for them as carmen said earlier i was one of those people who stopped playing violin in the second grade and really can't sing or do anything so the power forming arts for me i am just awestruck and so privileged to be able to meet the people of this caliber and we have so many fantastic nominations this year. in the area of inspirational leadership and community impact and lifetime achievement. so, my first category for nominations and if you will stand when i say your name, please do so. inspirational leadership. we have brenda wong aoki. >> we have malu peeples. [ applause ] >> and our nominee could not be here today so representing her is her daughter.

>> hopefully i hope that your mother was doing well. her mother is in korea right now. >> so the next category is in the area of community impact and these finalists organizations and we have this diverse amazing community that we live in with so many organizations that do so much to try and bridge the gap and support our young apa and not so young apa performing artist who can't seem to sometimes break through into the main stream. but also not break through our own cultural groups. in our own, we are such a diverse community as claudine had said, i can't think to name how many ethnicity and cultures and countries are in the apa community. so these particular organizations have done a fantastic job of trying to bridge these cultural gaps and support the artist.

so those organizations are asian american theater company, are they here? >> is someone from asian? hi. >> that is pearl, and i end up in her junk mail a lot and so we have to fix our e-mail for that. >> we have asian improv, arts. [ applause ] >> we have the asian league foundation heritage street fair. and i don't know if ted is still here and as the mayor said a fantastic organization that has been bridging these cultural divides and bringing the apa heritage and the apa celebration to all of us. and san francisco, pristine. >> one of the things that we foubd during the no, ma'am that ising selection process is how much we as a committee learned about the organizations in our

own communities that we did not know about, and this has been a wonderful learning experience for all of us and i hope that this is a and we will bring more attention to these fantastic artists that were out there and so our last category is for the lifetime achievement and this is for the individual whose have about, for at least 25 years had some impact in our apa community, and have used this amazing performance ability themselves to share their culture and also give back to their communities as well. and so i am really honored to be able to do it now. and we have robert tamakabailey. [ applause ] >> we have the team of john gang and francis wong. [ applause ] >> and once again, i am really

thrilled to be able to announce, a double nominee malo ravera people. [ applause ] >> congratulations to all of you for being nominated and for being selected as finalists and looking forward to see who our judges have selected on may 6th at the jazz center, thank you. >> thank you, mary, and all of your work. >> thank you. >> so, i want to take a moment to say and the committees that are here but those who have done the committees and this is all about the people that come, and i want to thank carmen from the community and irene, (inaudible) and all of your friends and the whole city. and san francisco communities somewhere along here. thank you so much.

hi. so, about next month, may 6th, the program is before 5:30, and 5:00, and (inaudible) the registration for ten days and over capacity. and that is great entertainment and i can't wait to see who the winners are, and they are just saying thank you again for your work and so please to arrive early at the center for the ceremony on next month and then after that, we will all be back here for our reception and again, thank you for the company, i understand that there are shuttles for those that feel that they do not want to walk and so that is great. and i want to thank you all for coming and thank you for the mayor's office without everybody and talked to and make things happen, and from just (inaudible) the mayor's office of labor and services.

and so i want to thank them. so, at this point, i think that we are adjourned and please join us and enjoy your lunch. >> the meeting will come to order. call the roll. >> president torres? >> here. >> commissioner caen? >> here. >> commissioner vietor? >> here. >> commissioner moran? >> here. >> [speaker not understood] is

excused and we have a quorum. >> we have a quorum. we shall proceed with approval of the minutes, item number 3. any additions or amendments to the minutes? >> move approval. >> second. >> moved and seconded. is there any public comment on the minutes before we proceed to a vote? all those in favor signify by saying aye. >> aye. >> opposed? the motion carries. we have supervisor avalos who wanted to speak before the board meeting. welcome to the commission, supervisor, and chairman of lafco, among other titles. how is your incredible father doing? >> he's doing great, thank you. >> fantastic, fantastic. best news i've had all day. >> thank you. well, thank you for a com indicating my schedule to come in and speak to you a little out of order with your agenda. ~ accommodating i want to thank you for the work you do in the puc and your work shepherding the [speaker not understood] program over the past several months and years for some of you.

