and then maybe three weeks after that we will have a draft and schedule that. >> commissioners. very good. thank you very much for those who attended. and we are looking forward to picking up the ball where we left off. madam secretary, the next order of business. >> item 8, bswsca update. >> thank you, that was quite entertaining. and will it may have been difficult for your staff to participate. but in the future if that's a

public hearing or wosh -- workshop, i would appreciate that there is time on the agenda so the others could be heard. i would like to announce that the board approved in the meeting the issuance of bonds. your staff has it on agenda to get your improvement with bawsca to work it out. and appreciate all the work of the attorneys and outside attorne attorneys. and we worked well together, this matched what our board approved. no need to go back for other approvals. i hope we can go forward today and issue bonds in mid-january, thank you. >> any public comment on this

item? hearing none, public comment is closed. madam secretary, read the next order of business. >> item 9 is consent calendar, items are to be considered to be retained by the san francisco public utilities commission, and will be acted upon by a single vote of the commission. >> would any commissioners wish to remove any items? seeing none, we will take them together. motion? >> move. >> second. >> motion is moved and seconded. any discussion? is there any public comment? seeing none. public comment is closed. all in favor signify by saying aye. >> aye. >> opposed? >> the ayes have it, the motion carries. madam secretary, the next order

of business. >> item 10, discussion and possible action to approve and execute a wholesale water revenue prepayment collection and agreement. >> todd rydstrom. you have heard of this item and you aassumed a partial repayment. what is before you is a culmination of a lot of hard work and congratulations to mr. jensen and his team that got this through and the legislature and the governor. it's refunding like the sewer bond refunding. and this allows wholesale customers to early repay retail customers. it achieves savings for our wholesale customers.

and allow us to smooth rates for our retail customers. a few brief slides. $362 million, or up to, could be the potential early repayment for previously funded capital. that retail investors have made in the system. bawsca is able to issue bonds now on wholesale customers as approved by the governor and legislature, and this is effective january 1. this prepayment again was envisioned in part in your budget hearing discussions. but we only assumed $50 million but with market conditions and they may want to repay up to the whole $362 million. other

slides. prepayments to the wholesale customers is cost savings. because of low interest rates. and it's the same story you heard on us selling to low cost bonds. to repayors it's a timely difference of when we receive money. it allows us to smooth out and have lower rate increases over the next five years. on the other hand we won't have interest earnings on the portion no longer outstanding. it's a trade off. but contractually wholesale customers are able and have the right to do this under the contract. before you is the prepayment and collection agreement and the tax certificate. because that's integral on the tax exempt borrowing that bawsca will be doing on the proceeds. the use of proceeds is a commitment that we make in the

representation of the tax covenant. it says that we will use these for eligible tax proceeds. we have plenty of items that you approved. and they include our capital project expenditures that are appropriated to large part. and includes the repayment of bonds. by using these proceeds to repay bond service it allows low increases for rate payors. this gives a look at what the rate increases would be with and without the prepayment. you see the most dramatic is that absent of prepayment we need 26% one-time rate increase. followed by smaller ones after that. however now we would be able to shave off 14%. a pretty material amount of money as lower rate increases in 14 and 15. the schedule is for your

consideration, and then to the board of supervisors in january, and bawsca would be teed up to the bonds in january. >> thank you. commissioner moran. >> i would like to make a comment. this is amazingly good. it's something where a need was identified that turned out to benefit us and bawsca. bawsca had to do the heavy lifting, between legislation and corralling many members, more than on this commission. and one that the agency could not have done. so i think it really marks a real step forward. and a tremendous accomplishment

on bawsca and our own staff. and it's a nice model for areas where the puc and bawsca can work together. where there is clearly interest on both sides. and neither interest has to see their interest to the other. i will move the item. >> so a motion has been made to move the item forward, a second? >> second. >> it's been moved and seconded. any public comment. yes, sir, and thank you for your patience on the earlier item, by the way. >> you are very welcome. one comment, i appreciate commissioner moran's comments. it was a matter of corralling a board of 26 policy makers. and the agencies each had to pass a resolution to make sure this could go forward with everyone's confidence. as of last night, 17 of the 26 had adopted their resolutions. the other nine are asked over the next few weeks.

