dangerous and that her presentation was notable to me and even someone called some of the grumpyist members, the people who are working on 20 years for the clean power that take time to get going and move tiny bits at a time were impressed by her enthusiasm and her story, and so i have noticed that personally about her and she has an energy about her and an ability to keep pushing through, even when the things are iffy and i am impressed by her and so happy pride and please support crews. >> thank you, next speaker, please? >> hello, good afternoon, my name is andy, brew and thank you supervisors and commissioners for hearing us today. and when i heard a few weeks ago that cythia wanted to certain san francisco on the local agency formation commission and i was very excited. i am pleased that the people want to sit on these commissions because they are very, very important to what is happening in our city, and

serving the interests of the san franciscans and so these folks do not get a lot of credit or a lot of spot light, and i am just so thankful that the folks diligently want to serve on these commissions and serve san francisco and i was also pleased to hear, a bit afterwards, that edwin is running for this seat and we are going to have two great folks on this commission, trusting that the right vote today and 100 percent confidence that crews has the interest of regular san franciscans at heart and that she will serve diligently on this commission and i encourage you to appoint her, thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please? >> hi, i am patrick coners and first i have a prepared statement from the league of pissed off voters who i am representing today. the league engages and educates

young pissed off and the voter guide for the 17 consecutive elections and i am here to express the league's support for crews to be appointed to seat six and i believe that she is uniquely qualified because her background in the local political activism has led her to see that the research is critical to the active policy. >> and improving the lives of san franciscan and recently she spearheaded the efforts to support clean power sf to follow the administrative processes closely, and informing others of it.

and we hope that you will consider her for the voting public seat, because she is qualified and a concerned citizen and rather than a professional policy expert or a politician. and her skills will greatly benefit lafco and truster that her research and the policy in san francisco with the values and heart. and you know, my personal recommendation, for miss crews, is that she is, someone that has completely energized my interest in local politics. not just because of her. >> thank you very much. next speaker please.

>> hello and thank you. >> leah coal and i live in the mission near sf general and i am a public schoolteacher at burton high school and it serves for the bay view hunter's point and the valley districts and i spend my time and my energy in the communities in which i live and work. and i love the cities and i am enthusiastickly supporting crews for the voting seat, or the voting citizen seat. and this is a great fit, she is her professional skill set is amazing and you have heard about it. and a lot of it, and she is ready, and she is ready and she does not need to do research and she will continue to do research, but she is ready to serve from day one. and she also embodies the great

combination of empathy as well as fairness and she can imagine herself in other people's shoes and the need for sound public policy, and an example of this would be, and i never once felt unvalidated she speaks her mind and is has no reserve, and reserve about her judgment and her decision making processes. she is tireless and diligent and she is also proven and she has already served the city and for many years as a volunteer, and she speaks out on voices and she withholds judgment for which we can actually hear the voices and she feels it is her obligation, to serve on the

commissions like this, i also know that she sees it as an honor and enjoys it and i hope that you will consider her for the voting seat. >> thank you. >> thank you very much, next speaker, please? >> hello, my name is jackson west and a reporter and a volunteer and a member and i just want to come and speak on behalf of cythia and i know how frustrating the process can be and she impresses me constantly with her enthusiasm for it and certainly more than i would be able to muster at times and she is definitely committed to a sustain able and a stable san francisco. i think that the attitude would be a great collaboration on the commission and reaching consensus and i have relied on her to accept me, source documents for stories so that

my reporting can be as accurate as possible and so she has been a resource in the media community for that as well. and so, please, please accept her nomination, thank you. >> next speaker? >> commissioners, supervisor, breed, i am born and raised in san francisco. and mine is very short, and edwin said it very well and i think that we all know that. and i am here to support him because of his passion and his drive that he has and that is all that i have to say. they are both qualified, but he is outstanding and i look forward to see them on the commission. >> next speaker please? >> my name is john and i am here in support of edwin, and in the time that i have known him he has been very welcoming, and he has been very i guess

empowering. and he has helped me along the way for as long as i have known him now, and i have seen the transformation within the other individuals that we grew up with, where he has made a difference, and a significant one. and so, i am here with the full support and i would hope that you will accept his nomination, now, thank you. >> and thank you, very much, and there are any members, of the public that would like to comment, come forward. and seeing none, coming forward, we will close the public comment. and we want to thank everyone for being here, and it is actually and we would bring out the community members who have been to the meeting before and we have issues that come out for the drive and come in as well and they will be great and it also speaks to and it speaks to the candidate and to be able

