program for applications, for inspections of systems. with the csi program gone, we are now -- we went through a crush of work at the early part of this fiscal year to implement an online application system. at that time we were clearing the queue. we had a backlog of applications and with the additional funding that we talked about being placed on the program, we were able to clear that backlog in the early part of this fiscal year and then open the program for more applications through this new electronic process in november. we did,s as supervisor chiu mentioned, reduce the incentive level at that time largely because ~ studies were showing nationally the cost of [speaker not understood] are down, which is great. we want to make sure we have this incentive level dialed down at an amount that gets the biggest bang for the buck and is it over rich. we think we're there for most

program elements. we may have dialed it back a little too much on the local -- excuse me, on the low-income customer component. and, so, we're taking a look at that as program administrators at that. and then a quick shot of the tiered structure of the program. this what another one of the changes that we implemented in 13-14 to make sure that we were not over inventing small systems within the statutory discretion we had ~ we went ahead and tiered the incentive structure based on the size of the systems. and then for areas of improvement, we -- flipping through to slide 15, you know, really want to make sure that we are improving access of the program benefit to not just to the pg&e customers who reside and work in san francisco, but also to the customers of the

power enterprise. so that the fund leaving our side of the ledger are going to our customers as well as others. we want to make sure we have financing mechanisms for program participants because not everyone has access to financing the balance of the system cost. we want to make sure we're addressing that going forward, making sure we're really optimizing long-term job opportunities for disadvantaged san franciscans, you know, working with work force development folks. we're very happy to have this component of our program. but given the level of appropriationses and expenditures, 1.5 million for this program, only 121 is -- employed is a fairly small number when you look at the dollars spent. and then we have a quick picture here -- >> i just have one comment on the areas of improvement. one thing i'd like to ask as an

outcome of this hearing is you're obviously going to be presenting the budget to us in the coming weeks. >> yes. >> i think it would be helpful if you could document for the public what areas -- what will you be able to improve in the coming weeks for the implementation of this program over the next few years. i think there will probably be other issues that are raised here, but the public would like some answers on. and if we can over the next month get some answers to these questions, i think that would just help put people at ease on where this program is going. >> yes, and i'm here and we'll take notes on the comments and questions that are posed so our -- the program day to day administrative staff, angela [speaker not understood] excuse me, sorry annette randolph, [speaker not understood] and taking the full bore of the electronic process and working every day with san franciscans and the installation community to keep the program moving

forward. we have a goal of processing our reservation letters in this program of 30 days and payments in 45. during that phase of the program where we had some backlog to work through, we were not hitting our goal -- our goal for reservation letters, but we are at this time. we were not hitting our goal for payments. we're currently processing payments at approximately 60 days instead of the 45, but as the electronic process moves forward and we reconcile the paper process with the electronic one going through that transition, we expect to return to the 45-day payment. >> when do you expect that to happen, electronic signatures? do you have a time frame on that? >> we don't have a time frame on electronic signatures. that's something that we've been advised by the city attorney's office. we can't move towards yet, but we're continuing to push for that.

all other aspects of the program, the application is done online, the reservation letters, the agreement. we've skimmed it down to having to sign one piece of paper to, to complete the whole process, but we are required to accept a wet signature and are not allowed at this time to move forward with electronic signatures. >> is that the case with [speaker not understood]? let me ask the question to the city attorney. can we not accept electronic signatures for other activities? i know this is a common complaint i've heard from the industry on this. >> deputy city attorney jon givner. i'm actually not familiar with the electronic signature issue with regard to go solar, but i do know that we're constrained in many ways, in many programs. i don't know across the board from requiring electronic signatures. >> okay. and i don't want to be labor this point, but i would like if

you could ask the city attorney who is providing you this information, it seems to me that if the private sector can do this with much larger amounts of money that city government ought to be able to do it in 2014 ~. but just like to understand that. >> we'll continue to pursue that, yes. >> thanks. >> and then looking, and finally , at sort of where is the money coming from. you know, our cfo described this bar on the left which is our revenue stream coming in. you can see it's our customers, retail customers, enterprise rate paying customers and general fund customers, that's at 79.6 million and 13.1 million. that's the money that's coming in to pay for this program and all the capital needs and operating and maintenance needs of the hetch hetchy water and power system. those costs are shown on the bar on the right. you can see that at present our total costs for fiscal year

