build the resources that, you know, stay within that cost ceiling and if you can get local resources in, get them in, if you can get regional resources in, get them in and if you don't have financial capacity and you have to go outside the region, go outside the region. so the focus is lead with the affordability factor and then develop the resource portfolio within that financial constraint. >> maybe i'm just being paranoid. but, do you think that it is possible that pg & e's proposed green tariff option will set rates that are

financed by their dirty money, like oil and natural gas facilities so siphoning off that they can actually finance taking a loss on renewable energy to compete with cleanpowersf? do you think it's possible? >> the next item we are going to give an update on it. i think we'll probably address that. >> i do thing that the reason why i brought that up is if we expect for green tariff to be an option for the summer do we want to set our rates prior to pg & e. maybe i'm just not getting it right. >> what we are talking about is setting the initial offering lower than the price that everyone is on

right now. the concern is that pg & e is doing their green tariff option and we are going in some of, they can use access green power and that's a big advantage because they have used it for their whole rate base. so we are going to be at a disadvantage offering something equivalent to that. that's why we need to know what the price is, what they are offering and what we can offer to entice people to go to our option versus their option. all of that factors, we need to know because of the great business sense to do that. >> you are saying then it's an advantage to wait until after the green tariff rates versus doing it before? >> because if our price is higher and it's not as green and they come in and they have a target they can have something greener and cheaper and it would be hard for us to

encourage people to opt into our other option. >> i definitely see your point i think obviously cleanpowersf has a great many things that are more beneficial for city san franciscans obviously local jobs and being outside of that monopoly. i guess i have concern about waiting certainly as others do. so i would just suggest that we also consider moving something simultaneously in the project planning phases to move forward at a swifter speed. thank you. >>supervisor john avalos: commissioner moran? >> thank you. i would express my appreciation for this report and one of the things that impressed

me about was the tone of the report. it reads like a business analysis. and i think that's been needed for some time. it's not an advocacy document. i think it takes a good straight look at what possibilities are, also some choices and some decisions we need to make here in implementation and i think it provides a good bases for that. i wanted to express my appreciation to lafco and the consultants that put it together. for taking that tone, i am hoping we can pick up on that tone as well. i also have to comment to supervisor campos that we have had many historic moments was very close to home and i made a note of that. we do recognize the sense of urgency and the desire to move very quickly. we do

have to recognize that city processes are designed to serve many interest. being nimble is not one of them. as we get to an overtly competitive arena, we can't just depend on program design. we have to be able to change program design as competitive circumstances that pay it. as we go forward, we need to take the time to get the operational and business flexibility that we need to make that happen. >>supervisor john avalos: thank you for your remarks. commissioner mar? >>supervisor eric mar: thank you, chair avalos. it's always great to be here with the puc commissioners. i wanted to thank jeremy and the enernex report. we already had some discussion at the lafco meeting, but i wanted to reiterate the point by commissioner vietor that a clear timeline

for the puc commission and lafco from the puc would be really helpful with concrete dates and hopefully more aggressive goals as people have said. i also wanted to say that i also support as a few other commissioners mentioned expediting this as soon as possible and i understand what was laid out and the environmental groups, there is strong support and the coalition for clean energy. supervisors breed and kelly and thank you for what you have done on moving our city forward. i want to say in education outreach, i don't think we have to wait to start raising awareness in communities and low income and community of color as

well. i know there is a backup of pieces hopefully in the timeline where we can think creatively about how we are building this as quickly as possible and as mr. kelly said of course we don't want to move more quickly than we should, but i think that the anxiousness from the environmental organizations and communities, i share that and want us to move forward. timelines by the february meeting makes a lot of sense for me. >>supervisor john avalos: thank you, commissioner campos? >>supervisor david campos: thank you, mr. chairman, just a quick suggestion and one thought. i agree with what commissioner vietor was saying and as the general manager was indicating a time line will be presented to the public utilities commission at their next meeting. i think it would be helpful for me to for lafco to also hear from lafco staff as to what they think, you know, in their minds what

