use. i'd like to see something that sdusz duces that change in business model from where we wish to where we're going and specifically where the acquisition fits. as part of it is changing the funding and an expansion of admission. i want to know how much that expansion of admission is costing us. and why we think that's a good idea >> so we would definitely come back and do a presentation. i think some of the reasons that we role looked at it is that as you knows we own a large portion of the street lights. we want to save a lot of energy costs. the problem out there is when a

street light goes down you don't know who it belongs it to. so with the board of supervisors we were thinking as one opportunity is if we go through the geoprocess and unsuccessful put that as part of one of the upcoming ballot measures we can obtain and maybe purchase some of the pg&e lights and make them efficient. and if they're not planning on macro them energy efficient we pay the costs. so that was the idea behind it. we can definitely come back and tell you what that will look like >> and i appreciate the complexity of that. it well may be that the

presentation has to be in a multiple triple format. the other thing i think we need to know we're not going to own all the street lights public works has a butch. this could be a significant step toward having unified street lighting but it won't happen. the other comment i had was goes back to this $100 million of transition upgrades. i think it would be helpful to think of the 11th year of the 10 year plan. it's stuff we know about that's hanging out there so we don't lose track of it and we don't

put things there for convenience and see them so we have the internal discipline to know we have to dlael with them even though that need not be part of the 10 year plan >> that's a good point. we presented the source program and that's a 20-year plan we do include that but whatever our wish is >> actually, i totally agree with this idea because two years ago we defer a lot of capital and when you balance the budget and if times are good you forget that you've move forward a whole bunch of stuff. we should make this visible all the things we're dir ways we

have a backlog and if times are good we should pull them >> and that's not a full statement in the future we don't know in 20 years. >> i think it's part of my earlier comment of getting a sense of knowing what is coming up in 10 years and beyond when does the tunnel reach the cat tropic situation you know what are the really big-ticket item moments when we need to step up to get a sense of 20 years mountain tunnel so we can help us prior itself. >> i should mention that the mountain tunnel effect is optional this good because we

assume about $11 million in year two of the budget and down to year 5 it's 24. the big construction thought of hundred million doesn't hit until 20/20. this is as good as it gets >> right so that's important information at least map out and give us a sense of what's beyond. >> thank you todd. >> well, i think as i stated before now you have a better understanding of some of the challenges. i want to say one of the things i've challenged the a gms we want to try to accomplish no new positions. and i think for the most part

we're able to redirect a lot of our priorities but i felt that the week to week in the course was something that was so large we couldn't absorb so some other things as we present that i think we needed give some visibility to because i've also for the last two years ago s am asking people to do more with less. believe me the message as we look at raising rates for a waste waterside the message is clear we have to focus those increases on just making sure the cost of inflation is absorbed and not adding new information but a lot of the increase in the capital. that's the message so you'll see a few things that i said to bring up to your attention

faster additional resources >> and to beat my drum again. i think the weshg in the course should be funded >> 6. >> how many positions in total the puc. >> 23 hundred employees well, is it 21 global? hose going to have the exact number public utilities that's close enough. my point there's nothing in the normal course of events that gets us to take a critical look at positions. and i don't think we're capable of doing a bottom-up budgeting process for an organization of this size and i wouldn't want to

be involved in that. however, that discipline can be evenly 1yer7bd when you add you also intaubt so from the 20 thousand positions that must be vacancies i think drawing it to our at the scene a correct and the need st. is clear. i'll support funding those are positions i ask you go and take another look and make it balance to zero >> so the unions want that number. >> pardon me? the number that we currently 2 thousand one hundred and 92 positions >> that's filed? >> those are budgeted positions. >> so - >> some of the challenges you have to for salary savings and

so, i mean we can do a workshop on the frgsz of not having the resources to hire i heard plenty of. i do just wanted to put out there we did do this exercise and believe me everyone came in with wanting to add resources and i wanted to say the folks worked hard to absorb as many things that we're prioritizing. but we'll stack another stab at it so your eyes can be focused on the bottom line >> before we move into any public comment? there were some comments i wanted to reserve so i'm going to reserve many of my comments until later but the

presentations from the assist general managers was independent but easy enough to understand. we appreciate all the work you did. obviously since i've been here it's raining figuratively more on us. one of the reasons i like working with commissioner torres he's seen this enough times he knows what the governor has done and a lot of pressure from units and employees and spend all the money we need it now and a lot of time we get fiscal responsibility from commissioner torres what's in the best interests of the rate pairs and the difficult balancing came back angle i know we have to engage here so i also appreciate all our comments.