2013-2014, the funding for the go solar sf, our total is 149 million. in order to pay for that, we are dipping into reserves to the tune of 20.7 million. when our cfo says that we have a financial issue and it's not a sustainable enterprise, it's in part because we are having to dip into our reserves in order to pay our standard operating costs or year to year costs. you can only dip into reserves or, you know, to put it into plain speak, you can only dip into the savings account as long as there are saving there. we're burning through our savings. so, that's part of the challenge we have as an enterprise. we have lot of competing needs for funds, lots of costs. where do -- how do we prioritize and fund those elements? the general manager has, has said that he will continue. he continues to support funding go solar s.f. at the $2 million minimum level so that we can balance that out with other

needs. one of the other needs we hear a lot about, not in the forum here today, but in other forums, our street lights. you know, our street light funding and our current proposed budget that we'll be bringing to you is at about the $5 million level. so, these are the issues we hear about locally from residents and businesses associated with power. go solar s.f. energy efficiency and street lights. most of the capital funds that you see on the slide as a cost, the essential capital costs of 44.7 million is really funding up-country needs to keep the generators operating, to keep the system providing reliable greenhouse gas-free power. and with that i'll go ahead and sit down and take notes on the good comments i'm sure we'll hear from residents. thank you very much for your time. >> appreciate your comments. one just finally guess observation.

i understand that there are many competing needs on your services. >> yes. >> i would suggest that this is a program that while low in dollar amounts has generated an enormous amount of community support for all reasons that we talked about today. street lights might be in that category as well. but if you look at all the different needs, i sub petctiontion this has from what the public understands of what you're able to provide, we've all seen the benefits of this and hopefully we can think about that as we consider our budget priorities. ~ suspect and with that i know supervisor tang has a few questions. >> great. i just wanted to follow-up again about the california solar initiative. i do want to know -- and i think it's great puc is really working on trying to identify additional revenue sources and all that, but it does seem like from a customer standpoint or a -- that rebate program is really a huge incentive. and, so, what are [speaker not understood] that puc is working on to connect with some of the folks who are responsible for that program to say, well, you

know, maybe we should continue this, bring it back up, just kind of want to know what the future of a rebate program might look like. >> so, we are active participants at the california public utilities commission and we do regularly monitor legislation in sacramento and at the federal level that affect energy issues. with state of california, when it adopted the california solar initiative program through the california public utilities commission -- implemented through the california public utilities commission, identified that the program would diminish over time, recognizing that the expectation is solar will become cost-effective. and you won't need to get to enrich it in order to have people participate in the program. and they identified penetration levels that would be indicators for them as regulators of pg&e, that it was time to close the program. [speaker not understood] so, state policy directives that

were adopted sometime ago is what has caused the closure of the program. you know, the attention of the legislature on energy issues is typically pretty strong. we can revisit with our california delegation any interest and in looking at new legislation, maybe centered on higher cost urban centers for solar program. but at this point the california regulators have limited incentive programs to multi-family and low-income households. so, though are the only program areas or types of, of businesses and residents that can get a rebate through the california programs. >> thank you. >> thank you. supervisor, i just also want to mention that the state programs, i know, have been looking closely at what we're doing here in san francisco. [speaker not understood] i

think if we're willing to consider investing in this, how other jurisdictionses and cities around the state might want to look at this as well. i know that is a concern to folks, the environmental world the community as well as the industry. >> okay, thank you. >> two other folks i'd like to just quickly acknowledge. jason freed is here from lafco. i know he has a very brief presentation about some ideas and some funding sources. like to ask you to make a couple remarks on that. >> sure. jason freed, lafco staff. you were asking for other potential revenue sources that could be a permanent source for funding this. the first thing that comes to my mind is the community choice segregation program in the city called clean power sf i know the board is interested in. one of the things that could be done is [speaker not understood] customer rates could go towards funding a go solar s.f. program which would give you permanent funding to for that. the problem we have is the puc

ha decided it doesn't wish to work towards that program. you lost that issue but that is a potential revenue stream that could be utilized that supervisor breed stepped out for a minute. on lafco, she has asked that the lafco commission put together an rfp which we have done and are in the scoring process to look at how we do a build out plan and go solar s.f. funding is what we look at is that a reasonable option for us to use for future can cca program in the city and the other thing that is separate from that, but still goes into it, the budget [speaker not understood] problem the puc is having are real and true, but one of the things cca program could do is help alleviate some of the budget deficits instead of it going out of the puc to do all of the work that needs to be done with like a shell contractor, third-party provider, bringing the work in-house for what they already do for their own municipal load could bring in operational costs the cca program pays for which could help alleviate some of that budget deficit you're looking at. those are two potential streams

of revenue [speaker not understood]. >> thank you. we have [speaker not understood] here. the community is looking at the larger context for renewable energy. do you have any additional comments you want to make? i know you're also here to answer any questions we have. i want to acknowledge you and thank you for the work your department is doing in this area. >> thank you, supervisor, for the chance to make some remarks. the department is very supportive of puc's efforts. we're terrific to see that map of how jobs have been created around the city. it's the right distribution that we'd like to see. we're very excited about any possibility that could bring more money streams to promoting solar and we will continue to support it through our regulatory work efforts to improve the market in san francisco to keep permitting costs down and systems

