this body three years ago. he said that consistently until the point that he retired. what was passed by the board last september was not a rec's based program. recs are energy, they don't create energy, they are not renewable in the sense that energy is not generated through recs. in fact, we, the ibw and labor in general has worked very hard to eliminate recs as much as we can because they don't produce electricity. in california where we have 20 percent of our energy coming from renewable sources currently and we are on our way to 33 percent, we don't need recs. they are not a viable approach. i must say we we were surprised when this proposal actually came through. recs don't contribute to work and jobs. as was mentioned the city

is already generating electricity renewable locally and the information you heard in terms of commitment to local build out, we are now part of the san francisco labor council which approved a resolution and i did author it that supports community choice aggregation because it has to be done in a way to support workers. we are going to support workers but those elements are not yet in the plan and we will and we promised before and we'll promise here today to continue to work and make sure that happens. supervisor avalos. >> thank you very much. >> i have a question of the witness? >> he's not a witness. >> mr. stern, miss malcolm indicated that you haven't gotten back to her regularly as expected. >> i had a conversation with

ken paulson, he didn't indicate that he had a chance to speak with miss malcolm. she and i did have a chance to speak directly earlier last month but i haven't had a call since then. the simplest way to put this, the one thing i heard -- >> i think you answered the question. as we move forward what i'm proposed is not a delay. 2-3 weeks is not going to destroy the planet. if there is no common ground, i get that and then i'm ready to vote. >> i this i the answer is there is opportunities for everybody to look at this as a job and environmental benefit. i don't think that recs even in the short-term accomplish that. thank you. >> just a question, commissioner term with your dialoguewith labor here,

>> former commissioner, sir >> but not a witness. >> if we were actually to continue a program that didn't include recs, is that mean there would be more labor support? >> look, the one thing that i did here that was positive that i considered to be very positive is the possibility of using hedgeey power, it's by local members. we absolutely support that. we support similar kinds of sourcing. >> does labor support condition on not having any recs? >> no, labor supports condition on having respect and inclusion of the principals that are not yet that were passed and supported by the whole labor community an are not yet part of the proposal that you are looking at today. >> okay. thank you very much. next speaker, please.

>> good afternoon, dr. jackson. bay view hunters point. i didn't hear in the the very end of what i was here for and that was solar. i'm a supporter for the solar because of the fact as being a homeowner, low income for energy and the fact that my electric big is $3.14 a month. i would like to hear more talk about solar because i don't know where your energy is coming from. you are talking about bringing in because i asked this question some years ago and that's before a lot of these babies have gone up here and spoken when they are talking about energy. i'm setting up this committee. i asked the question. i said, i

asked the question at the meeting in port row hills, i said who owns the line? they said pg & e. i said who owns the grid? they said pg & e. i said i'm going to be pg & e tonight because this is when this department was trying to put together peakers in my community and we fought against that. the thing of it is that i hope that you all make the decision because that is your responsibility. because i'm even concerned more about jobs, local hiring and this is one of the reasons that local hiring passed is because some of the unions did not local hiring to come forth to hire from the

community. so i just want to say that you have a good job on your hand. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> i want to begin by giving you a little bit of history because i represent the first people of this area. so, when the hatch valley was dammed by people in san francisco using their power so that we could use hydroelectricity and i know that most of you have not read the rick act of 1913. if we

have electricity, we chose to sell it and now we need it. in all this deliberations this body, the joined body has not been sincere in defining the terminology like i stated in my initial remarks. you all want to shove this down our throats. talking about generality as if the world is going to end tomorrow and trying to talk for the people of the south sector that have suffered for over 65 years. the question is what type of power, what type of energy and how clean that will

be and what will be the cost? if this city and county of san francisco has been truthful in having a meaningful dialogue, not really with labor, but with the community. i have been involved with this since 1998. thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, my name is don battles with the san joaquin irrigation. i'm here to lend support for shell energy. shell seems to be taking some hard lumps in this situation. shell is a partner of ours. we have a 120 mega watt shell

project. between shell and our partner at oak dale, we have had really good results with the shell product. prior to that time that shell took over in 2009, marketing our power, pg & e was the taker of that power and we have received many manyfold benefits from having shell market that power for us. that's ancillary services renewable energy. very very good products that we never received from pg & e. i wanted to tell you also that you keep talking about the pg & e workers. ibw 1245 pg & e

