energy efficiency work at the african american center, supervisor breed, so we want to continue to get as many dollars possible to continue that work. er >> there was a few, a couple of years ago, we had approved the sunset reservoir solar system and i think that we were talking about after maybe 7 years if the city could have the option of purchasing that site and running it ourselves, i think that could be a really good eligible use for any funds that we have, to have our own power system, we can help to ramp up. >> that's a great recommendation, thank you, and then as you know, puc is in the beginning phases of its sewer system improvement program and are trying to integrate some of the innovative technology resource recovery and the waste water process, so some ideas around that, and then i think one thing we were really

pleased about is that last year when the legislature did their initial bills around happen trade revenue allocation, there is a requirement that up to 25% of dollars be spent in disadvantaged communities, historically, san francisco, the definition of disadvantaged communities that the state uses is one that keeps income relative to the state and so we often don't count as a disadvantaged community though we have many neighborhood that are struggling, i think the definition they're using for disadvantaged communities in the context of cap and trade dollars, the bayview hunter's point community will be eligible for those funds so we are hope hating we can try to get access to some of those revenues for that, so we will continue to update you moving forward in the cap and trade, but you as lafco members may be interested in that.

the secondary ya around clean energy that we thought you would be interested in getting an update around st prop 39 funds, you all will remember in november, california voters approved prop 39 which basically creates 515 million dollars for a year for five years to go towards energy efficiency renewable generation projects and public buildings and primarily public schools. this is again going to be a big decision point for decision makers in sacramento, so the governor has laid out a set of proposals around how he thinks those dollars should be spent throughout his budget. there's about 3 or 4 different state bills that are also proposing how the funds should be allocated. we've been thinking with the city family about how we really maximize just the amount of dollars that first come to san francisco because we -- it's very unclear, will it be a

block grant, a competitive grant dollars that are administrated by the state, if it is a block gront, what would be the distribution, so we're trying to maximize the amount of dollars that come to san francisco and then in particular, that we have strong partnerships and places that have strong partnerships between the school district through their power provides like the puc, that emphasizing partnership at the local level is something else we've prioritized and quickly, the last bill that we wanted to bring to your attention is sb43 which is a bill that was also introduced and didn't make it to the finish line last year, that's focused on a community renewable energy supporting the creation of local renewable energy projects and i'm happy to provide you more detail about that but given the interest of lafco, that's

something you should be aware of, so i'm happy to answer any questions. thank you. >> thank you, i appreciate the presentation, separate from what was discussed, we've been getting a lot of communication or san franciscans have been getting a lot of communication from i believe it's one of our unions that is a union that's closely associated with pg and e, it's to undermine our progress so far with clean power sf, i believe there was a mailing that went out last week that people picked up, especially in our green area, we're expecting to have the largest concentration of people who are going to be staying in the program, the clean power sf program and i think that there's a lot of information and possibly misinformation, i would say more definitively more disinformation going about this and it's trying to paint a

negative picture about the sf clean energy program, but it's conducted by a labor union, we're also getting a lot of e-mails about this as well and i'm curious if the puc has been aware of this effort and what you think needs to be done on your end to kind of counteract the mez saj that is are coming out against clean power sf. >> yes, commissioner, we're definitely aware of the mailers, and e-mail communications, in part because your lafco staff is helpful in making sure that folks at the puc see the information, if it hasn't landed on our doorsteps, we get it from jason which is good. you know, our objective is to inform, provide accurate information to our customers,

our potential customers, so that's what our customer notification and education program is focused on. we don't want anyone being surprised by becoming our customers, we want them to understand what the service offering is that we're providing. i expect that in order to do that effectively, we will be answering people's questions that arise from receiving this mailer and then hearing from us about our program and saying, you know, how do you reconcile these two different messages and we'll have to be careful to make sure we get accurate information back to our perspective customer, not anl because we think that's the right thing to do, under the code of conduct law, we're required to do that, so we need to be careful to be giving accurate information and we know pg and e is obligate under that same code of conduct to provide accurate information and i believe the materials that you're referring to were not provided by pg and e. >> okay, by the international

brotherhood of electrical workers. >> that's my understanding, by an organization funded by them. >> and you mentioned having a response, has any material been filed so far by the communications department? >> not in direct response to the flyers you're referring to, we certainly already have a website, we are addressing particular information that is addressed to us, we did receive a letter, our commissioners and our general manager received a letter from a representative of the international brotherhood of electrical workers that raised some of the same arguments that appear in the flyers and we did carefully respond and provide accurate rebuttal to those remarks. i believe that letter exchange was made available to you through your lafco staff. >> okay, and we're seeing since

the mailing into the e-mails, i'm not sure we have the ability to do a mail piece or some kind of campaign through electric media might be necessary. i'd like to think that, you know, well, i'm worried now that we are looking kind of flat footed and their goal is they want people to stay in the program, we did not have the customer base that we expect to have for a clean power sf and i think we have to do everything we can possible to make sure we have that customer base, there's a lot at stake moving forward and i would think we could explore today just how the puc and working with lafco and our offices can have a proactive response here that we can all take part in and make sure we're getting our message out in a clear way. >> i'll let ms. fox take --

