and as long as we can oblej them to honor the working people we will work with them. and pg&e is not a matter of our concern, just that they honor the labor standards and take care of the folks that they represent. we look forward to continuing the conversations with your staff and thank you for the opportunity. >> any questions? >> thank you very much. >> >> good afternoon, commissioners eric brooks, san francisco green party and the local grassroots organization in the city. and i just want to get up to kind of piggy back on what mike just said, and reiterate, i think that you folks got from the sierra club a pretty clear letter that is that the sierra club is very dedicated to making sure that use the pras and other mechanisms to getting

the union labor heavily involved in this build out project. and i can also say for the rest of the community coalition, that is working for clean power sf and making it strong that we also concur with the statement that the sierra club put out and so the grassroots organizizers out here are strongly, supportive and would be deeply concerned about a program that did not maximize to the greatest extent possible the union labor on the project. when the projects were then programmed. >> and that is paramount and it is just smart for us to take that position and even though i am a solid union supporter but it is wise for us to take that position because together we can make sure that this program becomes what it ought to become. which is hundreds of megawatts of local installation and hiring the california workers to make this city a green city.

and started bringing in a deal for this country and if we get it done here it will spread. and the union labor is going to be key to that and so i want to make sure that the commission knows that we are strongly up portive on that. and i think that the shell contract itself is just a pretty tiny start up to the larger program. we are not thrilled with the idea of necessarily delaying the start up just because it is shell. i think that one of our objectives is that from our standpoint is that she'll role is only at the beginning and only in that small bit and temporary and not ongoing that there is a pec staff itself take over the role that shell starts of purchasing energy and you have heard from her that is

possible to at least get that going in the next or in a couple of years. so i think that what i am getting at is that we are not opposed to moving forward with a competitive and not-to-exceed rate, and at your next meeting, and that let's get that out of the way so that we can get to working with labor to get the build off to actually happen and for it to be build and comprehensive and make sure that we maximize the union labor in the project. >> thank you very much. >> for all of your hard work. >> anybody else on this item? >> mr. freed? >> jason freed, lasco staff, this part, you know that we at our joint meeting last did approve moving this program forward and we know that it is not an action item but we would like to make sure that on

august 13th that any questions are out there today so your staff can be able to address them before that meeting so we can get this program up and moving forward as quickly as possible. and the one thing that i will say, you know, i don't think that any of the commissioners would argue with me if i said that we want to make sure that our labor standards are adhered to. but one thing to keep in mind is the not-to-exceed rate which is the action item that you are doing, this can help us to understand better how much money is available for a build out so that we can have a discussion with labor and how many jobs can be created once we have the final not-to-exceed rate approved it will give us a better understanding of where for move forward. we want to know what is available for us in the pool of money for the p build out and having a not-to-exceed rate in place give them a commitment as to what they should be building towards, thank you. >> and the green nature.

>> any other questions? >> jeff acerman? >> is she still? >> that is me. >> you want to defer. >> she defers to. >> hi, my name is sharon, good afternoon and happy birthday it is a good day i hope. so i am a recent graduate from san francisco state university and i was an environmental studies major and i am here to show my support for clean power sf and this is such a great opportunity for the residents of san francisco to opt out of dirty energy, and to support clean energy and for the city of san francisco to be leaders for initiative and sustainability and i would like to thank sfpuc for listening to the public and sf advocates and working to bring down the rates for this program. i hope that we can continue to

move forward with the maximum investment and clean energy and support this program at a competitive rate. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. jessica akerman, san francisco bay chapter of the sierra club, i wanted to echo comments from everyone about how (inaudible) to move forward on transitioning to just and safe and healthy communities for everyone and part of that is giving people the community to move away from fossil fuels and giving the opportunity for good paying job and an opportunity to move forward to that ideal future together. and we do hope that you can continue to move forward with this program but the not-to-exceed rate and thank you for all of the work that you did. >> any other comments?

