city in the state and make sure that -- if we are the anchor of it we'll make sure there are union jobs and we'll be all to spread that to other city withouts restriction. >> thank you, eric. we're glad you made it today. brother jason freid. >> hi, jason fried, executive officer formality local agency formation commission and you hatred from my bosss and i won't repeat what they said. there is one part that is important and we're currently doing a study, as mr. brooks said, the work not completed by your staff. why is it not completed by your staff? because this commission has not told the staff to continue to work on this program and that is the key thing that i think is needed to figure out how to do all of this stuff. yes, we can have outside experts look at it, but your staff are the expert in. it we

don't need to go outside of the puc to do and it would i encourage you to recommended back to your staff, instead on slide i, assist board and lafco, but to take the lead and do the work. i like to say the puc staff, you have a lot of things. you have how do we balance our budget and do all of these other [stph-eupbgz/] you have extremely talented [stwa-f/] who can walk and chew gum at the same time and you i encourage to you do that. the one thingly bring you and i

know commissioner vietor mentions supervisor wiener legislation, but this is only going to help the largest customers. as the gm mentioned, you have expensive intervening connection equipment that needs to be put in and if you put it in the beginning you perhaps lower the bar a little bit, but it's large customers so your large customers won't get the chance. you will go down both paths and that idea and the cc i idea are good compliments and you should pursue both of them and not one or the other. having the interveninging connection and that side of it might be more extensive for more customers and cca will be cheaper. so you need to give everyone both options to have a choice. this is is all about choice. choice through cca, choice through intervening connection agreement or choice with pg&e if that is what people do, but giving people the choice. so please encourage your staff to get back to working on this program and not doing work as

requested, but taking the lead on doing this work. thank you. >> thank you, juror being here. jason, any other public comment on this item? public comment is now closed. [ gavel ] i'm going to ask that my colleagues allow me to prior to donna reading matters that we're going to take up in closed session, that she allow me to call on publication comment for matters to be heard in closed session. is there any public comment for items to be heard in public comment? do we want me to have read into the matter the items on the closed session? >> one clarifying question, may i? >> absolutely. >> there are a couple of

things that we need to maybe talk about, but one i just want to point out is that jamie actually -- already informed you what i was going to ask you. so one of the things that we have been wrestling with is to have it affordable because of the opt-out, people opting into a more expensive rate and then we talk about we want the program to have build-out and we talked about -- we can do build-out, but my understanding is that build-out is setup, because you are trying to get the initial program cheap, but the green is more expensive where you are going to invest in the local buildute. is that sort of the model? >> yes. for clean energy from the start we took the approach of walk before you run. it took us about two years of service before we broke ground on our first local project and

in the beginning, well and still today, we're focusing on having competitive rates compared to pg&e and offering the greenest amount of electricity that we could with the long-term goal of building local renewable energy. so as noted it took us two years before we broke brund on our first local renewables, but i feel like that is something at least for us, that is starting to snowball. so like i said in my presentation, now that we have been offering service for four years, we have seven local projects underway and in addition to one that is already existing. and it's more than 11 megawatts. so i think the local renewables is definitely something that is possible, because of ccas, but it does take a little bit of time. >> commissioner vietor. >> i know the president is trying to move us along because the hour is late, but maybe to try to close this, because i know that the general manager and the staff is looking for

direction on how to proceed. my understanding is that also there were monies in the budget negotiation process that are still through validate order appropriated, whatever the language is for this clean power sf program. for the moment; right? and as such it seems to me we should be doing some level of work as part of the business plan to really take a look at and whether it's a reframing of this, definitely a redesign and we have had sonoma marin come before us to show us the models and call out the best practices of both of those programs and really to -- i think the sonoma guy said it best when he said why do -- you might as well just imitate what is working and to really pursue along those lines with the goals of greenest product, lowest price, you know? back to the meter beat strategy we had earlier on and the