this has been a real critical period for green power s.f. as you know, we have our [speaker not understood] rates that are before you today. i'm hoping that today could be the day that you actually approve the rates, although i'm not sure that's actually going to happen now, but hopefully in the mid may meeting that's possible. >> yes. >> onev that it's a critical time to actually pass those rates so that we can actually continue on with the program that needs to get started, was going to be started october. now it looks like it's getting pushed back toward the end of this year, or perhaps beginning of next year and time is of the essence. we believe that the not to exceed votes are going to be essential to get passed before we actually get to the real votes that are going to come into place, the [speaker not understood] energy that is going to come into play, make the program viable and to reach the robust build out all of us

want to see happen. so, i want to encourage you to vote as quickly as possible to make sure that we can get on the same page to move forward with that. also, we have -- trying to get a [speaker not understood] to plan together our joint lafco-puc meeting. we've kind of rearranged our schedule for may 9. i hear may 9 may not work for you now, and i'm hoping that we can figure out how to get that day or another day as soon as possible. we want to make sure that we can come together to approve -- approve together the votes, and move forward on the robust start and build out of the program. so, hopefully we can get together with that in the middle of may as well. >> i have it on my schedule. >> i have it, too. >> may 9th at 1 o'clock, right? >> i found out yesterday we don't have a quorum and i had to send out an e-mail. >> oh, there isn't a quorum. >> no. >> all right.

we have two [speaker not understood] right here. we'll workout the schedule. >> okay. so, we are amenable and we hope that you can work closely with our schedule to make sure it can happen. we want to make sure we can move as quickly as possible. i appreciate your attention. >> thank you very much for all your hard work, supervisor. >> thank you. >> especially on this issue as well as many other issues. we look forward to seeing you soon. >> take care. >> any other public comments on item number 4? there being none, communications, item number 5, i think that's pretty self-explanatory. >> chair, i just have one question on the water supply agreement update. >> um-hm. >> we have had -- >> on the minutes, right? >> we have had -- one of the items we've had outstanding for a while is to have discussions with bawsca about potentially changing the rate structure, changing the fixed and variable

portion on the rate. and i know that there is some work ongoing and i guess my question is clearly we're not going to have anything for this next rate cycle. and what i am hoping is that we're tracking this so that we will have something for the next rate cycle. so that a year from now we'll have something to look at that would reflect our best work on this. >> anyone like to respond to that? todd? >> todd read strong, assistant general manager and cfo. we are thinking about that, commissioner, and we'll be reviewing that as well with mr. jensen and his successor as well, given that he will be retiring soon. we have plenty of time to review it. and also with our recent bawsca prepayment, which is in your packet today as well, that is also in part moved from our perspective to greater fixed

cost recovery. so, that was one of the consequences of that structure. and more is to come and we'll review that with mr. jensen in the future as well as his successor. >> okay. and if, if for some reason it looks as though we are not going to be able to come to conclusions on time for the next rate cycle, would you please let us know that? >> we will. >> my expectation is that we will. >> point well taken. thank you. >> thank you. any other comments on communications? >> i do. >> yes. >> i wanted to draw the attention to the pipeline, water pipeline assessment. it was very shocking to me to read this. i hope everybody did. and i thank david briggs for putting this together. we certainly see problems. i mean, these pipes are older than i am. so, i know that -- >> they're 29 years old? [laughter] >> amazing.

>> so, it really is very eye opening to read and i wasn't aware of. so, i hope everybody did review that. >> thank you, commissioner. any other comments on communications? all right. any public comments on communications? i think we have a special introduction. >> i just wanted to possibly follow-up on the date issue just before we leave that, may 9th, and see if there is an opportunity to find a date while we're all here. and one suggestion might be before our next commission meeting because i think that if we are going to proceed with a rate setting conversation, that we should probably have the lafco meeting ideal by before that to get some input if we're not going to take action today. >> we're not going to take action today. >> so possibly that may 14th might be an option. that would be great just to do a quick little survey on dates.

i know it's been difficult to find, and i did recognize that the supervisor was here to try and urge us to get a date. >> on may 9th i can do it 2:30, 3 o'clock. i just can't do it at 1 o'clock. [inaudible]. >> it was my understanding that lafco cannot do it after, the meeting has to be done by 2:30. >> okay. >> so, is may 14th a possibility then before our regular puc meeting, we'll just extend that day? >> we'll also need to check with lafco commission to see their availability. >> is there anybody here -- >> is that a tuesday? >> yes, that's a tuesday. >> before the puc hearing. >> that's fine with me. >> why don't you let the lafco people know we have an agreement here. the only thing i have is 11 o'clock if we can call by our general manager. i'm sure he would appreciate me not calling him that day. >> i will check with lafco and get back to you. >> all right, thank you. [laughter] >> you're the best. other commission business?

