aggregation we hope that it can be less controversial than it was in the past, it has been terminated and shown that the model works. and they recently celebrated the 4th anniversary, with the addition of the city of richmond, and served 125,000 customers and the county just

launched their own program last year, and the alamena county to explore the program as well it is time for san francisco to do its part and so why don't we go on to the budget analyst, and i think that is. and the other parts. >> mr. president, do you want to speak first? >> we can wait for the budget and the analyst report. >> mr. rose, could we go to your report, please?

>> on the page 10 of the report the recommended reductions in the proposed budget total 3 million in 14, 15 and of that amount, 2 million, 563 are ongoing savings and 256 are one time savings and these reductions will allow an increase of 53 million, 436,700 or 6.1 and the department's fiscal year, 14, 15 budget and we recommend closing out three projects resulting in a one time savings, and that is one of the organizations that san francisco avalos has referred to. our recommended reductions to the proposed budget total, 3 million, 432, 956, in the fiscal year, 15, 16 and the reductions 3 million are ongoing savings and 55,000 are

one time savings, they reductions will allow an increase of 61 million 672,582 or 6 percent in the budget. and the other part of the savings that supervisor avalos referred to is shown on page 9 of our report and that is approximately 800,000 and one time savings, and again from the power or the hetch hetchy enterprise, the department concurs with us, on the report and we are happy to respond to any questions. >> thank you mr. rose, and supervisor breed? >> thank you, thank you supervisor avalos for working with director kelley to put forth these recommendations which, i think are reasonable. but, as you know, in the past, there has been money put in

reserve for clean power, and specifically it still did not convince the puc commission to set any rates. and so it did, it did not do what it was intended to do. and i talked to director kelley. and i talked to the folks at the mayor's office and i have assurances that they are going to work with us to review and to determine if the direction that we are proposing to work with marin is the best direction as it results to actually implementing finally a real clean power program in san francisco. and today, i actually came prepared to put their funds on reserve, and in an effort to leverage the resources within the puc's power, funding in order to get them to do what they are making commitments to do. and at this time, i am not prepared to move forward with

that budget reserve, but, this item is going to go to the full board, and i don't think that should be placed off the table. so between now and then and moving forward, and with having the discussions in order to develop some sort of a clear plan, or assurances that puc and the mayor's office will work collaboratively with the members of the board to work with us to develop a clean power program that could be successful for our city, i think that we still have time to have those conversations, i think, but i want to make it clear that a potential reserve is not necessarily off the table, and it is off the table today, from my perspective, and i am prepared to move the budget to the full board for consideration. and we can look at the possibility at that time, if it is at all necessary. and so, i want to continue the ongoing conversations, with the puc, to figure out if we could

really trust that they are providing good intentions in order to really help us in developing this clean power program that we have been asking for, for many, many years, thank you. >> supervisor mar? >> thank you. chair farrell, and thank you so much to mr. kelley for presenting this compromise and with supervisor avalos for i think raising the critical question of why the reserve was being readied in the first place, and i know when the mayor made that announcement, it caught the puc staff off guard as well but i feel like this compromise and this proposal really protects the integrity of clean power sf and it looks like it is four million to 7 million of finding that is protected and i am also pleased that supervisor breed won't move forward with facing a significant amount of money on reserve, because what i understand it, it would have had a very negative impact on the over all power enterprise,

budget in particular. but, my hope is that we continue to or through the budget committee process and the board of supervisors to work as closely with the puc as possible so that we insure that the funding for the cca and the clean power sf is insured. i really appreciate all of the equity parts built into the budget as well. and the funding of different programs, in addition to your hard effort to make your budget solvent and address the different crisis issues that you have had to deal with and thank you to mr. avalos and mr. kelley as well. >> thank you. so, i agree with supervisor mar, and i thank supervisor for not making this tonight. and i voted for cca and i voted for the resolution that he offered to was very critical and legitimately.

and of the puc, for forwarding the super majority vote of this democratic board to proceed with the cca and i think that we were all very not just disappointed but pretty outraged that the agency chose to do that. and i am glad that supervisor avalos is able to work it out with the puc in terms of the reserve, and i think that placing a significant portion of the power enterprise operating funds on budget reserves, would be a very negative thing for the agency's ability to actually deliver the power to hospitals, and to sfgeneral and fire stations and muni and so forth and even though i completely understand, the concern, that given the track record, you know the trust level and the commission's, willingness to follow through on directives from this board, i completely understand that sentiment but i think that this would have been the wong way to go and so i am

appreciative that supervisor breed was able to get the assurance and to work that the agency is accountable for following through on the commitments. >> thank you, process wise, we are talking about items one and two, and i will lay it out on monday when we start the heart of the budget about our public comment process that will be the following friday. so we will make the motions now and continue these items to next week, madam clerk? >> would you like to have the public comment? >> no, we are going to with the training that we have worked out, we are going to have the public comment on the friday, the second friday of budget. for these items supervisor avalos? >> we can take the recommendations from the budget analyst. >> right >> before continuing and then make the amendments to the other items. >> exactly. >> great. and so up first, so we have our