generator and you see it as a three-headed monster, but maybe it's a sweet spot and follow in the footsteps of what worked. >> so i hear you, and i am just saying that as soon as we say that, all of a sudden the conversation swings towards job. generations, local newables and as we heard it's hard to incorporate that in the beginning because they actually have it as part of their deep green, which is more expensive than the pg&e and if we offer that, then as a whole issue of now you having automatically enrolling people into a more expensive program. which has this whole other set of people that has issues with -- pardon me? [ inaudible ] i didn't say that. i said that -- >> i get you. >> i said that if we were to

offer a deep green, which has a local build-out, it's more expensive. the deep green is more expensive than pg&e. >> so it has to be a phased approach. >> i'm just saying that we -- you know, we just have to have that conversation. >> right. >> so is that enough for you for now? >> yes. so i think where we're going to go is we are going -- >> i'm, is that enough? what are you saying? i don't rale there was a consensus or vote taken? >> i don't think there was. >> you are just directing him? >> i'm asking what he needs from us so far as direction because as far as next steps, there is money -- >> i'm not so sure i'm ready to move at all at this point. i would like to look a little further to see what happens with 2145 to see what other options there r. you are subjecting what the lafco representative said to get the staff to work on it; right? >> and suggesting that there is a look as part of the

business plan and there is this revenue question in the business plan, where we heard from marin there is $100 million that they generated from the program and there is the revenue question. there is the directive from the board that we have said it again with some budget monies appropriated, $4 million plus the solar money. >> that was from the mayor; right? i thought that was from the mayor. >> yes part of a negotiation process. so that is all current. that is all current and these pieces of legislation. >> can i -- so maybe we're not -- are we asking for something from staff how to, really? >> that is what i don't understand what you want. >> maybe if i just shed light on it. so given the legislation that the board has passed, it's about working -- one of the commitments is that we're going to work closely with lafco and look at the

possibility of the marin model with the focus on local jobs. and i think we still should entertain that and talk about that. i think the issue of local jobs and local build-out, we need to have that conversation and maybe come back and see what that looks like. but i think also what is important is to do our plan, for power enterprise and to present it holistically. because some of the development, like we do in ty treasure island is not only commercial, not just the commercial side like hunters point, if we do hunters point we're doing the whole area. so i think we probably just want to kind of identify what it is and how each component could work with it and then talk about the risk profile, if joining marin vs. starting up something like sonoma and have

that conversation. so i think one of the things that i wanted to do was just kind of get and talk about how things have moved since we presented something? and i think the census from what i am hearing from these programs is that having a beginning step, where it's meet or beat pg&e is one of the goals of these programs, which our goal was to get the greenest project even though it cost more money. >> i'm still unclear where we're moving. are we moving to another vote? >> no. >> to proceed further? i didn't think so. so where are we moving? >> a workshop to talk about the other cca programs, marin and sonoma, based off of that, we have also identified what we want to do as far as our business plan on the hetchy and so the legislation that the

board passed is for us to lafco to study the marin, so we're going to participate that with the local jobs. so when we come back with our business plan we'll hopefully have -- >> so we're having another joint meeting with lafco on this issue? >> i believe. >> i don't know. >> eventually. >> yes, eventually. >> i would hope -- i mean for me, i think the goal that was set was achieved for this hearing; right? we had the two entities show up. for me, maybe i may be speaking for myself, but then the public participation also gave us a whole new perspective. i would just hope that staff between now and our next meeting would kind of now narrow that down for us. because i would want -- i would want them to kind of organize those thoughts, bullet point them for us and then

we'll all convene again. >> where is scott's board now? is it passed by the board? has been t been approved by the board? >> which one? >> directing us to use hetchy. >> no we're actually working with scott on that legislation. >> so it hasn't been passed:there is a lot of stuff that we are working on now. >> i think to your point, i know for every punch that the puc throws on this thing, actually moving it forward, it's going to be two counterpunches. and we just have to be ready for that. the labor component, i don't see that sonoma or marin has the same labor component. i just haven't seen it. maybe it's there, but that is one of the heads. and i don't know that we were ever successful with the san francisco labor council. this is not just the ibw but