to connect with the constituencies and we have spoken a lot about it and i would like to propose that both serve on this body. commissioner breed? >> thank you. i think that we have two really outstanding candidates. one of the challenges, of course, that we face, with lafco in general is the fact that we need to make sure that we do everything that we can to push to insure that the clean power succeeds in the city. and i do think that i would like to basically take the steps to nominate crews, for the seat the first seat, and edward lindo for the alternative seat. because yes, they are both outstanding candidates, but i am completely familiar with miss crews. advocacy and work around clean power and i think that her voice is one that is needed and would help us move in the direction that we need to as it relates to clean power, and i

think that mr. brooks mentioned that that even though someone might be an alternate on this board, that they should continue to attend she is meetings and i could not agree more, i think that if you are going to serve as an alternate or as a member, that you ought to be at the table and involved in what is happening here and that to me, would demonstrate, that you truly want to do what we need to do to push forward, clean power, anything else, that we do on this board and so, i really appreciate the time that they are taking out of their schedules to not only come here and ask to be a part, but their willingness to serve, and it truly is an honor and i would like to move that motion, forward, colleagues? >> okay. >> thank you for your motion. and we have a second for that? >> second by commissioner campos and mar, commissioner mar? >> i just wanted to say that as an alternate on this body i feel treated equally, and i

feel that the candidates will be tremendous and make this body full and really bring new experience and perspectives and really great ideas and i feel really good about lafco right now with the applicants and i wanted to also thank schmeltzer for moving us towards the clean power sf and their dedicated work on lafco as well and thank you, for making those motions and i am totally supportive of commissioner breed's motion. >> great. and you have the other comments? >> okay, so we have a motion on the floor for crews to serve as the first public seat, and lindo to serve as the alternate and it was seconded by commissioner mar and could we take that without objection? >> so done. congratulations, to miss crew and mr. lindo. we look forward to serving with

you. >> let's go on to the next item, three. >> community choice aggregation activities report, a, the status update on the clean power sf and b, status update on the proceedings at the calf public utilities commissions and c, the status of update for this state legislature. miss hail, welcome. >> thank you, barbara hail, and assistant general manager for power. on 3a, i would like to report that on tuesday, at our regularly schedule puc, public meeting, we held a dedicated workshop on community choose aggregation and we did not close it out until 6:30 tuesday evening. and morin and sonoma

representatives both came and presented their programs and we had a constructive q&a and the commissioners acknowledged the change and the success of the sort of the start, flow and build approach and strategy that morin and sonoma have undertaken and that was discussed quite a bit and there is definitely interest in further exploring and understanding their approaches, and what it might mean for clean power sf, and it was also discussed, and i want to emphasize that as a take-away at least at the staff level, the staff will be working with the general manager to further analyze the programs and include the clean power sf, and pca options and considerations in the power business plan. and the general manager is already actively attempting to meet further with morin and potentially with sonoma to dive deeper than they were able to at the hearing and so we are

taking a deeper look at the proposals and not the proposals but the successes of the programs, that were implemented by morin and sonoma. and moving off of the workshop, and unless there are any questions on that? >> we are also continuing to assist in support lafco staff and their study of clean power sf, and working with their consultant, and that is another activity at the puc level. and then, moving to 3 b, the status update on the proceeding of the california puc. and i have reported numerous times on this. and it is the pg&e, activities to attempt to have a green tariff, option, for their customers and i can report today that we are expecting a proposed decision, in the green tariff proceeding any time now.

and the law requires the commission to have a decision, by july, of 2014. and we are actually expecting a proposed decision, and it could be issued this afternoon, or monday. and so, stay tuned on that. we, are expecting further activity after the proposed decision, of course, the way that the puc and the california puc process works and there is a proposed decision, introduced by staff, comments are received, and it sits before the commission, for not less than 30 days. and then the commission may take the item up at a public hearing. so, that is kind of the time frame, and so for that first phase decision. and the assigned commissioner in the case, issued a ruling in early june, that established a third phase of the proceedings. and that is where they, they are likely to hash out the community renewable portion of the green tariff program and so