if there's no further comments we'll move to any public comment? commissioners is that okay. so the first card dave >> good afternoon i have a lot of things to say. first, i appreciate all the work staff has done and read all the passage through. in terms of power i agree with commissioner vietor we need to investing invest nor in general if you happened if we can reduce the demand at the three or four kent to resell and the last time i went through the general fund department i found the libraries and museums suck up a lot of power and maybe we can do things

with climate control. there maybe some investment there that could offset an increase. some of those with related with the budget and workshop. i'm not ready for the mountain tunnel cost. so i think we need to think about that and hear more about alternative. some of the reductions i'm fine with but those are costs for the new mountain tunnel are huge. the intersection agreement costs makes we think about our lack of transmission line from newark to san francisco. it would be nice to know from staff like what the back of the envelope would be to complete that line that was never

completed in nourishing to the city and the trade offices if we were to bond finance that versus pay the additional cost for pg&e for transition of power from newark to the city. the cost of service as it relates to general funds and enterprise departments and actually all our customers. it's not just the single rate it is where it's delivered so from turlock to modesto it costs us less to get it that far then to power the city. i don't know how you get those costs. the rates certainly need to move closer to cost of service faster more than the half kent but not to the full cost next year that's unrealistic so maybe

three-quarters or a kent and a half. i don't know but there small business different alternatives there. also on the street light purchase i'm not sure we need to purchase all the street light unless a geobond is going to pay for that but not sure we need to purchase ail the old pg&e. if i can conclude quickly and the capital cost clearly we need to look at the new candidate projects for possible cuts in the capital budget. those things we need to do clearly we don't have a lot discrepancy on those those were we could reduce or defer we should be able to talk about those in greater detail that's where the balancing is going to have 80 happen for hetch hetchy.

the balance for the need for the project versus the risk of the increased cost of maintenance. i recall and a cpr will remember the repair was a project we said we need to defer it this year and we can keep dir is but at smcht we need to do that and as commissioner vietor asked which does that risk probably going to happen before it fails. i guess i can talk at a future meeting about staffing. the one thing i want to point out there's a small project that the department of environment has a small number of staff that does energy prestige there's a

in and out to move that to puc and it would be a number of small positions it's transferring positions from one department to consolidate all the efficient position because it's split right now i don't know if you want to do it but hesitates talk about that are. i'm happy to talk further at the next meeting >> give us 30 seconds on the newark power line. >> as i understand it the power is generated at the 3 powerhouses we have transition lines to newark california from newark we pay pg&e through the injecting enter connection agreement to move the power from newark on its lines to san francisco for ultimate

distribution i hope i'm getting this right. the initial thought as part of the act and the build out we would essentially witness no. run lines into san francisco it didn't happen we got as far as newark and pg&e had build a new line so there was a deal struck for us to optional convey power as far as newark and pay pg&e to wring it the last million. it appears to me that part of that transition and distribution costs we're paying pg&e that would increase under this both the liability things the tariffs the new i a would cover that territory from nourishing to san francisco. i'm not suggesting we build no

transition lines in the city but at least that high voltage transition from nourishing to of - from newark the cost motive just knowing what the cost is in the trade offices is important. it's been talked about from time to time but i don't know what the costs are >> just a followup on that i -- i talked earlier to the general manager i'd like to see that on our list of things to talk about. we know that the transition costs is a big bucket and could it be a revenue to us to that cost if by the take that on. and one other comment.

on david brought we haven't fully talked about what we're asking for and working towards. would it be three-quarters of a kent or gradually rising up to our cost coverage. without getting into that and it plays into that when it is going to come up and how is it going to be paid for >> so to talk about the transmission line we'll definitely follow-up and put that on our list as part of the quarterly workshop we'll give you an update on that item. so we will prepare and present on that.