we anticipate it will be a 100% participation. it's corralling the members of the board and the members of the agency. and it's been a good achievement and a good opportunity to work with your staff. with the respect of the question that mr. moran is thinking, how do you do that. you asked that before how i work with the agencies to get them moving the same. and my answer is the same, i am a magician and i won't reveal my tricks. >> any other public comment? mr. decasta. >> i want to thank todd for doing a good job. and art jensen, even though he said what he said, he makes it a point to have a real good relationship with those that

count. i have not attended the bawsca meetings in a long time, but used to at one time. and it has on a regional level that we have this type of relationship so that we can move forward in a very methodical way. so again i would like to thank todd and art for the wonderful work. because you know, normally we don't hear them. but it's time for us to acknowledge their good work and to thank them. thank you very much. >> thank you, any other public comment on item 10? seeing none. public comment is closed. the item has been moved and seconded. commissioners. all in favor signify by saying aye. >> aye. >> the ayes have it. the motion carries. madam secretary, the next order

of business. >> item 11, authorize the issuance of task orders above the initial $100,000 allowness approved at the october 9 commission. >> julia ellis, with this item we are asking the commission to authorize staff to move forward with task orders with davis & associates communications are for marketing services for the cleanpowersf program. at your previous meeting you asked for less than 100,000. and asked how the uses would be utilized. based on that draeirection, we

worked on this plan to ensure that san francisco residents are fully informed by the cleanpower program. and we worked with staff and mayor's office and board of supervisors and community members. and on friday, november 30, we presented the plan at the joint lapsco meeting. and during the meeting, commissioners torres and moran and vietor passed the plan. and supervisors provided constructive feedback on the communication plan and urged us to move forward quickly. and we are seeking to authorize the additional task orders that

would not exceed the $1.4 million. and this would allow puc to take an extensive communication effort and target eed residentsn phase 1 are aware of the program and its costs. funds associated with the contract would be utilized for city-wide telephone surveys and grassroots programs like environment now, and for television, and advertising services, for graphic design services and other types of outreach for the education of the cleanpowersf program. it's our commitment based on the feedback from you and the board of supervisors to ensure that the customers know what this program is. and how that opt out. and if they choose to stay with

the program to understand the features. in closing in the last meeting commission moran had asked questions of how to reach out to other community programs. the board of supervisors offered the following program, that during phase 1 of the program we should not actively outreach to low income communities given the premium price, but to target them with the go-solar. that means during the opt-out period that we will if low income communities identify their interest in the program, they would be offered the 20% discount that, is similar to the 20% offered by pg & e.

we have identified and are in conversation with community based organizations that can do outreach for us targeting those communities as part of the green-power ssf program so they know it's available. and we are in the process of talking with affordable housing developers if the go-solar dollars or efficiency dollars could be targeted for housing developments that could benefit low income residents. as it includes low income residents, to be aware that there is a premium program and be sure we don't add additional costs to these communities. that's this item and happy to answer any questions.

>> can you are remind me, the $100,000 that we first approved. wasn't that for them to come up with a specific-detailed plan of how the rest of the money would be spent. you guys did that. >> we did do that. >> did davis? >> they did not, we had conversations with davis & associations of the direction. but the outreach and communication about the early notification program has been staff driven. and we haven't outlined the money but have a plan, and that was presented at the joint meeting and you guys got a preview of that. this is developed in consultation with davis & associates but we took the lead of staff. >> that was my understanding, i think that the framework is

strong and seemed to include everything in it. don't have a clear sense of what davis & associates would do, which portions they would take on and implement. relative to the staff-driven stuff. and whether between those two entities everything would get done that needs to get done. or to bring in an additional consultant or someone to make this program work. >> may i suggest, we have been trying to make sure that everyone is comfortable with the approach. and as juliet said that our approach is staff driven. given that it seems that everyone is okay with the approach. what we can do is now engage the consultant and really kind of formulate the team. because we want make sure that the team is put together in the best way that will ensure success.

and what we can do is come back before we execute just to kind of say, this is the team, these are the people. these are the people that will reach these certain groups, to come back to you with that information. would that be okay? >> yeah, that would be great. and also which pieces of the plan. you know that have comments and feedback from the glasco members. i think it was pretty close. but those revision pieces. and which pieces, davis would do versus staff versus some other piece that maybe either one. and what would the team look like and who would do who pieces to get a better sense and use of those resources. >> in what month will we are are are -- have the results of survey? >> i believe end of january, i will look to staff. end of january.