even though we are going to be seeing a proposed decision and potentially a decision soon, there is still more to come on the community renewable component and just a reminder throughout this proceeding, san francisco puc staff, our staff, has been actively participating to protect, non-participating rate pairs from bearing any cost from the program that pg&e gets the authorization to introduce or to launch and we have been working to insure that the pg&e facilitates the projects and the disadvantaged communities and that was part of the obligation and we are participating to insure that pg&e renew ables program creates a opportunity for the communities like ours to develop and subscribe to the local projects built in our community and that is the focus of our participation and it

will continue and finally on the legislative front, ab 2145 was referred to earlier in today's meeting, and this is assembly member bradford's effort to modify the rules of the game if you will for the community choice and it was heard in the senate energy and commerce community on june 23rd and the opposition was successful in removing the opt in requirement and it recalls that this bill will eliminate this opt out and put in place the opt in requirement instead. and there are ongoing amendments to allow pcas to expand existing ccas or new ccas to expand to three counties, and it includes those amendments include some grandfathering provisions for existing like ourselves those amendments were passed. and how the amendments will be

finally incorporated, and the application of those grandfathering provisions, to the clean power sf, are still to be understood so it is kind of a stay tuned message on that and it is not over yet and that concludes my report, and i am happy to take any questions. >> thank you. and thank you for your presentation. and your report. >> and just a question, on the work that is being done around cca, here, and includes us locally and the discussions with the clean energy and sonoma and the representatives from lafco can take part in the puc discussions with these entities. >> and i imagine so, and i am remiss of not mentioning that the members of your own staff and lafco staff were present and participated, thank you. >> okay, great, that is going to be mr. kelley the general manager is obviously going to be setting up those discussions? >> working through us. >> yes. >> they are actively engaged in

the effort to calendar those. and i would want to make sure that through mr. freed and our office and able to take part and i want to take part and mr. freed as well. >> i will take that back to the general manager, thank you. >> colleagues, any other questions? mr. freed? >> jason, freed, lasco staff, miss hail did give a good synopsis of what occurred, there was a lot of discussion and a lot of interest, but once again, while the staff is once again looking at least at these options there is still not the four robust, you know, movement of the staff to try to get a program forward and so hopefully as these discussions start to continue, again they will pick up the speed and we will get the staff working on the regular basis of trying to launch the program in the city and i think that it was a good start at least, getting us restarted in this process of getting the program moving forward and then on ab 12, or

2145, and that is was, that i think that it was a very good victory in a lot of ways of what got stripped out of the bill and there is still some concern about some of the language that was put in there and even the unions and the three county, and the step was arbitrary in nature and still needs to be worked out and definitely needs to be worked out and let's not forget that none of the utilities need to worry, and they have the service charge and they service all of those people and why should we set rules differently, because we should allow them to choose who they want to be a part of and there is something that we should monitor and participating in the discussions, with the that

wraps up my report. >> very good. thank you very much. >> and no other questions from here, and so we will go on to the public comment on this item and this is item three and our update and reports on the activities? >> good afternoon, eric brooks, san francisco green party and the local grassroots, and san francisco clean energy advocates and the coordinator of the californians for the energy choice, which has been fighting against ab 2145. in sacramento, and me personally over time and so if you have questions about that, please do ask, when i get to the bell and i can answer them, and either that or i can answer

them off like. and on the issue of the workshop that was held at the sfpuc and i will have to concur and amplify on what mr. freed said. and it is great that they had, a workshop, and it is great that we are hearing more from the sfpuc and from a couple of the commissioners and definitely from the general manager kelley, and we heard exactly the same diminishment that we have been hearing for the last couple of years on clean power sf. and so, the coalition said that i represent, still see lafco as the primary driver for this program and we would like you to keep being that driver and keep working on the local build out. and with regard, with ab 2145, it is restricting clean power sf and the other programs to only, three counties, and we

think that will be extremely problematic and we need to make sure that we keep opposing this bill, so that we can remove that provision, they want to compare the projected rates and require the insurance programs to post the actual rates that they are going to have and leave them open to lawsuits and so we need to get rid that have provision as well. >> any other members come forward. >> seeing none, we will close public comment. >> do you have any responses? >> no. >> okay. we will go to item four.