streamlined and to market the program as we market energy efficiency around the city to residents and businesses. >> great, thank you. i want to just thank you for the work you're doing in developing a new green work force power program that i understand is going to be launched later this summer around clean energy financing and in my mind i think this is very much related and intertwined with that. and then i'll also mention there has been some discussion about whether we could use property tax [speaker not understood] and use that as a way to potentially finance, another conversation we can have with the puc and the department of environment to move this forward. >> sure. i think you're referring to property assessed clean energy financing that we should be launching and releasing an rfp through the office of public finance sometime in the next few days actually. >> great. thank you. i appreciate the city staff and your work and thinking on this. we have a lot more work to do. because there are many members of the public that are here, i'd like to move, if we can, madam chairwoman, to public comment.

i did hear a small child somewhere, and if the parent of that small child would like to testify earlier, like to invite them up. but i have at this time only three speaker cards i'd like to name. dr. espinola jackson, [speaker not understood], and john rizzo. if there are other members of the public that wish to speak, feel free to either submit cards or line up after those individuals. and ms. jackson, why don't we hear from you first. it's doctor. >> dr. jackson. [laughter] that's right. >> hello, dr. jackson. good morning. listening to some of the statements that was being made, i think one of the things that i heard was an audit. i think an audit needs to be done. you know, and i heard about [speaker not understood]. i've been watching and seeing discussions about the general fund. i'd like an audit of the

general funds. also, as you know, 2008 when this came about, i was one of the first to receive solar on my home. and when you look on page 12, i think it is, you can see 94 1 24, how many people have received [speaker not understood], that's because i made sure that those of us ~ that are seniors, low-income would receive this. in fact, i am [speaker not understood] by one of the commissioners as -- what am i? ~ i am coined by i'm supposed to be something. ambassador. [laughter] [speaker not understood] for solar. you know, i have a concern about the sewage tax.

the fact that we received all of the sewer coming into zip code 94 1 24, and funds are supposed to have been set aside for the community and our work force [speaker not understood]. the mayor's office of housing, hope, eoc, mocd, work force, city build, i ask for you to look into those programs because of the fact those programs started and the city is receiving grants today from 1992 when this program started in bayview hunters point [speaker not understood] residents of public housing. and i know i'll be talking with you later on about that. y'all have a blessed day. >> thank you, doctor. next speaker. good morning, supervisors. i'm gill hernandez. i'm speaking on behalf of laborer union local 62 1

[speaker not understood]. we have a [speaker not understood] for the past several years. it's hard not to note that every year our articles and news stories about all the backlash when sfpuc proposes to cut this program. we wanted to come out today with some of our members because over the past year the laborers have expended their solar training in the community and become partners with installers to perform work on the go solar s.f. we have come to believe in go solar s.f. and firmly support go solar s.f. our members are now getting jobs through go solar s.f. and they are excited about working while also helping to do good for the environment. we do not want to see go solar s.f. suffer. we want it to see it continue to be successful and promote similar programs here in the bay area and across california. thank you, supervisor chiu, for your leadership in calling this hearing.

thank you for 5,000 members of local 261, we strongly support go solar s.f. thank you. >> thank you very much. and want to thank your members for being here. supervisors, i'm john rizzo with the sierra club. i want to thank chair breed for agendizing this and supervisor chiu for bringing this to the -- to light, to the public attention. this is an important program. every week practically we read a new article about scientists saying that global warming and climate change is worse than we thought it was. this is the, this is the chance of our times. the city of san francisco likes to think of itself as a leader in fighting this, but that is actually not the fact. the city has been giving lip service to climate change, but it is not putting the money where its mouth is. it is gutting and canceling all

the programs that would be used to achieve goals in climate reductions. it has put green power s.f. on a definite hold. it is gutting go solar s.f. year after year. gavin newsom's clean fleet initiative, most of the city cars have opted out of the program. and, you know, it's time for the city to step up. the sierra club, you know, we think it's our business to say where the money should come from, which department, but we do believe the city does need to step up and fully fund this program at $5 million. but $2 million level is not sustainable for the program. you can't keep -- you'll hear from workers and providers about the hiring and firing cycle that this causes. you can't have a steady program

of hiring and building. we're seeing declining solar installations through this program because of the constant cuts. my last thing is mayor ed lee promised a year ago that this would be fully funded and he should live up to his promise. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. good morning, how are you doing >>ed my name is chris, chris willis and i'm the proud program manager of [speaker not understood] employment training center. can i have -- if you're ready for a solar job, can you stand up for me, please? >> [speaker not understood]. thank you. sfgov-tv, if you could. thank you. ~ >> a [speaker not understood] goal is to he reduce proofer is, revitalize neighborhood, [speaker not understood] ~ for low-income residents.