>> i have some business. >> please. >> in fact, i have quite a bit of business. first of all, i would like to request that we put the security assessment on the next agenda in closed session as we used to have it. i think it's time to revisit that in light of recent occurrences. so, i'd like to do that. and secondly, i would like to talk about what i see is a breakdown between the communication of the commission and the staff. there seems to be, in my mind, a feeling that staff is just going on doing what they choose to do without any answers to directions that we give. one point was yesterday i

received an e-mail about the various questions that had been asked and the question was had they been answered. well, i don't know the answer to that. but my guess would be that probably most of them have not. and it's lack of concern about what the commission is saying. i personally have had situations happen. and as you all know, for easily four years, i might say, i have been talking about real estate and the surplus that we have and what to do about it. and all i would get would be reports. nothing was ever actively done. i have -- i was going to ask secretary to see when this started, but records don't go back that far. that's how long it's been and it's a huge disregard for me

personally and for the whole commission because we've been asking about this. furthermore, it's a disregard for our rate payers, because some of those lands do have value which could be passed along to our rate payers. some of the lands would make wonderful gardens. some of the lands would make wonderful parks, and we are denying our rate payers that. now, a very specific point was in the chronicle on april 12th, which was a friday, there was a two-page piece on the francisco reservoir, which i know we're going to discuss later. but i want to make this point. it goes on and on about the different groups banding together. they want the reservoir, they want the [speaker not understood] as a free church, they want it as a park. why weren't they told years ago that this is impossible, we cannot give them this land?

that land belongs to bayview hunters point. it belongs to pacific heights. it belongs to everyone, not just telegraph hill -- excuse me, russian hill. so, i really feel there was a huge lapse of proper -- of discipline in term of what our properties are. furthermore, this was answered from us 10 days after the fact, after this was in. there is no excuse for that. that's very poor. management of dealing with problems, dealing with public concern. and i must say -- and this is directed to you, michael kern, i really feel insulted personally that this has happened. that after all these years that you're showing a disrespect for me as a commissioner.

and everybody in this room knows how many times i've asked to have this solved. so, i want you to know that i'm very, very displeased and i'm also very sad that it has to come to this. so, in closing, i would like, mr. president, if you could get together with the general manager to clearly define the role of the commission vis-a-vis staff, general manager, because somehow the momentum has been lost. >> thank you, commissioner caen. and that will be communicated to the general manager at the appropriate time. and obviously sooner than later. >> thank you. >> i appreciate your comments and i appreciate your concerns, and i think that whenever a commissioner feels that they have been not given the due respect, we need to be very, very vigilant about making sure that they are because at the end of the day, we're appointed by the mayor who is elected by

the people of the city and county of san francisco and who are here to represent the people of the city and county of san francisco. and, so, i think the lines are pretty well drawn. it's a matter of reigniting the lights on democracy and how it works. commissioner, i think you have an introduction to make. >> i do. i'm very pleased to welcome the second grade class from the san francisco day school who are here with their teachers and here with several parents. and we're so pleased to have you here at the san francisco public utilities commission meeting so that you can get a sense of some of the meetings and how they work and also with the hopes that maybe some day in the future, you all will be -- one of you will be sitting up here if not all of you and helping to set policy for san francisco. would you like to stand up for a minute, second graders? (applause)

>> now, where is kiera sitting? >> here's kiera. >> welcome to the commission. it's nice to have you back again, the students of san francisco day school and the teachers who i'm sure are underpaid and work very, very hard. [laughter] >> welcome to the commission. thank you, commissioner. >> thank you. >> and proud mama. >> proud mama. >> report of the general manager. >> good morning -- well, good afternoon. first of all, i just wanted to say that i had the opportunity to talk to commissioner caen and she voiced her concern and i take definitely full responsibility for the agency not adequately responding to her request. and we will right the ship and we'll take the steps necessary to make sure that we prioritize

any wishes of the commission. and i'm willing to work with the president of the commission to do so. so, i truly apologize for that. with that being said, you indicated that francisco reservoir was in the paper. and what we would like to do is kind of give you an update of the conversations that we've had with rec and park and the supervisors. but i want to ensure you that we never said that we will give this property away for free. and, so, we've been in conversations of var market value which is, i think, pretty much everything we've talked to them about. so, i've asked michael to come up and talk about the conversations that we've had. >> michael [speaker not understood], deputy general manager. first off, i apologize to

commissioner caen for any disrespect i might have shown her on the francisco reservoir, any real estate item. they are very difficult items in some respects, but we need to communicate better and make sure that we're moving things forward. francisco reservoir is an interesting site in that we have been very adamant about obtaining fair market value for the site. if we due to surplus put it on the market and there's been a lot of conversation with supervisor farrell's office, with some of the community members and some of the beliefs that they have that we can just turn the property over to another city department for free, and we've made it very clear that's not the case. we also are very much aware that now rec and park has francisco reservoir on their acquisition list for open space to be converted into a park. and we are actually trying to research more the recent acquisition in the noe valley town square property which they