>> all right, we will... there is no resolution to approve, right? >> so moved. >> is that it. >> thank you very much. >> presentation. and number eight. bawsca update. >> you are never going to retire? >> no, i am but i will be here for the end of september, i will be not at that one august meeting. >> you will be absent to the best one. >> darn. i have invested all of these years. >> and well,vy good news to report and that is last thursday night the board of directors appointed my successor. and that is nicole st. croix and she has been working with us for 14 years and many of you have seen her before. she is a water resources manager and she has worked with

very closely with julie on the swip and with michael on the water supply planning and so forth. and they sent a nice note to her which she is appreciated she is not here today because she is taking one of the last vacations she is going to get in a long time. >> she knows what to expect from the job. but she is very cap able and she is drifb and these results are oriented and all business. i would like to say that i brought in a lot of nice comments about her appointment, every once in a while someone says, well the inside cab date and so no big deal. and i am here to tell you that the board is not that easy. there are even biases against an internal candidate and she got the it old fashioned way she earned it and she las the board's entire support. so you will get to see her next time and she will be here and i

won't and you will get to know her for the next 18, 20 years. >> okay. >> that concludes my report. >> all right. >> any public comment on the report? >> we go to the consent calendar. >> 9. >> accept work performed by par electrical contractors, inc., for contract no. hh-961e transmission lines 5/6 repair to optical ground wire,for a total contract amount of not-to-exceed $30,000; approve modification no. 1 (final), for a time extension of 287 consecutive calendar days for a total contract duration of 407 consecutive calendar days; and authorize final payment to the contractor. >> all right, is there any public comment on this one item in the consent calendar? >> is there any member that wish to remove it for further consideration? >> i will move the item. >> all right, commissioner moran moves the itment >> seconded by caen. >> aye. >> opposed? motion carries. >> item ten, regular business. >> thal locations of the existing appropriation in the

amount of $40 million. approve the reallocation of existing appropriation, in the amount of $40,000,000, consistent with the planned fy 2013-14 capital project investment, from wastewater enterprise fy 2013-14 capital improvement program ssip project cwwsipdp, biosolids digester project to wastewater enterprise fy 2013-14 ssip project cwwsippr, program wide efforts; and authorize the general manager to coordinate a request for a supplemental reallocation appropriation to adjust existing appropriations accordingly. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. >> todd, the assistant general manage and her this is a budget update and it is a technical item that does not increase the budget and just rearranges it and provides direction to the general manage and her myself to go before the board of supervisors to update the budget accordingly. it is a 40 million dollar item and it relates to the sewer system improvement program and will allow us to stay on track and on time for all of the important work there and the treatment and collection. i am here for any other questions? >> any questions? >> any public comment? >> is there a motion? >> i will move it. >> moved and seconded. by commissioners moran and caen. >> all of you significant by aye? >> aye

>> opposed? >> the motion is carried. >> item eleven. adopt the final mitigated negative declaration, the mitigation monitoring and reporting program and the findings as required by the california environmental quality act for the san joaquin valley communication system upgrade project; and approve hetchy system improvement program-funded project no. cuh10201, san joaquin valley communication system upgrade project; and approve the solicitation of design build proposals pursuant to administrative code section 6.61. >> welcome mr. richty. >> thank you, president and commissioner this is really a straight forward item and i am happy to answer any questions that you might have on the item. >> does anyone have any questions? >> is there public comment? >> all right, entertain a motion? >> so moved >> moved by commissioner moran. >> second, >> thank you. >> finally. >> all of those in favor aye? >> aye. >> opposed? motion carries.

>> item 12. recommend to board of supervisors to adopt the construction site runoff control ordinanc >> good afternoon, general manager for waste water enterprise and so this item has been long in development and it is actually a very big benefit for us if you look on the horizon in san francisco you will see 20 something cranes and we know that a lot of the construction sites needs to be managed as a lot of debris and bricks, and stones and, rocks and dirt and others get into the system and so, it is not anything new. and what it does is it actually puts a compliance process through the contractors and we also, it puts the environmental code that exists in other places altogether in one place, and we also have to develop the best management practices for the contractors, and assist in the managing construction site. so if you have any other questions for me? on this particular item i will be happy to take those. >> so moved. >> already >> second? >> second. >> public comment? >> thank you.