>> i'd will happy to do that, and i think it would be helpful to summarize some of the key activities that are part of the customer notification and education plan because i think it will partially answer some of that, so the customer notification and education plan which i think we presented the overview of that to this commission at the end of november and our commission sort of approved that moving forward with that plan at the end of last year as well, so the poll is the first piece of that to really understand the market to generate that new heat map of where is the greater propensity for clean power sf and then beginning at the end of april is where the first phase of our early notification customer education begins and as part of that work, we will be reaching out to 10 thousand people in those darker green, the dark green medium green precincts going door to door and through phone

to educate about what the clean power sf power offering would be and to get peoples' feedback on it, we're also planning on doing partnership with non-profit organizations and we are in the process of figures out who those will be and how that will roll out to help support us in doing overall education about the program so that early notification work is scheduled to happen and we're currently on track for that to happen in april, may and june. then, you know, in june, we have a key decision from our commission around the contract the purchase energy, you know, assuming that that were to move forward, then we enter into the mandatory opt-out period which is another big opportunity for education where we will be doing agm for power barbara hill has described, that would focus on broadcast media,

radio, etc., educating about the program, so we continue to move forward in our efforts around customer education and notification and then commissioners are happy to provide factual responses if you would like to, to some of the mailers. >> i think it makes sense that we have the plan we had approved before and that's one thing that certainly we have to continue with, but we also have a countercampaign against what we're doing that i think needs to be considered in terms of stepping up our efforts to make sure that a clear message is going out about the program, and i'd like to figure out just how we can be really strong about that. i think april for the start of that could be a little bit late because there's already a lot of messages have been going out now for a few months now and that kind of worries me that we're losing, we're falling behind in terms of the message. commissioner campos?

>> thank you, mr. chair and thank you for raising this issue. thank you to puc and lafco staff for looking into this matter. you know, just -- let me just get a copy of these mailers. i certainly respect the right of any entity or any group and in this case of ibw to put out information about our program, but i also feel that in many respects, we are not doing enough in terms of really countering the misinformation here because whether intended or not, the message here is that somehow our program is unique in the sense that there is a purchase of energy from shell without really saying that pg and e itself is

actually buying energy from shell as well, and that the difference between our program and ours is that we are buying energy from shell with the idea as eventually building an infrastructure that allows us to create our own energy, and in many respects, you know, the message to the consumer is that in fact if you want to get out of business, you know, get out of doing business with shell, that the only way we're going to do that is through community choice aggregation, so i think that when someone is providing misinformation about your program, we have to figure out the level of information that we can really provide out there to counter because i don't think that it's enough to simply say this is the truth about our program, i think we

should definitely do that, but is there an ability to say, you know, they're not telling you all the facts, is there an ability to say that is there anything legally that precludes us from doing that? shall -- maybe that's a question for counsel. >> well, this is and it isn't a campaign, and you know the city cannot participate in a campaign, but you can always even in a true campaign, which is this is kind of a pseudo campaign because there's nothing on the ballot but it will be a fiekt, can provide facts and information and that i think is what we're trying to do through the education program, but i think you're right, that as these pieces fall, there probably should be a strategy or at least a discussion about are we going to, you know, sometimes you think early money spent is well

spent and sometimes people forget about it and until we' ear ready with our program, we know big money will be spent, we have limited resources, so it's a discussion of should we respond now, we have the ability to put information in envelopes to rate payers. >> i would encourage us with the puc, the lafco and the city attorney's office to really figure out how aggressive we could be in countering this because i do think that a lot of people are confused and rightly so. i've had so many people come to me and say, how can you be buying energy from shell and i sort of point out, well, you right now as a pg and e customer is getting energy that comes from shell already, unfortunately, it's part of this business right now, we're kind of stuck, but we have a strategy for getting out of that.

you know, but that message is not getting across. the other question is, i understand that this is coming from ibw, but have we inquired or looked into what if any involvement pg and e has actually had? >> in terms of financing that, maybe violating the code of conduct? >> well, has there been any communications between pg and e and ibw regarding this? >> we have not looked into that specifically as staff. >> because to the extent that, you know, pg and e is legally prohibited from, you know, negatively campaigning against community choice aggregation, right, and to the extent that doing something like that, it could be done in a lot of different ways, not just directly but indirectly so i'm not saying there is any involvement and there probably isn't, but i do think that we

need to make sure that we verify that because if there is some involvement, some connection, i think there is an argument that indirect involvement could be a violation, and so to the extent that, you know, we have legal protections that have been put in place by the puc and the state of california, we need to make sure we avail ourselves of those. >> well, i will check with the city attorney's office and i know the sfpuc will be interested in following up on that as well. >> and again, i don't have no reason to believe there's any involvement but i believe we have an obligation to verify that. >> and jason fried, lafco staff, one thing we did the last time when there was the common sense san francisco which was pg and e using a different name at the time they were allowed to do this kind of stuff, we worked with the puc and the lafco staff put out a