workers, but many of the public utilities owned in california also have 1245 as their employees. i doubt that 1245 employees on the public side would be resisting a public agency such as yourself taking over a portion of pg & e's territory. >> thank you very much. i do believe that shell is also part of the western states petroleum association and if they are, we do buy power from them. we buy oil and fossil fuels from them in the county. next speaker, please. >> hi, my name is theodore. i work in san francisco. i'm against this proposal. to begin, plenty of people i have talked to have voted time and time again against the city turning our current utility public. why has this happened. you have already decided

democratically. in the past we have struggled with a plethora of issues related to our electricity. let me tell you, change here is not welcomed. shouldn't the sf puc be worried about other issues, issues that are actually there. i'm talking about source, water mains, water transmission, they are shotty and they need to be up grated. where is sf puc focused? it's on clean energy and cost more to be delivered by shell. that is a step in the wrong direction. i said earlier that we voted against this public utility. that is not permission to give it to a company in texas under the guise of public power or

renewable energy. what's going on here? when someone has to ask that question, it's time to rethink the proposal. thank you for your time. >> thank you. i have a few more cards. if there is a speaker waiting to come forward, please come forward. the next speaker is june, lydia dpree, mark, jed, jeff , brook wayne right. >> hi, thank you for your time. i'm with the local clean energy alliance. i'm here in support of all the potential that clean power sf has for the local development clean energy and local jobs and economic benefits for san francisco. i'm really glad to see everyone

here today xhiltd committed to moving this program forward and very happy to see the not to exceed rate to come down to 11.5. i really appreciate all the hard work that lafco and the sf puc staff has done. it's really a victory for them and the groups that have worked with them to bring this rate down. we recognize this is a not to exceed rate. this is a cap. a cap that will protect customers from any future energy price bite. we think it's important to have that protection if place for customers and we are confident in our talks with sf puc staff and what we have in the region that the actual rate at launch will be much lower and even still and we've seen successes

in places like paleo alto. that is not real today but it's promising of what might be coming in the future that will be possible for us. we look forward for working with the commission and staff and seeing what we can do to minimize the shell contract and add to it to build the local jobs that are so important. we are happy to hear people talk about and some of the advocates have been suggesting and that there may be opportunities and other ways that we can involve labor in how we expand this program and most importantly how we get new programs with -- >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. good morning.

i'm lidda dpree. i come to you today as a consumer of electricity. i use it in my daily life and i also approach you as one who truly loves city of san francisco. leadership has been taking in moving us into a cleaner and more environmentally friendly form of electricity to be consumed within the 70 miles in san francisco and let this program be a living document that will grow over time as improvements are made. but let us take action now so we can give people that option sooner

instead of later. we can show this world, not just for people who live here, but for people who visit here, show this is a reason to come to san francisco and a reason to invest in this great city to bring jobs and entrepreneurs and thinkers and investors into this wonderful city that i love so much and thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> hello, thank you for taking public comment on this issue. my name is mark caesar and i'm here today representing organizing for action the 501 c 4 promoting action on the agenda that most voters voted for in 2012. climate change is one of those issues as you know president obama has recently

brought climate change to the forefront of his agenda and the clean power sf program would align well with that agenda if it is successful and that means if the not to exceed rate is reasonable and there is a robust local build out of that program. we would encourage you to set the rate at the lowest level and implement a local build out as much as possible. as a resident from san francisco with solar on my rooftop with water and pd, i would suggest you do this as quickly as possible. and frankly i'm an appalled that there with be an unwillingness on your part, mr. torres, to vote on this. because clearly there are -- >> unwillingness today. >> and i'm clear that the only

benefit i can see from delaying is that it gives basically pg & e another couple three weeks to attack this program. it seems to me that all of the issues on with respect to labor unions can be resolved even if you do vote on this today and i would suggest with the other that yourself reconsider that position. as a resident and voter here and a consumer here, we need to get this done as soon as possible and there should be no delays. i request that there be none. thank you. >> thank you very much, next speaker please. i pay pg & e $40.04. my

bill has been reduced in half. i would like to see this put the into effect so everybody has that benefit. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker please. >> hello, commissioners, thank you for the opportunity to speak. my name is jeff hol son. i'm a resident here and represent an advocacy group. i would like to thank the staff. i see the 11.5 cent rate

already in this resolution. great work. if we can set the rate below 11 that is affordable and competitive with pg & e which were two of the goals that were prescribed. in addition given the rapid changes in the renewable energy market and pricescious i would definitely advocate for staying aggressive on rate setting for going forward after the not the exceed rate. i think the labor issues that have come up are somewhat unrelated, that seems to be more in the implementation and build out. i believe everyone has the same good intentions. i wanted to point out this is in the puc's staff. the council is more

organized than the puc is, that is going to result in more unionized jobs than pg & e jobs on net. i agree with supervisor campos that the cca provides a way for us to take care of ourselves going forward to eliminate the shell role and to reduce the recs component which is boent labor and environmental groups are not a huge fan of. you talked about the marine model and i think we should get to that renewable energy as quickly as possible. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please.

