sf gov. tv. san francisco television, powerpoint, please.

>> thank you for the opportunity to speak about this and the management system, department of technology completely grease agrees this is very much needed and has begun implementing a system in management system for department of technology assets actually has been working on that since the it was pro cured in april and started configuring in july. the benefit pointed out by a grand jury were certainly all valid. second bullet point addresses some of those that gives us a broad view to some of

the assets and allows us to share resources. it allows us to make sure that the resources that we have purchased are being used fully. it allows us to find out if we have assets that are becoming dated and end of life and on that before it becomes an issue with operations. compliance and life cycle issues are also addressed. we also anticipate that we'll be able to consolidate all the tools that we use for management and have other tools that have been used and we'll be able to over time remove those and save the time an operational overhead that thoughts are causing. just quickly direct your attention to a time line.

the second page is a timeline. a highlight overview of the schedule we are on for procurement and gathering information and assets into system. the goal is to use the data center with 200 pal concept and hope to do that by the end of the year, this year and we'll continue to look at other groups within dt to that system and beyond the launch of the go life for department of technology system. we'll begin to look at bringing other departments into city for that tool as well.

any questions i can answer? >> no. thank you. >> thank you very much. >>supervisor london breed: okay, is there anyone from the controllers office that would like to make a comment at this time. it's not necessary, but the floor is open to do so? >> rachel from the controllers office. i don't have a statement to make, but if you have any questions. >> okay. colleagues are there any questions for the member of the controllers office or department of technology? okay. with that, i would open it up to public comment. are there any members of the public who would like to make public comment on this matter at this time? seeing none, public comment

is closed. colleagues i was told the board issued a response to the grand jury response for this issue, at this time i would like to update the board's original response nor update for recommendation to read as follows.. this recommendation will not be implemented by the board of supervisors as it is not within the board's authority to do so. the city and the controllers office is working on this recommendation in effort that the board of supervisors fully supports. that's my motion. >> supervisor, i want to clarify this has to do with the sf p.d. recommendation, is that correct? >> yes. >> so moved. >> thank you. are there any further

comments? can we take this motion without objection? motion passes. and colleagues would we like to continue this item to the call of the chair? okay. so can we take this as recommended? without objection, this item is recommended. okay, neck dshg next item. city clerk: item 3. progress of the city departments in the plastic bottle water requirements. >>president david chiu: earlier in february we passed our san francisco bottled water ordinance making our city the first if the country

to phase out the sale and distribution of plastic bottled water on city properties. it applies to large scale events and vendors as well as the city departments themselves. starting this month, sites having water bottles are prohibited from the sale of bottled water and in conjunction of what's being asked of others requiring the public safety to bring water hook up where appropriate where there is a heavily used park or plaza. in the absence of any capital projects are ordinance asking to investigate solutions to allow events to hook up to our water infrastructure. the ordinance requires city departments to report back to

the board of supervisors within six months 6 months which is now on the following, the properties and facilities shall within the puc on properties that have events for drinking water. the puc in consultation with dph and other appropriate city departments are to investigate other procedures to access water supplies and report their findings to our board and also the sf puc is supposed to have investigated back flow preventers and other equipment related to plumbing for existing water systems to facilitate public access to potable water. the sf puc is to report findings to the board of supervisors. we have received from interested events in the future and we

are here to understand where things are. we would like to invite up sf puc to give us a report on where things stand. >> good afternoon, david briggs with the puc. are the slides triggered automatically? >> good afternoon. so with that introduction, this will go to getting into the heart of the matter, although i'm going up one slide here. to recap what the puc is in concert with other state departments. certainly developing these procedures in making it happen and making it become real and we've been do that for several months now, we have consulted with various city departments that are responsible for issuing the permits and have been very active and

thankful for the sf and ports and sf mta and got a lot of information from the cites sites that are sponsoring. this data allows the charts moving forward with implementing getting this ordinance successfully implemented. the standards in play which are under our purview in mentioned the ordinance are not many, just for references here the mayor's executive order which initiated a lot of this barring the city from purchasing bottle water. the build code is another interest and looking at ways for the building code for language that is in the build code or to be amended to see if there are minimum requirements for fixtures or

capacity in public settings that would facilitate getting city water to participants and citizens. the area which is most relevant is with water quality and protecting public health. there is an area where the end use part which is to make sure the water is safe for the people participating in the event as well as the water system itself to make sure it's not harmed when we make the connection. we have supported various events throughout san francisco, america's cup, thousands of people, beta breakers, small neighborhood events, we have been facilitating this event and allowing access to our water system. what happens in the puc is to formalize this under the as auspice

