friday is not always good for you. -- i kjnonow that friday is not always good for you. >> neither are good for me. >> we don't have a schedule the next regular meeting because the next regular meeting date would have been the twentieth during the week of christmas. the 13 is the regular meeting.

the 6 is a tuesday, but that's a board meeting day. >> what time does it start? >> 1:30. >> can we do earlier? is it sixth? an earlier meeting on the sixth? >> it doesn't matter, we don't have a commission meeting. the 11:00 give us enough time? 10:00? >> i need to make sure that the chamber will be available the morning. >> there is a transportation at 9:30, but how about a new -- noon? it would give enough time for

that meeting -- >> is that enough time before the board meeting? >> noon on december sixth. tentative meeting scheduled for tuesday, december 6 at 12:00 p.m.. any member of the public of like to speak on this item? public comment is closed. >> item 11, adjournment. >> the meeting is adjourned, thank you to members of lafco, and members of the san francisco public utilities commission. >> congratulations, i am very pleased. i want to thank the staff a lafco and the puc. it has been a long road, the activists and the stakeholders to get us to this point. i encourage you and urge you to stay involved with the board of

supervisors and the conversation there because i think there is work to be done on figuring out and finalizing this issue. >> thank you to the rest of staff and advocates, meeting adjourned.

>> good afternoon. i would like to call the meeting of the commission of the environment to order. >> [laughter] >> wow, that popped up. >> back to the future. >> san francisco public utilities commission. >> to order at 1:46, october 11, 2011. next item, please. >> roll call. president vietor. commissioner moran. commissioner caen. commissioner torres. i believe commissioner courtney

is here and will be joining us momentarily. the next item as the approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of september 27. if there are any additions, corrections, substitutions -- president vietor: you have the minutes before you. >> move to approve. president vietor: there is a motion. is there a second? second. questions are comments? all those in favor? opposed. thank you. the motion carries. next -- >> the next item is public comment, an item for members of the public to speak about items that are not within the commission's jurisdiction better not on today's agenda. we have no speaker cards. president vietor: no public comments. next item. >> communications. letter summary and the advanced calendar. at this time, the commissioners of the complete set of documents and letters of rain in the ledger summary.

i was not entirely sure that i sent everything to everybody, so i copied it to be sure that everything is there. if you have any comments about any items on the advanced calendar or questions or pending matters -- president vietor: any questions or comments on the letter summary or the calendar? next item, please. >> next item would be any new business any commissioner might want to propose. president vietor: new business? hearing none, next item. >> reported the general manager. >> good afternoon, ed harrington, general manager. i have no items to report. i am here to make note that in previous meetings, there have been in discussion by commissioner moran to have workshops at times, and we have items that need it thoughts. we're trying that today. item 14 is a workshop to the commission on land use policy. i would love to hear your

feedback after that to see if those are the kinds of workshops and the way to present its, and i would like to get your thoughts on whether that works for you. today, we will try that and see if it works. we're trying for something closer to the kind of discussion we had at our retreat, where there is more resolved conversation before we have actually britain's sunday down as a policy. president vietor: with the idea be that we would have a workshop and then at the subsequent meeting we would have a resolution or action item necessary or recommendation to come forward? >> we would headache recommendation, resolution, policies subsequent at the next meeting. it would dictate how much information we are crafting. but it really is to have that broader discussion, more free- forming kind of discussion, as opposed to being stuck with something already written down. there are other topics like that that might be useful to have it in that fashion. president vietor: any other questions or comments on the

general managers' report? >> thank you for including that. my hope for that, frankly, is that it can be an opportunity from time to time for us to get in, as programs are being formulated, that we have the yes or no amendment, and we have a discussion beforehand. we will see how it goes. president vietor: but thank you vietor thank you. next. >> the report of the citizens advisory committee. but i have been advised that mr. alex lantsberg was detained at asked that the side of the continue to a future meeting. so the next item would be the consent calendar. all matters listed here and constitute a consent calendar considered to be retained by the san francisco public utilities commission and will be acted upon by a single one of the commission. a, approve the plans and as avocations and award water enterprise multi-your local water repair and replacement program and department of public

works pavement renovation program funded contract wd-2456 eighth-chance -- and pavement renovation on mission street from 17th street to 21st street, on 19th street from shotwell street to valencia's street, and on san carlos street from sycamore street to 21st street, the amount of $2,428,000 to the lowest qualified responsible and responsive better, m squared construction to perform the water main replacement, a pavement, and curb ramp renovation work. b, approve the plans of specific and award water enterprise program funded agreement wd-2661, 4 hetch hetchy regional water system. and the conjuration credit for