the timeline would be. i think it would be good to see if maybe there is an agreement, but maybe to the extent that one staff might think it can be done sooner than that's an opportunity for us to, for both staff to at least discuss that. i certainly as the puc hears from the puc staff, i would like to get a sta sense from our lafco staff as to what they are thinking in terms of an expedited timeline. that would be helpful for me. >>supervisor john avalos: thank you, i appreciate that as well. i think the lafco staff nancy and others looking at the other programs out there and have some ideas for how we can leverage some of the work that's already been done and so it's not just all on their shoulders and they can assist with the effort. i

think it's a great suggestion. okay, seeing no other members with comments or questions, we can continue with the next part of the presentation with the department of the environment. >> thank you, commissioners, this is a great day. i just wanted to make a couple of comments about activities that the department of the environment is doing and has been doing that are going to intersect with cca and talk about things that are on going right now at the public utilities commission and let you know about that. we have been running about a $7-8 million energy efficiency program over the last few years. a part of it is a partnership of administration with pg & e and we have a smaller contract with the bay area regional net who, that we helped form which is administered through a bag and a bag has a contract with the state or with

the c puc on that and we have some grant funding to do policy implementation and other research. i want to say that one of the things that we have discovered in our programming is that while using the life cycle costing analysis is a great thing to do and presenting the business case to a business or homeowner about the energy efficiency saving is usually not what sells. what sells is the improvement in the maintenance, lighting, comfort home health and having a lighted project on a shelf. it's a way to get the project sold. we have sold 15000 projects in san francisco to date with the small business program. another area that we are very active in now is we've been working with the puc on marketing, go solar sf and we've had a number of

grants from the federal government. we recently received one to start doing a planning of solar plus energy storage for the purpose of the disaster preparedness. we are working with the department of emergency management, puc and the power enterprise and with pg & e will be launching that next month. it's how we can get more solar into the marketplace, really back up our critical loads with energy storage technologies and then use that on a daily basis to provide grid support, demand response, peak load management and during times of disasters have those electrical loads for on going support. we've also been very active in the finance area. we have several finances areas in multifamily buildings and commercial pace program out of our office and as residential pace is just launching now and we are

working with water enterprise on the pay as you save program. we are hoping some time this year and next year that will be up and running. finally the regulatory area there are three proceedings with the california public utilities commission that we are following closely that will intersect with cleanpowersf that is the energy efficient portfolio where the rules are being set for efficiency programs can operate and that included community choice aggregators and marin has been fighting on this alone and i'm hoping we can join with them from the cleanpowersf perspective to fight about the proceedings that will benefit san francisco and the second is generating proceeding which is opening and we are just starting to follow that. i'm not going to report anything on that. a third one

which is integrated demand site proceeding and that is where puc is looking how to integrate, demand response, demand management with energy efficiency projects. right now those two things are in silos. if you are management an energy efficiency program you can't bundle it with a response. i think that's a real advantage that community choice aggregation is going to be able to provide integrated services to our customers that include water conservation, energy efficiency, demand response, electric vehicles and other renewable generation all in one package that we can build-out with them over time as they can manage those things. final ly in terms of program design sometimes we can structure these things to no cost to

the businesses and homeowner as things are paid off over time using savings and other benefits that are incurring to them. we are very much looking forward to working with the puc and contractors in designing programs and i appreciate wanting to get the program up and running on the purchasing side and stabilizing a cash flow and your customer base and there are also opportunities for us to get out in front right away with customers and provide them the kinds of services that are going to excite them about staying in the cleanpowersf and expanding the utilitization of the program. thank you and if you have any questions and i will be here to answer necessity -- any questions in the future. >>supervisor john avalos: thank you. we appreciate that. weem look forward to that effort. mr. fried?

>> thank you. jason fried. while this was going on, there was a period where we were getting questions from enernex and about something and they were always very good and requestic to respond back to those questions so the report can keep moving forward and we thank them for their efforts and thank the advocates for the comments when the drafts were put out there and getting those incorporated into the report as well. most of what i have been wanting to talk about are comments addressed already. the first one came up to me while we were standing here talking about setting of rates. there is two different products, there is the light green and deep green. for a lack of better calling. the light green everyone is in agreement, it's kind of pg & e's price and we figure out we can fit into that program. it's not

going to be 100 percent. we are going to do what's left over. once we create that product, we are going to use a build-out program. that's pg & e's price. we know what that is. we need to know what pg & e's rate is going to be. what we maybe doing on that portion is why don't we figure out when is the best time for us to launch. when can we get contracts to launch. when you look at marin and sonoma they launched in may, lancaster launched in may of this year. i don't think we can do it this year. but perhaps we look to spring of next year because of heche hech power maybe we'll get snowpack and perhaps we'll figure out when it's best to launch. set that rate. we already know what that rate is going to be.