>> all of those in favor. >> aye. >> aye. >> opposed? >> motion carries. >> item number 1 3. >>authorize the general manager to execute a memorandum of understanding by and between the sfpuc and san francisco recreation and parks commission regarding management of the lake merced tract. >> and mr. ritchie >> general manager for water, this is an issue that was before the commission before and we also had as you recall a workshop in march out at lake merced to talk about the issues related to the lake and this item is as important to move forward now and really established the structure of the relationship between the puc and the recreation and parks department and relative to the mutual responsibilities out there but again, clarifies that the puc is ultimately responsible for the land out there as the owner of the property. and we made one minor change from last month, or last, july

9th we had to continue the item and added the clause that to clarified that in effect as almost a land relationship that you are sure that that rec and park would not allow the conditions to exist out there and that would be in part to make sure that we don't end up with a case of pollution or something that again the pec would have been ultimately have been responsible for and we do have a couple of additional proposed changes to the mlu. one of those is to item b, which basically was say that the commissioners adopt this and that the commissioner and not the general managers would have the ability to approve any extensions to this mlu over time. and the original version had a lot of that to be delicated to be generated to the general managers but we want it to go to the commissions >> secondly a change in here was the identification of craoetation of an annual work

program that would be jointly developed by the puc and the recreation and park department. the existing is creation of an annual work program that responds to and addresses relative issues such as the 2010 water shed report and did the interest that may impact the uses or any other quality or activities at the tract. and in addition sentence that says that the general managers of the puc and rpd will join with the reports no later than november 18th each year that it is in place, covering the work program completing and source of funds and facilities kfn and capital repair and the placement needs and activities that reporting would give both commissions the ability to track the progress at the tract. and we think that is a good addition to the mlu here. and that will be happy to answer any questions. >> any questions? >> yeah, i have a couple of

questions. so the $2 million bond discussion, is that something that is going to happen and do swre that calendar? >> we actually, the general manager of the recreation department is here and i am sure that he will be able to speak to that item. >> great. >> and maybe i will just finish asking you a couple of questions and i noted that there are probably some people here, i don't know from the lake merced task force who are going to speak to this as well but i remember asking i believe it was last year, a year ago, probably for what the rec and park plan is as it relates to sort of the concession of the rfps and the financials and whatnot. and i assume that is what is part of the plan that is presented. >> yes, the concession management and that will be part of the package and so i think that he will be able to respond to that question. >> great, i am curious when we

will hear a greater level of detail on what the actual work plan will be moving forward. >> great. eif you address those two questions, that would be great, thank you. >> thank you, scott james, general manager, and the parks department and first of all we are grateful for this commission and department staff for your partnership and a number of properties that we work together and to provide the activities which is our joint and shared mission, we worked closely with the department and the department staff over a number of months and we have viewer feedback and

the veriable amount of fee back to reach and formalize a refresh which we are comfortable with and pleased to be here today. with respect to the two questions, that you raised commissioner, one bond planning, we have begun in earnest our 2012, park bond planning it is 185 million bond with two million assigned to the lake merced and there have been staff meetings as we have done with the different sites to prepare for it and we have an assessment happening some time early in the fall and we will begin the community stake how older process shortly there after. >> great. and so what was the process be or role for this condition? would it be one community engagement process is further along, would you come back and say is this the priorities that the community came up with? >> we will definitely keep this commission in the loop. and i am happy to come back

here and report the progress and i am sure that the pc department staff will participate in the community out reach process as we allocate it is not a lot of money, and we have it from the task force already and the facilities of an assessment of what is happening i am pleased to note that it will be augmented by a grant that the recreation department obtained from the department of building ways to enhance some of the recreational access to north lake and that will be part of the over all package and we are happy to keep the commission informed. >> maybe it is for the general manager.

>> the financial resources secured for the recreational planning and the concession contracts and all of those lingering questions that we keep hearing about as a commission. >> i understand that there have been some vocal advocacy and communication about it and i think that it is important that we all focus on what is happening in the future, whether those perceptions are, or whether those observations are perceptions or fact and it does not need to be resolved, the fact of the matter is that we have a very good partnership of the puc and the part department and we have a recreational program at the lake right now. and it is happening right now. we came when we were there and we were presented in may, we gave you a pretty detailed overview of the recreational programming that we are doing there. and with regard to the concessions, most of the concession activity is actually

at harding which is very, very low established and i think that an update on that could go in whatever annual report but one particular concession that people are interested in is the boat house and an update on the boat house is that the property management team has started to identify potential opportunities. and based on community feedback to support the water recreation and hopefully some fishing and so the staff has started to work on that process and to identify the potential prospects and this is something that they require that the pec will play a role and participate in that future process. >> great. >> yeah. i mean, i am not as interested right now in the details of them, or each an update of what it will report back on and the annual budgeting pieces and rec and park. >> did most of those, but right now, quit well, in the mlu and i think that we will get to a little bit of a deeper dive i think in may we came here and presented what the maintenance