species and california tiger salamanders in mitigation for the san joaquin pipeline system project and authorize the general manager san francisco public utilities commission to negotiate and execute a professional service agreement with wildlands. accept work performed by melton cascade for water enterprise water system improvement program funded contract hh-914, roselle crossover a perfect, modification number 10, increasing the contract with the time expansion and authorized the final payment to the contractor. does any commissioner was to remove any of these items, a through d? president vietor: no removal from the consent calendar. is there a motion to adopt the consent calendar? >> so moved. >> second. president vietor: any public comment? >> we have no cards. president vietor: all those in

favor? opposed? motion passes. >> next item, a decision to authorize the general manager to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the san francisco arts commission for the process of defining their working relationship and responsibilities of each department for planning, funding, and commissioning our work and supporting the arts commission-based community arts programming in accordance with section 3.19 of the san francisco administrative code. hold on. sorry. there. >> hello, commissioners. general managers for external affairs. i can be brief. this item came before you all at the june 28 commission meeting. at that meeting, you gave us feedback, both on the resolution and ask us to bring the mou back to you and give direction for the general manager to move

forward with that mou. since that meeting in june, the mou has been developed but with the puc staff as well as staff from the arts commission does death internally have begun to meet across the enterprise to begin to identify priorities for arts enrichment spending based on places having impact. i am happy to answer any questions that you may have today. it is pretty straightforward. commissioner torres: there was a commissioner -- there was an issue was supportive of. making sure the whatever arts works better commissioner given at least some priority to local artists. >> we have taken a completely to heart. so the arts memorandum of understanding and the resolution to speak to the fact that one of the priorities and the resolution is to support local artists. both to support local artists to

collaborate with other city agency his efforts, so we can leverage the other efforts that may be happening, whether it is redevelopment or within the school district, and focusing on places where the puc is having impact. commissioner torres: thank you. commissioner caen: i have a couple of questions. as i understand reading this, we will not have any temporary -- we will not contribute any moneys to temporary art exhibits. is that correct? >> that is not correct. my understanding, and the general manager should jump in because he has been closely working on at this as well, is that if we are to use bond money, it needs to be allocated to a prominent art. if we are using non-bond money,

it can be used for temporary art. the idea is that even as we think about what prominent art is, we have had conversations that the city attorney's office and with leadership within the puc in the arts commission around our definition of permanent art. one could imagine that we would work with an organization, yes or pulling this out of the air, like may be the bayview opera house that provides recognition for committee members in the southeast. the idea is that we could -- they could produce permanent are they could go into puc buildings and facilities that we own, for example it would not be permanent are like the big buddha outside city hall, for example, but we would see it as permanent. commissioner caen: ok. my second question is, how is it going to operate in terms of if they commission some artwork

that is not pertinent to puc how are the checks and balances going to work? >> we have it quite a few checks and balances in place. the resolution says everything from -- that the puc has full discretion over how the resources get allocated. so it would require puc approves all before our resources get spent. so there is that part. each year, we will come up with an arts plan that will be driven by puc staff with regard to the priorities. then the arts commission will develop a plan that then gets approved by the puc staff. so there are those to the mechanisms. the third is that there's also an out in the resolution in the that not all -- not all of the arts resources have to be commissioned. for example, if we wanted to partner with the san francisco foundation, that is one example where they're putting money into

an organization that we would also leverage, for example, that we could do that directly without having to go through the arts commission. i think we have put a lot of thought, working with the city attorney's staff, are around how to make sure that there are checks and balances and that is really based on puc priorities in places where we have impact and to leverage these resources. one of the question that was raised by to this meeting, via e-mail, was how much money we were spending our arts enrichment. $7.8 million have been allocated to arts enrichment. out of that, $4 has been paid. that has gone out research to the arts commission. there is $2.6 and to be paid this year, and an additional $1.4 million after this year. we're not under any requirement to spend the money. we do not need to spend $2.6 million this year if it is not justified. >> commissioners, in the mou

before you, is is that the art money should be spent with the following priorities. it says it should be in neighborhoods and geographic areas where the puc projects and operations affect the area. the second is they must have an nexus and connection to the puc operation functions. so it really goes to the issues you have raised. commissioner caen: good, thank you. >> and i want to thank all of the commissioners, playing a role getting this through. from memory, i remember having been on the commission, and commissioner caen mentioned the art. at the time, i have no idea which was talking about until a couple months ago. so thank you for your leadership on this. commissioner caen: i also want to extend a big thank you to you for picking this ball of, because it has been something that has been on the radar but we have not really looked at and paid attention to. i think there's great possibility and opportunity for