i think, you know, we could probably, maybe have the other item as well and give you an update on that as well quarterly >> okay. and we do have information about the transmission line; right? >> yeah. >> mr. brooks please. . hello eric >> good afternoon, commissioners eric san francisco green party. first a little bit of good news and an important observation minnesota just beat out fossil futile i foul electric on price and australia just beat coal and in sonoma county they're going

to introduce a foul that's cleaner than pg&es dirty power. its not just efficiency it's renewables that are an opportunity not a liability. so, now with regards to the hetch hetchy system and the climate crisis. we could be facing a 10 year drought or a permanent drought that's a real possibility. if we're going to lose itch of the generation policy of the house/senate system we better take those opportunities i've talked about and start rapid building large amaze of other renewables to have a reliable power source to sell power to our customers we'll be able to sell cheaper than pg&e.

mentioning the climate crisis regardless of the fact there's an opportunity and not a liability we can't be balancing budget in the 21st century on the fragile back of the earth's atmosphere. if you listen to what scientists are saying scientists never want to make alarming statement to the public are now making alarming statement talking about possible collapse of human civilization within this century or by the end of it at least. and that means that both because of renewables are an opportunity and because we're facing the end of out of civilization we can't be cuttingy newable energy programs we need to be vastly increasing them and to cut them

instead is like what the federal government is doing right now with things like informed staples and contemplating social security those are things that gives us more opportunity. we need to fully fund sf and not cut it. in the document that was presented that we - this hadn't been discussed a program that's far less expensive will give us hundreds of kilowatts n is in sf and staff is ready to put that to the side. you should know that they're getting rode to do an rfp. and that means we need you to direct our staff to likewise

work with them so your department is ready to take part in clean sf and what i would say even though go solar sf and clean power sf is stand alone program and didn't effect our hetch hetchy budget the reality is if we start a about how many putting huge amounts of workings to work for the next decade we are going to create economies of scale with which the hetch hetchy enterprise can also build out at the same time lots of renewables and like i said at the beginning can develop a replacement electrical source in case hetch hetchy is not going

to be book on the line >> thank you eric. >> francis 0 please. good afternoon. >> good morning and happy new year to all of you. my strengthens working inform the department of defense was in infrastructure. so i hear this long budget description and i would like to notify each and everyone of you who care for this city to go back to the regular act and to see at that time, what was destined in water and power for san francisco. as as opposed to what triefrd in

the decade. the big businesses that have money they will and your commissioners, if you all have any standards, be ethics, morals you all know that sometimes you can't say much because of politics. now realistically speaking how many million dollars of globulins of clean water of hetch hetchy a leaks into our ground. we need to have the technology to monitor our pipes to get realtime results to find out about how many millions of gallons of clean water leaks into our ground and effects our

watershed. now having said that, that we don't know how many people work for puc maybe 2 thousand plus that just like the city nobody know where the 29 thousand workers work but anyway, having one worker for every 289 constituents is a joke. so in the year 9014 for example, we want to know all the new people that were hired in one of you all department of external affairs rather than those five or six people are warranted. we want to know and we want to know if they work so hard how did they find time and use their influence as a conduit to send

$1,200,000 to green. so good men come here and try to like talk the talk that's fine. we have to learner to walk the walk. thank you very much >> thank you francisco. next card jason freed >> jason freed. chair al loss couldn't be here so i'm here with his notes and according to the january 10th could he power points that gm kelly put total and harassing as mr. brooks mentioned we believe this program is good.

when you take a look at you're looking for new customers cac is an abundance of new customers what could help and i'll san diego with mr. brooks it can underline our hetch hetchy budget if i look contracting the shell the cac program can help pay for those and you'll have them still available for the work on scheduling of power or the other items they do. there are ways to bring them in to cover the budget imperial operations and there's money through the c pa c we krnt u currently have are a program according to c pa c we could be going after the $9 million for

efficients work right now. we could help to fund the programs because we're in tough wments the budget so to address those concerns couldn't be taken off the table. i need to direct our staff and figure out how it can help us address some of the agent orange problems how do we the city diverse from hetch hetchy which in drought years is going to be a problem if you diverse your portfolio you can have a boarder basis of customers and the item that was brought up about connecting from newark all the way to the city give us opportunity to bring on larger customers it's going over the fence as