is on the lake. we have the partnership between the commission and our staff and among the community. and there is a broad community that uses and enjoys the lake and they don't come to commission meetings. and we are actually doing a robust programming out there and that pga considers harding to be one of the best golf courses in the united states of america and we are excited to have opportunities out there and the department of water ways and the state agency has entrusted it with a half a million dollars of grant funding to approve the water front access out there and the

feedback and from the park users has been quite exceptional on the programming that we are doing there and so we have work to do and we appreciate this commission's responsibility fiduciary responsibility to see what is happening at the lake but i actually think that if we focus forward we are on the right track in a professional manner >> thank you. >> any other questions? >> i have a question. >> commissioner caen? >> on the topic of the boat house, and facilities there, have you ever thought about private funding? i think of the graduate of the schools, to me i just happened to think of it, that that might be a way to go and we will have the extra money for other things, and not just the bond issues has that ever been considered? >> i think that the clubs have actually been great stewards of the lake and they have expressed some degree of interest of it and we did work with the clubs a number of years ago to replace one of the

docs out there and that was a combination of public and private funding and some of the events and activities that could happen at the boat house and weddings and special events could help to generate some revenue but i do believe that there are some topic opportunities there. and you know, we do a considerable amount of work with the community, commissioner, and you know we do have to, we do try to prioritize our programs with a very small partnership for development staff. but, that would be something that we would certainly welcome the opportunity and the partnership of the community and i think that the community has very justifiably been interested in seeing the boat house interested again and seeing and expanding their opportunities for fitness and exercise, and support you know, that incredible sport which we are doing and maybe we can move on to other projects. >> good.

>> a of things, to commissioner caen's comment, you know, it is probably not the subject of today's meeting the long term, i think that the people who are using the boat house, have some desires to have a replacement facility. and they also have a desire to have more control over what goes on in that facility. and i think that in one way, that there are tremendous alumni organizations for the rowing clubs and i think that if they will strengthen their position i think that it is a contribution to recreation in the city and also city government if, you know, a group were to form to come up with some money to develop the new boat house and provide for those opportunities. >> so any way, i would like to second that, i think that that line of thought is very

positive as we go forward. and second comment is just a procedural one, i think, the two amendments that mr. ritchie talked about are intended to. provide a degree of accountability and transparency that i know a lot of the community folks have been asking for we would like to when we get to the public comment, period, i would like the comments to address the item presented and also the amendments and if there is a procedural step we need to do and move the item and move the amendment then i will do that. if we can just do it by it, but i would like the comment to address the mlu and the potential amendments to improve the accountability. >> that is a very good point, in addition of the two other s and they prefer that vice

president present his and so that we have all of the amendments in front of us before we go to a vote. >> okay. >> thank you very much, president torres. we have been talking about the lake for a long time and i actually grew up on the west side and so i am very familiar with that space and the boat house. and i think that one of the problems that we have is that there is we don't take credit when we should be taking credit. like stop and the intimate relationship with the staff and we represent a number of the employees that represent to the general manager and the general manager is failing to acknowledge that over sees a unique program and i met with tommy and agm and cruise the other day and we talked about the communities that we have here at the public utilities commission to engage community youth and under served

communities in interns. >> they have actually sat with the union and sat with that state certified board and over seen those things and he has done that because, not because he had to. he has done that because he cares about it being successful. and so before we let an opportunity slip away, to address this, i would like for the colleagues to consider the amendment and goes under the joint responsibilities and it will read like this. joint responsibility number 6, to evaluate and possibly implement the opportunities for apprentice ship and community workforce training and education programs. and what that would do is that would open the door for us in faout thank youersinger,

the public utility commissions the same programs that they did before us. and because i think that when you talk about the department heads, who clearly understand the needs of the community and the needs of the career pathway, for these deserving youth, there is nobody that understands it better than harman and kelley. >> i proposed amendment. >> all right. >> council have a copy of that? >> i was from the city attorney's office and i was handed that language and i move that the language that he read at the beginning of the meeting is also available and in a printed copies over on table over there. and that would be an amendment to number one in section e of the mlu to replace the language

that is there by adding the general managers will jointly provide an annual report to the commissions no later than november 15, for each year, the mlu is in place, and covering the work program completing, and sources and use of funds. concession management and facility condition and replacement needs and activities and so those are the two proposed and two of the joint responsibilities of sfpec and the ripd. >> all right. >> there is a further proposed amendment that rithcie read and it is before the commission and it is to