these solar jobs represent not just a job. we service folks who are coming out of recovery, homeless, former foster youth, come out of prisons, come out of jails. [speaker not understood]. they come to our program for the training and support and case management and the goal of receiving one of these solar positions. these jobs right now transform our trainee's live. i want to bring attention to that point. [speaker not understood]. we're just here to express the importance of this program. it really, it really gives low-income san francisco residents an opportunity to really transform their lives and the lives of their families. and [speaker not understood] myself, one of our trainees wants to give a little importance of this go solar program. thank you so much. >> thank you. next speaker, please.

good morning. my name is nancy kaufman. i am the [speaker not understood] of eight children. i have experienced hardship. in february of 2013, my 13 year old son and two-year old daughter were struck by a vehicle. we were forced to [speaker not understood] my business and to provide care for my children and it has been a difficult road ahead of us. we are currently homeless. we have no means to financially sustainability from the family. the [speaker not understood] design program i have found hope and i am currently in the 13-week training program that provide solar training and my goal is to become employed in the solar field and provide a

rewarding -- provide a future for my family through the program. it is very important to me to be here today to be a part of the program because i believe in reducing the environmental impact of our world. i also want to provide -- i want to foster awareness of my children of taking care of our planet. i think solar jobs are important because it will provide -- create more jobs for future generations. thank you. (applause) >> thank you. next speaker. good morning, supervisors. my name is kelly pierson and i'm with sun gravity. we are a solar provider located over in oakland. the company was founded in 2007, and we have actually worked with the go solar san francisco program since the beginning. we feel like the program fits in line with our company vision

of solar for universal need or sun. and obviously as we heard today the program has been a great success. san francisco has more than quadrupled its number of four roofs. that san francisco, from last to first among bay area counties among solar installations. to participate in the program, [speaker not understood] with local san francisco based companies who hire from some of the green job training programs through participants we've seen and heard here today, to complete our installations and this has a transformative impact for the community. so, obviously despite the tremendous popularity of this program, budget cuts and budget uncertainty have definitely had a negative impact on operationses. when programs and funding shut down, these crew are directly impacted in a negative way. so, as san francisco work it meet its renewable energy goal and continue the sustained program or the success of go

forward s.f., we're here to advocate for a london-term transparent funding solution. again, going forward we highly recommend increased transparency for the installation community and live updates that are available through installers to plan and hire crews accordingly. lastly on the topic of e. signatures, we find this does tie into the velocity goal and customer satisfaction, and this is something that pg&e was able to implement ~ last april for their solar programs as well. thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. good morning, supervisors. my name is john cochran. i'm the green building instructor and solar installation trainer for asian neighborhood design employment training center ~. and i want to thank you for your support of go solar s.f. it's a foundation for our success in placing our trainees

in green collar jobs and careers. and i want to leave aside the environmental and social justice aspect of what this program means and speak only to the budgetary concerns because that seems to be the focus of this meeting. and ask that -- well, first i'd like to second the motion to audit the general fund and ask that attention be brought in particular to the effect that continued cuts to the go solar s.f. program would have on general funds tax dollars spent on the jail programs and social services, because without these opportunities more of our demographic who is the reentry demographic and economically disadvantaged san franciscans

will be requiring those services. and that's going to cost the city. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. is thank you, supervisors. my name is sarah [speaker not understood] and i'm here representing sun run. sun run is a company funded in 2007. we're based right here on market street. we employ over 300 people right here in the city and support 4,000 jobs across the country. we have built over 20,000 system in california generating over 200,000 megawatt hours of clean energy each year. so, obviously we have a large stake in the california solar market. and we have heard a lot of arguments today in -- about what this program does for the city of san francisco and i'm going to kind of speak a little bit more about what it does for california as well. san francisco is really the hub of clean energy, clean tech, and solar policy. and it is important for the rest of the state that we remain that hub and we are a

model for solar policy throughout the state. this program has really been truly remarkable. it's facilitated the growth of solar in all customer classes as well as fostering job training work force program we've heard about. it is important we remain the hub to be a model for the state so that the rest of the state can continue to foster these important jobs and this important development. >> thank you. thank you. next speaker. hi, good morning. my name is jeannine carter and i'm a resident in katy tang's district, supervisor katy tang's district. we've done work in all of your districts. i am the primary owner of lumina, which is san francisco's only woman owned certified solar installation company. we have been a huge supporter of go solar s.f., hiring folks from when we