the entire labor community and once they have an opportunity to see this new information, once it's all kind of straightened out for us. they will weigh in. you know? and i will be eager to see that. >> i'm still unclear what the end goal is? is the end goal to reverse what we voted to do last year? >> it's done; right? >> i'm sorry? >> that is done. >> that is done. so i think what i'm asking for is due diligence from staff from me as a commissioner because i have never been briefed on the wiener legislation and didn't know about 2145 and should have known about it, but now i do and i'm dr. ed because i know the author and would like to find out his intentions and a few other factors in terms of are we really beating pg&e orb $0.70 as it is in marin? i don't want to close the door, but to make sure where the door

is and to find out the pathway to that. >> for my part, i think we have gotten a lot of information today and so it would be good to get it all kind of put together and say in this new day. >> we're on the same page. >> without shell, knowing there are products out there, that could beat the rates that we could get greener with the product, is there life after? is there a new version? a newly-designed version to meet these goals that were laid out originally? >> great. >> if we could get something at next meeting or the next month. >> let's have another hearing. >> [laughter ] >> the another month that would better inform us to continue this dialogue. >> when does her leave start? >> she is not leaving -- no. [laughter ] >> she is gone now. [laughter ] >> she has already left. she knew i was going to say that. so let me work with the staff and give you an update when we feel that we get to an

approach of what we feel timelines of what we want to do, because there are moving parts. one is the main focus we're working on is the wiener legislation. so we actually may even do a hearing on that legislation and how that impacts us. so we have to work on that. and then, you know, we're going to look more at the marin model, and the job component, and how that would look like if we were to do that? and that will help inform, if we should model something like sonoma. so we just need to talk about those things amongst ourselves and come up with what we think is a good plan. >> everybody okay with that? it's not crystal clear, but i think it's general. >> i'm good. >> commissioner ryan? vice president moller caen? i

apologize for prematurely moving. i was thinking ahead, but that certainly wasn't intention. public comment is closed unless there is further public comment. if you would indulge the chair, the purpose of this next comment is to entertain a motion to table items 19 through 26. but i don't want to be in violation of any of the rules. so if it's a requirement that the secretary read into the record the items that were scheduled and agenda eyesed agendized for closed session and for me to call public comment on those items and then move to table the following items, then let's do it that way. >> city attorney's office, it's the commission president's discretion to take a matter off calendar unless there were a

motion by three other commissioners to insist that we proceed with those matters so you don't need to have the commission secretary call the item, if the idea is that we're going to adjourn the meeting now and not go into closed session. you can simply make that call and if no one moves to overrule you to hear the items, then it's done. >> that is why we have lawyers. if there are no objections, i'm going to adjourn this meeting. [ gavel ] meeting is adjourned.you.

>> ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ in landing a contract with the sfoifk is pretty champ but now with the opened contracting center visitors can get opportunity at the new state of the arc facility and attend workshops and receive one-on-one technical assistance and learner what you need to become a primary contractor or what information to be a subcontractor and a created bed public commission it will help people to assist people to

compete for and performance open city contract a lot of small businesses do have the resources to loblth the opportunity so one of the things we wanted to do was provide ways to access contract >> access to the plans spiefkz and a data place basis ease contracting opportunity and funding or capital training. this is and other documents that needs to be submitted. to compete is a technical skill that it takes to win a scheduling for a popular to you can win a professional services job or how to put together a quote it's all those technical pieces. looking at the contracting assistance center is our touch point with we get the people to

come and see the planning specks and later than about projects earlier is he get training so you're ready to go arrest hello engineering it has all the tools that a contractor small or large can come here. i can't say enough about the center it's a blessing. we do business all over the country and world and a place like the contractor center to identify the business in san francisco >> the reality is you need training and that's what the center is here to train and make you better qualified to go work with the city and county and to be successful at the end. >> that will give people the

competitive edge e edge at receiving contracts with the city. >> we have krafshth services here that help you find out where you need to get the skills forbidding. >> i mean local businesses participation in city projects is a winning factor it helms help the business their local businesses they're paying savings and a property tax and payroll tax and normally adhere san franciscans so their bowing goods and services in san francisco it really helps the economy of san francisco grow so its not only a benefit to the project but to the city. the contractors center is 5 thomas melon circle in the

bayview area open 8:30 to 5 welcom

>> good afternoon ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the june 24th meeting of the sfmta board of directors and parking authority commission and miss