paid $4.2 million for for a park on 24th street within noe valley. we want to look at that appraisal and see how it pencils out against their purchase price. so, we are in discussions with rec and park and others that are -- keep coming forward and are interested in the site. if we can enter into some sort of exclusive negotiating agreement with somebody about that, then we can actually talk about the terms and conditions for that site and what the future use might be of that site. the things that we've done at francisco, we've taken the roof off as you know, that cost us about $300,000. so, we don't have the safety issue any more, but we haven't done anything else to that site except secure it at this time. we have a number of other properties that are in various stages of sort of development or sale. the kmj property down at sunnydale that we've hearkened to the commission, is at the board of supervisors. it will be introduced at the board of supervisors very soon. we have a couple properties we're moving forward with potentially identifying as surplus that we can actually

put out for bid. and once we have it out for bid and we've identified a party, then we can talk about what the disposition of those properties would be. so, we have various things, but this is listed as francisco and i want to make sure you understand we have been very forthcoming and transparent in the public realm that we want fair market value for francisco reservoir. >> well, one problem we have, the last i heard, was that we don't even know the value of the property. >> that's true. we have had appraisals. and again, appraisals are confidential. we don't release them. they are there for our use in negotiating. and we are doing an updated appraisal at this point in time to make sure that we understand the value in today's current market. >> well, this has been my point. i mean, there has been no reason after all these years that we don't have some valuation of that property. and my discussions with you earlier -- you know, clearly

there isn't, and that's what i don't understand. i do not understand why we're not moving faster. it's been years. i'm really adamant about this, truly. and another point, the people of russian hill thought that they could get it for free. i'm not saying that we ever said they could, but they were under that assumption. and what i'm saying is that should have been stopped years ago. they never should have thought that because it's impossible. so, you know, i'm angry and i've been talking about this for years now and i'm not -- i'm not going to let up this time. i want to see these properties brought forward. there's no reason why they can't be. you've been sitting on them for years. >> and we will bring forward -- the problem we have is we can talk about the properties in open session, but unless we have a buyer, we can't talk about it in terms and

conditions and right now we don't have a buyer for francisco. we can put it out for bid. i'd be glad to take direction from the commission. we can get an appraisal, fair market value and put it out nor bid. >> i think the commissioner is referencing we need an inventory of all the properties. >> we have that. we have some indication of what our surplus properties -- >> and i'm sure commissioner caen and i also know how real estate works. we've been around for at least 29 years. and i think that we know exactly how these things are run and we know you can't put out an appraisal unless you have an offer. but at least give us a ballpark figure that i think you're asking for as to what the inventory is, and we can make a determination of what to sell or not to sell that can go back into the coffers. isn't that your intent? >> i received a report two months ago, three months ago with the properties and some

did have values, and that's where it sat. i have stacks of reports and nothing ever happens. >> all right. >> question perhaps to the city attorney. the process for disposing surplus property that's in the charter, could you outline that for us? >> briefly, nor even [speaker not understood], city attorney's office. ~ when the charter was amended in 2002 giving the commission exclusive jurisdiction over your real estate, that it also provided that you could dispose of real estate but was surplused to the needs of any utility. and, so, although, for example, the francisco reservoir is historically an asset of the water enterprise, under the charter amendment in 2002, you

need to make a commission determination before you could transfer it to another city department or outside of city ownership, that you do not need that property for any water, wastewater, power purposes. so, that would be the first step, would be for the commission to make that determination. in comparison, you'll recall a couple years ago you made the decision to dispose of the property at 17th and folsom street. did you sell that to the park and rec department for fair market value. you made the find thattion that property was not required for any of your utility purposes and then you entered into an agreement with rec/park for the fair market value of the property. and just so you know, commissioner, that fact of how you conducted this position of rate payer property was communicated to the community organizations.

they've chosen to listen to a member who has some legal theories that are different than ours. so, it's not that they haven't heard that that was a requirement. it's just they've chosen not to accept that. so, in any event, once you go through that process, then it goes to the board of supervisors in either case. if you're transferring it to another city department, the board has to approve a jurisdictional transfer from one city department to another f. you're selling it to a third-party, as in the case of the mountain view property that michael referenced, ~ the board has to approve the sale of title outside of the city's hands to a third-party. is that what you're asking? >> in part. there was also a provision -- i don't know if the law has changed on this, but it used to be that once the commission declared a piece of property