>> hello. my name is theresa mcfarland. i support clean power sf. i'm very excited to opt in as soon as i can do that. i urge you to set this reasonable rate for this so we can move forward. thank you. >> thank you very much. before the next speaker i will read more cards.

i believe the rates, it's my understanding that the rates will be a way to provide tangible evidence of what we can do with the build out and jobs in the future. i think that's the key in discussions moving forward. finally i believe this is an opportunity for san francisco to be a hero and the leader in the nation as far as climate action goes. so, thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon commissioners. thank you for being here and for your hard work and for working diligently in the last few months for bringing this rate down and thank you for listening to san francisco consumers on that. i'm jess from the sierra club

representing our 6,000 members in san francisco. the sierra club supports the no the to exceed rate of 11.5 cents today. all the community advocates for sf power encourage you to pass this rate for a hundred percent renewable electricity and the build out work which is the point of this program. we do not know how much money we have or the build out which means we don't know how many jobs we can create if we don't have this not to exceed rate. another person said this is an important context in labor negotiations, it is. we do not have that information. to pass that we need to pass the not to exceed rate today. in addition, if we pass the rate today we can launch next spring which means we can launch in a time when

there is other options available. the only way we can launch with that energy is if we launch at a time that is excess available that others are not using which means we need to launch in the spring. this not to exceed rate has to be passed today. thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, again, my name is in monroe. i come to you in strong support of community choice aggregation primarily just as a citizen. i'm extremely concerned about global climate change and i think as it's been brought up already it's an urgent issue that every minute of delay actually makes a different. by then of the century, we can be

looking at hundreds of millions climate refugees from floods, droughts, fires, sea level rise, potentially could be over 30 feet alone from green lands, antarctic ice melting. that puts san francisco in a very unlivable state. i'm looking at this that it's something as some of the best scientist are looking at as a real possibility if we don't change our course of avenlgs -- action. i think it's imperative, not just from my generation, all of us are looking at you and judging you on this issue today. this is not going to solve climate change, but it supports it in every direction. we are not going to get there in every

second. so please take a vote today and i would be extremely excited to see that happen. >> thank you very much, next speaker, please. >> my name is rebecca evans. we support this and i hope you vote today. i think it's important that you are talking about energy independence here in other parts of the country that are not like san francisco, they are talking about having oil drilled and gas from this country. i think it's really good that under the leadership of the puc and lafco and the department of environment that you have come to this point and also working with the advocates to applaud the puc and lafco and i hope you vote today. thank you.

>> good afternoon. i live and work in san francisco. i don't represent a group. i have worked with the local clean energy alliance. there is a lot of common ground. we want reliable energy supplying grid and reduce carbon in the atmosphere, we want clean air in san francisco neighborhoods and we want local benefits with jobs and reduce cost. that means local control of energy. and one thought you might keep in mind if there is going to be recs bought, let's by them in san francisco. i'm 57 years old. 40 years ago, i had gas miles. we had a lot of conservation and the energy is down. 14 years ago i was the president of my teachers local. we had plans to really cut our class sizes and improve our education system. that was about the time when we got

theft of our money due to energy spikes and manipulation of the market and we lost teacher jobs. and that's a big impact on labor right there. it is time to bring home energy control. build local build out for energy efficiency is a very strong way to do that. look at building behind the meter and building in revenue stream in that manner. pg & e says 50 percent of this can be achieved. yes on this. thank you. >> thank you very much, next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners, my name is may. i work in san francisco. i'm testifying against the clean four sf program because it is

not culturally competent. i believe it will force my family who has never heard of this program to participate without their consent. this is automatic enrollment that requires those who are unwilling to participate to opt out. immigrants tend to not change their -- my family and other immigrant residents are likely to have to figure out how to opt out of a program they don't understand. this means that the automatic rolement requirement would force the residents to comply with a program they don't even understand. in sho