spreadsheet, it doesn't cost any money because i think a lot of the supervisors in their news letters put links to this information, so we have facebook, we have e-mail list, we have a lot of ways we can get has information out that won't necessarily cost any money right now is we're not spending the money we need for later on but we can still get that information out there, so what is reality of the program and using some of the things that those mailers are saying which is completely inaccurate would be a way to start that. >> and one thing we could say is in addition to any kind of like a mailer or mailing that has some information about this, i would also encourage puc, lafco staff to go into the community and there are probably -- i mean, there is dozens, each one of us on the board of supervisors have dozens of organizations and merchant groups, community groups that we can give you

information on and we should be going to those meetings and saying, listen, don't be -- at least have all the facts, and don't be fooled by some of the stuff you're hearing. i think it's important for us to do that, even if we do something citywide, i think that going to the ground level is really important. thank you. >> thank you for all that feedback, we'll take that back to our commission and we'll see what we can do working cooperatively with lafco staff to take these low hanging fruit opportunities to get the facts out. >> thank you, another question from commissioner mar? >> let me to try not to repeat which has already been said by my colleagues, this is a sophisticated propaganda campaign which is spreading misinformation out there, we're being caught flat footed. i feel like jason fried does

his best as an army of one but the puc has to be the one that has the eyes and ears with so much staff and resources than i think jason has and i think for him to be relied on to know what's going on and to give it to you to me doesn't make that much sense. i just reviewed the website for the so-called san francisco shell shock and i think they framed it early on and it's going to be hard to raise awareness to counter that, and i'm hoping that we're looking carefully with our partners. i know w*ef f we've received hundreds of supporters with limited resources as well, but i don't think pr the puc staff you're giving me an understanding that you know what we're up against but i know you know what we're up against and i'll say that even in accept, we were getting non-profit letters from senior organizations, housing groups saying they had concerns about

clean power sf, so ms. fox to say you're thinking about what cvo's to think about, we should have been doing this months ago, our offices are getting e-mails proand cons, there's e-mails coming with a similar mess sang and i hope we follow up with some of the legal questions that supervisor campos is following up on seeing if there is a connection to whoever is doing

>> a lot of the areas that these mailers were sent to, i'm not sure necessarily since we have limited resources that a mailer would be necessary right now, just getting the missing fact sheet out to our friends in the community would cover a lot of the people that have received these mailers already. >> commissioner campos? >> thank you, mr. chair, i want to add another point and i appreciate all the comments that have been made and i do want to acknowledge that i also know that there are limited resources and there are limitations in terms of what we as government agencies can do. i would also say that and encourage the advocate community to also have some

role here because as advocates and as private citizens, there are -- there's flexibility that as government agencies we don't have, so i think that anyone out there who cares about the public being -- given correct information, i would encourage them they seriously consider being involved because we can do certain things but there are limitations on what we can do. >> okay, thank you for your presentation, thank you for listening to our concerns and i'm hopeful we can work together really well to manage a response. we can open up this item for public comment. any member of the public that would like to comment, please come forward. we'll do two minutes per person. >> i'm jessica from the sierra

club, thank you for having this in-depth conversation, we've been concerned about it, we created an sf heart facebook page, we're trying really hard to combat this misinformation but would help us immensely if we had real facts, like how many jobs is this program going to create a work, how many megawatts of energy we will have and what years so we've been having a lot of conversation about this program for a long time, the consultant that's been hired by the sfpuc has a proposal or a plan they've presented that says you're going to have this many jobs, this much renewable generation online and this year, and maybe that program is not completely feasible but what we need is some kind of numbers, we need facts and we need them now.

we need more than just the shell contract, we need to know what kind of investment are we make ining the build-out, how much money are we going to spend, how many jobs are we going to create and that will help us immensely fight this misinformation, we can't fight it without that, unless you have the numbers for how many megawatts you're going to have in the city and how many jobs you're going to have, that's going to be a hard one to sell, we're fighting hard to fight this misinformation, it's great that you're going to continue to have this information, and i urge you to ask the puc to get those numbers to you and have a plan in place as soon as possible, we need to know those details right now so we can maintain a good p.r. and have a good campaign strategy for this, so thank you. >> thank you.

>> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners, eric burkes, representing san francisco green party, so just to take off where my colleague left off, first of all, it's really good to see a new commissioner stepping up, especially from district 5 because all of the things, not just clean power sf, but lafco works on our crucial, clean power sf itself, especially in regard to the build-out that jess was talking about is very crucial, it's particularly to district 5 because i'm sure the commissioner knows that there's a great need for jobs and jobs training in that district, and so -- and that gets to the heart of what we've been working on for the past couple of years, working with local power and the