as according to the san francisco department of public health and regulates or drinking water. that's the steps for outset. >> what's the timeframe for that? >> i think it's six 6 months is doable. it's been on going for a while. it's unrelated area right now and we've been doing some trailblazersing. >> i guess i'm wondering under regulation sf puc was driving this recommendation and you were supposed to report to us regulation by july 1st. is it going to take another six 6 months? >> i think that it could be faster, but i can't obligate a

regulatory authority. it's an unregulated area in terms of whether these connections are part of the water department now. we are doing this now. if someone asks us to install access at an event. we would do it. i don't think it needs to wait. but to formalize it into a regulation would take time, but actually doing it right now because it's in a quasi regulated area now we would implement that now. >> what departments have you been working with that? >> san francisco dph and formally known as the san francisco department of public health. following through here with

what options we have. this is not an exhaustive list. it's the most powerful list and it represents all the actions coming into play and as long as we are active with. the thing to keep in mind is the solution not going to be a postage stamp where it's going to be every solution. it's going to cater to what the site specifics are. the last slide here getting into the specific recommendations that i think are relevant to hear today and what we are actively working on. i think the way forward for the site in san francisco is for the puc to walk the site with the site manager be it rec's and parks and the event sponsor, the third party and very critical the three of us to work on this together because the parameter of the event are mostly directly

shaped by the sponsor and what they are doing and we can chart out the particular solution to apply to that particular area. that's with a we can do and that's the best path forward i can see. in parallel to that, i want to bring the rest to your attention. the street events which are a special category, these are permitted through sf mta through a street closure permit. there are a litany of obligations and requirements where working with mta right now on amending that would enable this ordinance and telling the event sponsor where it would pull the event for a permanent street closure. they maybe aware of that bottled water is not an option pursuant this to this ordinance and then having an

event, they can look at the options and see whether they involve puc or a third vendor. we will work to formalize what we are already doing. the third party inventor, it's a growing industry. there e vendors that are getting it that people want to use local water in their local event and not bring plastic water from another inventor country. >> excuse me. supervisor tang had another question. >>supervisor katy tang: working with the street closure permits. i want to see if you are distinguishing between some of the smaller block parties that have to go through epicot to obtain a permit would they have to abide by this rule? >> i think there is an off ramp in the ordinance where certain

events would not be applicable. i think it's a hundred people. some parameters are already built in. continuing on with what we are doing to help enable this, the vendors that are out there and how we can help and we have been helping them telling them how to bring local wear to local events and what vessels to use and how to keep it safe. we keep a list of vendors and whether it's a private event sponsor, calling up one of these people or it's the city department, some of them are already city compliant. so that should be easy to do. the last category is running somewhat cross wise to the ordinance and various endorses and various contracts. the next time the contract is

renewed or whatever option the city wants to pursue that would be the chance to make it consent with the ordinance at that time. there is a little bit of an inconsistency right now in some venues. that's what i have. we'll continue working with you and being helpful and if there is any questions, i will take them now or turn it to anybody else who wants to speak. >> my understanding puc has not yet identified all potable water, is that correct? >> during the service we performed earlier this year, we is surveys the big facilities with golden gate park and working with rec's and park. we know what the landscape is, we don't know what issues will be applied about because we need the event sponsors to know the parameters of the event and the operator. we have enough information to now do that. >> is that information

available to the p be? >> yes. i mean i think we know the parameters of the facility where water is now, when where the waters are. >> can we have access to that if i want to have access to water, i can take a look at that. >> that's exactly what we are trying to achieve to make it as easy as possible. >> the timeframe for that? i'm asking questions because it's been 6 months. >> we need to sit down with a prioritize the list with san francisco that are having the highest profile events with the property owner and operator with someone who has knowledge of the venues that are going to be sponsored there and chart that out. it not going to be limited by my schedule. it will be limited by the participation of the city departments. i'm happy to do it. >> what i want to mention as

my staff as we are trying to figure out, there are a number of city departments that need to work together. it's been a little unclear from our point who is running point on this. and maybe the case that we would need to amend this legislation or otherwise make it clear on hoping to not have to do that. i'm not sure if you have experienced that phenomenon. what i'm hearing from you is you are trying to identify certain pieces, but other departments, you need feedback and i'm just wondering who is driving this so that we get it done. >> it's a very fair question and it is definitely a team effort. is there a single point of contact who is in charge of getting this done. if you read the ordinance there is references and i don't want to replicate another department who i don't speak for but i think the department of the environment

may have closest to overall or responsibility or tracking authority. they aren there. it may not be as clear as it could be, but this is in anyway shape or form that will require collaboration among the city departments. it's not one thing the city department can do by itself. >> sure i get it. i know your department is responsible for investigating procedures and allowing spores to -- sponsors to access water by july first 1st and installing the plumbing and so what i'm trying to figure out is just how do we get clarity on that and six 6 months from no you would put this eight 8 months from where the ordinance was supposed to be? >> understand. i would suggest, i don't know if anyone is here from the department. >> i think they are here. i will ask questions of them.