>> item four, authorization to amend the local services agreement with miller and owen to extend the term to june 30, 2015. >> thank you, and mr. freed will be presenting. >> sure. this one against is the annual reuping of the miller and owens contract to do the legal services in the past for many years that we are appreciative that she would, and miss miller was also acting as the executive officer with the recent changes that they are going back to the legal services. so, we are, and we are requesting that if we continue the legal services and also, with their knowledge, and experience, here i am also going to be part of and we will be utilizing that knowledge and experience, for other purposes outside of the legal council services and last year we had approved not-to-exceed rate of $95,000 but based on the board of supervisors, you know, the request that this be a cost saving measure and also the fact of the work load being reduced and given the chance of

the responsibility within lafco and the staff is recommending a amount of $45,000, and this is for me, a best guess as to what are not-to-exceed amount would be. and if we as the year goes on and we will be monitoring this and if it turns out that i was wrong, i will come back to you and increase that amount and because we are entering a new era here of not knowing exactly how much or what services will be needed and if there is a project and something that comes up, that we are not planning on we will need to have the services and that will be one that i think that when we brought the budget for that, i will also be bringing the budget for the extra services of miss miller's office to do the activities for us, and so if we think that this is a good place to start and like i said, if the amount, needs to be exceeded that will be the case and also in addition to this, it is a couple of years, since miss miller requested an increase and requesting an increase this time of her rates of $5 an hour, for her and, each of her staff to do work for us. and so, that rate is schedule in your packet so that you can see what the schedule is and i

am encouraging you to support, approving the extension of the contract for one year as well as the rate increase,. and with the not-to-exceed amount of $45,000 and as always, the contract has the ability for us if we wish to terminate the contract at any point in time during the year. any questions i am happy to answer. >> okay, thank you that was thorough and the packet has all of the information as well and so, not-to-exceed rate of $45,000 for the fiscal year. and that could be adjusted if need be during the middle of the year and also an hourly increase. from 208 dollars an hour to $285 dollars an hour, or $275 to $280 and that is for the staff as well. and i am okay with that especially knowing that miss miller will not be in the executive director position and now you are the director and probably the hours will be less as well and so it does make

some sense.. >> i want to note that i am certainly supportive of this and i want to thank miss miller i have certainly appreciated the excellent work that you have done, and i think that it is important for us to maintain that continuity and thank the staff for the recommendation. >> any public comment? >> seeing none, could we have a motion to approve the rates?

>> or for the not-to-exceed rate from commissioner breed and campos and we will take that without objection. >> and the item passes. >> okay. >> and the next item please? >> sorry. item number five, san francisco lafco reserve fund policy. >> i think that pg&e was happy about that. >> commissioner, mr. freed? >> jason, freed, lafco staff, and on this item, if you remember from last month's meeting where we were talking about the budget, we were talking about our reserved fund that we have left and how that has been shrinking over the years as we have been spending it down to get the acceptable level and the fact is that we don't have a policy in place to determine what should be responsible amount for us to keep in place. and so based on the request

from the commission last month, i did some research into what do the other s do as far as the reserve funds and just as every lafco is different, the reserve policies are very different, and some not having any and some have the specific ones and i wanted to focus on the ones that are similar to what i believe that we are looking for here in this commission which is a more general reserve and in your packet you will note that there is an attachment that has, a draft language for a reserve for our policy that we could add to our policy, and since we don't have one right now. and but it is, what i tried to take the best parts of what i thought that we were looking to do, and yield a couple of questions to the commission so that you can make the final determination if you want it and if so, what to set that rate at. most of the commissions when they had a reserve policy, had 10 to 25 percent was set as a reserve amount. and some of them made note that that was a goal, and because they had started with nothing and were trying to work their way up for us it ko actually be

the reis reis heser and we have more and it will be working our way down to it and so that will be an impact if we should do this because we will be making sure that we are keeping that money set aside and not spending it, unless there is a direct action with the understanding that they are drawing out of that reserve fund and need to build that fund back up to get it to the proper amount in order to be in that commission's policies should we adopt something today. and one issue that i think that i did find and one of the commissions and i incorporated the language in our, for the purposes of the language, although that you can remove it if you so desire, and one of them, that specifically acknowledged that the staff, when they leave have things that are cost and associated with that, and such as the pay out and the vacation time and the things like that and make sure that the reserve has enough money to pay for all of the staff leaving assuming that they will leave on the last day of that fiscal year, if you leave on the last day, a lot of places what you do is pay out of person and it