>> i will entertain a motion. >> you want public comment? >> public comment before we entertain a motion? i do have a speaker card, mr. decosta. >> i can move the item to get it on the table. >> thank you. the motion has been made and seconded. mr. decosta. >> okay, first and foremost, one of the most important things that i think (inaudible) luncheon at the joint meeting that we had, is that we need to incorporate san franciscans to do the survey. you see what i see here, all the staff is doing. so may i ask for a resume from

the staff. if you are not from san francisco, what type of information are they getting about san franciscans about the issue. right off the bat, you don't need to be a rocket scientist. when i saw that colored map showing that you an all of those other areas where other people live who maybe interested in clean energy. but putting a color on a map detrimental to the people who have been adversely impacted for decades. i as an environmentalist, i am not going to keep quiet. we need added outreach to those areas. and the only way that can be done is when the local people knock at the door. and the people that are comfortable with them, answer a

number of questions. which i guarantee you that the staff did not do. now if we have some consultant and we pay them millions of dollars, that's fine. provided we have the empirical data from the right areas to do the right thing. i see you just asking questions in general and not going to what type of quality work has been done. so it's left to y'all. this an enterprise department that generates a lot of money. and you can use your money wisely or waste your money. but i am here to tell you in district 10 and 11, that survey with that map that you have has to be revisited first. and that's what the chair, kind

of said after i spoke. and we also need to get some empirical data in district 10 and 11 as to the pollution and contamination. because simply speaking that's where the power plants were and polluted the area for 60 years. and as an environmentalist i have the duty to inform you of that fact. >> thank you, mr. decosta. mr. brooks. >> this is the last one, eric brooks representing san francisco green party. i want to pick up where commissioner vietor left off, on october 9 when you give the preliminary okay for this. i got up and gave tentative support for it. but commissioner caen rightly

insisted that davis & associates be appropriated $100,000 for a detailed plan for what it would do for the remaining $1.3 million. we do not have that yet, that money has been spent. the framework from the meeting. there are difficulties with the framework, and i understand that you okay with that, but now we are approiating the money for this. if you start the process and do the full funding now, the survey that is done will be based on a $10 premium on one year and $20 for two-year.

it will be similar to those done. that survey will not be incorporating the possibility of what i spoke to after the general manager's report. that there might not be a premium. we may be able to offer people 100% green without any extra costs. and if we jump the gun and do a survey before we know the answer of that question, and looks to get that answer around the end of january. we will do an unnecessary survey that doesn't include all the data. what advocates asked and i can speak on behalf, you stick with the plan of appropriating $100,000, to have davis & associates to work a plan for the remaining funds. and in that process they should

communicate with local power about the possibilities of the build out and their financial model. and this possible exciting new model with noble energy credit and all of this great stuff i have been talking about. if davis & associates takes this on, they have the full picture of what they market to the public and the survey work. and local power has demonstrated for their plan it work they need survey work that is targeted on specific commercial and residential customers based on joint arrangements. and shares purchasing and things like that. all of that has to be wrapped in. we would ask that you take the $100,000, and develop a stronger plan. and come back in january with the incorporation of the

possibilities raised by local power considered in that plan. >> commissioner vietor. >> can i ask a question about the survey. i thought the survey had a question on there that says, would you be willing to pay $10 more or $5 more or willing to enroll -- whatever, would you be interested if there is no additional increase. because without sort of having to get in the nuance and detail of what local power and build out is. i thought we were also getting that information, so when we do contract with davis. they would then be able to have the new financial modeling, or whatever, the options that we end up with. as part of their strategy. >> the poll that will go out in january will have information

about refresh. and we will have a better sense at that point in time with the poll after the refresh happens. and we will be asking folks questions about pg & e program and if they offer a similar program and if they would stay. there is money in the budget to do additional polling after local power's work is done. if there is things pertinent to clean power, and substantive way, and we can go back in the field and talk to folks. but the challenge for us as folks that live in san francisco and as do the folks at puc -- just a little plug. couldn't help myself. the communication work is organic. and commissioner torres mentioned this in the joint glasco meeting. and we have a road map that will

provide us community-based partners and with the environment. and craft messages and going into the weeds about what the survey looks like. and work with a firm on that survey. the details of the questions that we develop will happen around the survey in january. it will be released in january and do that process. and we have done tons of polling in the field. and with the community, we have begun conversations with the mayor's office and with the board of supervisors and cac members, and etc. where we need to go deep with regards to both pushing forward with the go-solar program, and the energy efficient dollars that are tied to low-income households. and who to partner with in district 10 and 11.

even though they are not on the dark green of the map. we believe they can make the program more attractive with the green overlay. our commitment is to reach out to those communities. and the direction from the board of supervisors, they have that fine line and that balance to not trap anyone. and in particular not capture low-income household in this power program. where they could be more hard hit and felt. and to your point, we can come back as regularly as you want to. there it will be different kind of milestones along the way and they will be developed as we go. >> my question was really about this poll. and if we could include in the survey so we don't have to go backo