budget analyst recommendations mr. rose, you understand that we are in agreement with those, and could i have a motion to accept those amendments? >> motion and a second and take those without objection. and supervisor avalos, do you want to make your own motion? >> okay item 6, item 8. >> why don't we, why don't we continue items one and two and go to i think that we are going to go to those items in a minute, is that all right? mr. controller? >> supervisors that was controller and just procedurally, if you wish you don't need to continue the first item, unless you wish to have it arrive back on a committee, the full budget remains before the committee throughout it for the last day of the committee's deliberations in three weeks. >> one and two we don't need to continue. >> we are skipping ahead to one

of you, yours is 6 and 8 and let's do 5 and 10 first. do you want to come up and talk on those? >> the remainder of the items are a capitol program and before you today just briefly to summarize the capitol program, there is a total of 1.5 billion dollars of needed work that is before you in items 5 through ten. and that would include, water, waste water, as well as hetch hetchy water work and the amendments as a whole and marked by supervisor avalos will effect two of those items items 6 and 8 in particular, for hetch, hetchy's power operations. and the capitol is also partially funded by financing, and that is bond issuances and

so also before you, is a legislation to allow for us to issue bonds totaling approximately $1.2 billion, over the next few years. the items taken as a whole in the amendment i will let supervisor avalos speak to those, but they will effect both items 6 as well as 8. and taken as a whole it would preserve a total of 4 million dollars of immediately available funding, at which partially that was funded by the budget analyst cuts already adopted by the committee. and then 1.02 million would also be increased, revenue bonds, authorization. and so, those are the rest of what you have and we work with the controller's office, as well as city attorney's office, for the red line amendments before you today. and i am happy to answer any questions. >> okay. >> thank you. >> mr. rose, could we go to

your report, please? >> mr. chairman, members of the committee, do you want me to go through the entire? >> do you want to talk on all of the items right now or was that your... >> that works, and we are in complete concur ans with that budget analyst. >> okay. >> and ready for the report. >> okay. >> mr. chairman and the members of the committee, initially we brought in items 5 and 10 on page 26, of our report, we know that the puc currently has a remaining balance of 81 million, 259,979 in issued water revenue bonds that are not allocated to projects and so on page 27, of our report, we report, that the total estimated debt service over the 30 year term of the bonds is 533 million, and that consists

of 290.4 million in principal, and 242.7 million in interest and the estimated annual debt service is 19.8 million. the file 140479, appropriate ates the 363 or 768,000 in various revenues for the capitol projects which are itemized on page 28 of our report. and our recommendations for these two items are in the bottom of page 29. and we recommended the amendment proposed ordinance and that is file 140484. to reduce the aggregate principal bond amount from 290,431, to 209 million, 171,566 and that you approved the proposed ordinance as amended and authorizing the issuance and the sale of the revenue bonds and also recommend that you approve the

appropriation and ordinance file 140479 and regarding items, 6, and 8. on page 34 of our report, and we report that the total estimated debt service over the 30-year term of the bonds is 235 million, 959,566 consisting of 111 million in principle, and 134 in interest, and estimated debt service is 8.4 million. on page 36 of our report, we simply note that the, which, of course the board has already discussed and knows that the board of supervisors approved ordinance of 111340 which appropriate ated the 19.5

million for the san francisco community choice aggregation program and this ordinance, and that is 140480 would reappropriate ate the 19.5 million added to the clean water, and the clean power san francisco and reappropriate the funds and it was a source of the revenues for the proposed projects on table one on page 35 of our report. our recommendations on the bottom page of 38 and for these two items are recommended that you approve the proposed ordinance on the bonds and that is file 140418, and we recommend that you approve 250 million, 108,836 and interest the appropriation of 234 million,608 and that represents a reduction of 19 million and 500,000 and the position of all offices that we consider

approval of the balance of 19 million,500,000 which has been appropriate ated by the board of supervisors for cleaner power san francisco to be a matter for the board of supervisors regarding the last two items, that is items 7 and 9, on page 41 of our report, in the total estimated debt service over the 30 year term of the bonds is 1 billion, and 599 million, and 701,000 and that consists of 846.9 in principle, and that estimated debt service payment is 56 million, 846,474 dollars and file 140481, would appropriate 950 million, to the waste water capitol projects as shown in table two on page 42 of our report.

on page 43, we note that in june of 2013, the board of supervisors approved an ordinance, specifically file, 130365, and deappropriate ated 17 million in waste water revenue bonds, and therefore, we recommend that you recommendations on the bottom of page 43 and amend the ordinance to reduce the authorization to issue and sell the not-to-exceed principle amount by the 27 million, 870,000 and 59 dollars, from 846.9 million to 819.9 million. and we would be happy to respond to any questions supervisors? >> thank you, mr. rose. >> colleagues any questions for mr. rose? >> okay, we want supervisor avalos?