equal opportunity that folks have their responsibility. >> maybe we can hear from them and then we can discuss about getting these single points done. >> we have mr. rodriguez here from the department of the environment. i will ask questions of you. department of the environment i know your responsibility is around educating and informing citizens around this chapterer and at the end of the year to submit an annual report. i want to hear from you as to how things are going. >> thank you, supervisors. give yes, -- guillermo rodriguez. you are correct. the department outlines for our department to engage and make it successful. let me respond to some of the questions on the items earlier. first is the department is charged with education and outreach

in that we look at it in two distinct groups of audiences we are working with and the first is working with permitting agencies in san francisco to make sure they are aware of this ordinance in terms of making sure they are updating their permits to make sure we capture this information so we have been working with all the permitting agencies in san francisco to make sure they have this language in their permits going forward. the second is audience that we work with are actual event producers. the department is also charged with working with large event producers to ensure that they are meeting the city's zero waste goals including mandatory composting and recycling at major events and we are bringing all the major event producers in san francisco and do a complete day long workshop with them on all of their responsibilities and we've now incorporated aspects of this

ordinance so they understand. a lot of the event producers all want to be very successful with their programs. many already have incorporated this before the ordinance came into play. it was voluntarily providing water at their events and not having single use bottles. so we've incorporated that in our aspect. the second aspect that the ordinance calls on is our department has engaged on enforcement. we look at this issue more than compliance. that is where our promulgating around enforcement but it's really around compliance to make sure that all the events know what the responsibilities are and working with them in order to make sure that they are meeting the spirit of the legislation and really that's our big focus. we are not out to hit anyone over with a large stick, it's really about compliance and making sure that this ordinance is actually in

place. the last item is the reporting to the board and mayor. the ordinance calls specifically for all of the permitting agencies to provide our office with any exceptions where they have made a determination that a particular event is unable to meet the obligations of the ordinance and they have indicated as to why we would capture that information, compile that and provide a report to the board and the mayor on an annual ized bases. that is the report we have. i would briefly comment that there are a lot of moving parts and a lot of different departments have permitting responsibilities. in san francisco we have been talking and engaging in conversation. i do thank the sf puc who have taken the bulk of that work and tried to corral us together and began

to identify at least what are some of the major locations for a lot of the events. there are a lot of annual ized events that we can begin to prioritize and as the sf puc has indicated the opportunities and events have opened to wanting to incorporate this into their activities but they have lots of questions. so the city needs to really work together to provide answers to them. again, happy to answer any additional questions you may have. >> i certainly have gotten some feedback from the event producers that the city's left hands isn't always talking to the right hand side. >> which agency, who is responsible for determining if a water source is drinkable? >> that i'm not familiar with.

i don't know. >> okay. maybe i can ask puc. >> the short answer is the puc to determine the water and managed in san francisco. >> i know we have heard sometimes the port, sometimes dph and the parks has oh pined the water is not drink avenl is ---ible. is this your department? >> we get it to the customers. to the meter. what happens on that side of the meter, we still make a derjs and is determination and tell if it's safe or not, the work if it's the house plumbing be it the city hall or unified school district, it's

up to the city department to remedy any quality issue within the facility. we determine what the quality is but we get it to the curb and it's up to the customer, the building facility operator to make sure it's drinkable. >> the end user has a frustrating experience for the puc to get the water to the curb and having to figure out where the water gets from the property owner to where the water goes and want to get to those who ultimately have the responsibility to not use plastic water bottles. foo

>> if i drink out of a faucet at a water park and i don't like the way it taste, i would have the puc check to see if something is wrong with it, maybe it's creating low pressure or what have you. the remedy if it's between the meter and the drinking fountain, it would be the responsibility of the owner, not puc. unfortunately it's not a one stop shopping type of situation but that's the way we have it. >> who is riding on that department to make sure that work gets done? >> again, i would assume it's up to the facility owner. we don't. the puc. >> all right. it strikes me and i'm glad all the departments are here and i know that because these pieces don't

seem to be all working together it's creating some frustrations. let me ask a different question, who is the point department when an event producer or sponsor wants to know about different site options. is it a matter to go to all the departments? >> that's where we can make it easy and if you are an event sponsor and you want to put on an event at a given location. if it tells you that these are the rules in san francisco and here are the options you have in front of you to get hydration to your visitors and here is a number to call and here is the logistic involved and the planning and the steps. that's what we can help with. what i was refg to earlier, is there is a lot of standard preprepared information preparation, best practices, etc, we do that, the actual pledges of