>> thank you, i have a question as long as we have the budget analyst recommendations and the fact that the ordinances that i am putting forward and make sure that we are not getting lost in the shuffle. and maybe he could help? >> yeah, we are in con concur ans. and so the item that we spoke to as far as the 19.5 million portion for item 6, the hetch, hetch and the committee would to accept the budget analyst recommendations for everything, absent that because you are proposed the amendments effectively carry out the intent and allow for the appropriation to be amended. >> okay. >> great. >> okay, why don't we open this up to public comment, five through ten first and is there anybody in the public that wishes to comment on item five through ten?

>> good afternoon, supervisors, madam clerk and i think that you should continue these items on your agenda as you continue to item one and until the imp ass and the cca with the mayor and i think that you lose your leverage with the mayor. and my recommendation is that the matters are continued and you continued item one, thank you. >> okay, is there anybody else that wishes to comment on items 5 through ten? >> okay, seeing none, public comment is closed. supervisor avalos? >> i would like a motion to accept the budget analyst recommendations on all of these items. >> okay, i will recommend to supervisor avalos and a second without objection? so moved. great, and then, i will start with item 8 because that seems to be the source for item six. and item number 8, we want to

increase the not-to-exceed amount and i have a document here, the amount for the power revenue ponds from 111,326,843 to 112 million. and i am not sure, if there are other changes that are on here. and i don't believe that there are. and so, first we could take that motion for that increase? >> okay. >> and the amount? >> motion, we have a second. >> second we can take that without objection. >> okay, and then, on the related item on expenditures, item number appropriations item number 6, i have an amendment of the whole which has various changes on it and if he could

walk us through any of these changes on item number six? >> sure. >> in the record? >> on item 6, this reflects the increases for hetchy revenues in particular from 215 million dollars, renovate up to 217 million. and additionally, it looks at a capitol improvement program, total, that is not 105 million, 878, for the year, 2014, 15 and revised upward from the previous amount, 103. and it also, allows for 173 million, 755, 378 of the bond funded appropriations to be on the controller's reserve and the board of supervisor's approval for sequa. and importantly, it also reduces with the appropriation

and the reappropriatation of the reserves downward from the 19.5 million procedure, to 17.3 million as well as places 3 million dollars fiscal year, 15/16 and go to the appropriation on the budget and finance committee reserve. this is part of the actions taken in total that result in 4 million dollars of availablable funding for the cca and reserves next year as well as the potential 3 million in the second year. >> thank you, the amendment of the whole that reflects the changes that he has discussed and would like to motion that it be approved. >> okay. we have a motion and we will take that without objection, so moved. >> in doing so and this gets to the full board and if it is approved, there will be a pulse, but we need the assumptions and body functions, and so we are in it together to

the extent possible. and i know that we have a huge hurtles to cross still. but i look forward to working with my colleagues, and supervisor braoet has mentioned going to talk directly with the puc commissioners and with the mayor's office about how we perhaps can move forward and so thank you for offering that. >> and a motion, please. >> okay. >> as amended. >> so we would like to motion to move them forward as amended. >> we have a motion and, we can take that without objection as well. >> madam clerk, could you call 3 and 4 please? >> mr. chair, i would like to request that the department provide all of the amended legislation. >> okay. >> are you okay with that? >> yes. >> 3 and 4? >>interim proposed annual

budget and appropriation ordinance appropriating all estimated receipts and all estimated expenditures for selected departments of the city and county of san francisco as of june 2, 2014, for the fys ending june 30, 2015, and june 30, 2016. >> item four,interim annual salary ordinance enumerating positions in the annual budget and appropriation ordinance for the fys ending june 30, 2015, and june 30, 2016, continuing, creating, or establishing these positions; enumerating and including therein all positions created by charter or state law for which compensations are paid from city and county funds and appropriated in the annual appropriation ordinance; authorizing appointments or continuation of appointments thereto; specifying and fixing the compensations and work schedules thereof; and authorizing appointments to temporary positions and fixing compensations therefore. >> okay. >> good afternoon kate howard the mayor's budget director, item 3s and 4, serve as appropriation authority for the city and government to function over the next or during the month of july while the city is proposed budget for the fiscal year, 14, 15 and 15, 16 are pending in front of the full board of supervisor to continue the city's functions, and service levels and staffing levels as they are today. happy to answer any questions that you have about these items.

>> colleagues any questions on these items? >> we are okay. all right. we will take public comment on item threes and four, anybody wish to comment on these items publicly? >> okay, seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, could i have a motion to send these items forward? and so moved, and we can take that without objection. >> madam clerk, do we have any other business in front of us? >> no, mr. chair. >> we are adjourned.