it's going to be a pg & e rate to launch. >> they actually go to the public utilities commission to set their rates. so we know there is a schedule for rates based on that presentation. so, that seems like we can tailor to what we are seeing is going to be decisions made at the california public utilities commissioner what the rates are for pg & e's regular power for customers. >> yes, there is going to be some guessing involved in that because pg & e can change their rates 4-6 times a year. there is going to be a little bit of guessing and perhaps go below of what the rate is in case they decide it's going to be cheap now. so we go out there and start that part of the program and for lack of better terms get it towards launch and as harlin kelly was mentioning the deep green is where we have to figure out how to do that and that might take a

little bit more time to figure out. maybe we do two tracks of setting rights. one for light green. if we wait a month for launching deep green, we can't sign up people at that point. maybe not the best for marketing purposes. there is nothing to keep us from launching a program as quickly as possible or the best time possible for us over the course of the year. figure out when that is a go ahead and plan that and deal with the deep green as the pg & e green tariff moves forward as we learn more about that. what i would like to see done is do more market research to determine what is a deep green product that san francisco want to see. if you are going to put that green rate and use that money to do a larger build-out for more renewables. maybe in the beginning it's not the greenest program but gives us the ability to

build that green program or do people just care about getting that green electricity now and our program needs to launch that way. and we need to determine what people really want. i think in some cases we split the two items up and figure out the light green, the base product and move that forward now and get the contract in place. maybe we are not launching this year but we have everything in place and ready to launch what that time comes and the staff are going to be able to do the research and know where they are and hire everyone and getting everyone in place and when we launch it we have time to do the other stuff. that was not my talking points that i wanted to bring up and we can go with puc is that of -- staff to make that possible. i want to make sure when we come back in february with a timeline and work with the puc staff

to do the same to make sure we are in line with it as much as possible. the other thing with maybe having sat through negotiations not just with shell but the provider we were talking to several years ago, first time we were trying to do this is how the energy contracts work and are actually two different pieces. it is really hard to do the energy marketing contracts with the city's contracting process in place. one of the things that is good for the puc is working with the board of supervisors for the legislation. and someone will probably yell at me the exempt status for the regular average city contracts that stuff has to go through and figure out a better procurement. what we have is we are going to pay a premium for every contract for how to city's contract work and will make it

difficult to set a competitive price with pg & e and for that pricing contract, i would rather have a little bit go towards a greener product or something more beneficial to us. what i was thinking about it sitting here today and also maybe figuring out how that works and getting through the process in a faster way is to sit down with the city attorney's office with the board of supervisors and puc to help us get through that process a little bit quicker. >> to go through some of my other comments and you will see me flip through the pages, we are with the light green dual tiered system. that we have a launch period for the number of factors. one is when a procurement contract is available and

hetch hetchy power available to best utilize that and hopefully get them more of what they might get if we go into the system rather than an actual contracted with the cca program and also when is pg & e's generate when do they on average tend to increase or decrease because they tend to have higher and lower prices because of some premiums and in the winter time a little bit cheaper and we maybe lining up with increases with potentially coming in place and finally reviewing the staffing needs with the puc to make sure we have everything in place. we are missing a cca director and that needs to go quickly and if puc was having any issues they can say something and every board would be yelling at every department to make it go quicker because we want to get that person on staff. i already mentioned the rates and build-out. we

can do in a two phase process and figure out the price and figure out how much is left and that determines what type of build-out we do. that is three different options. the enernex report list a bunch of products. we are not building everything on day one. not all 9,000 jobs are occurring on day one. you pick the most competitive cost products and you determine is there enough for phase one and that's the first product program that you go out and build and you look at the energy efficiency. there is already programs out there but i know he has in his head of what might be better. trying to figure out what programs are available that are best for the

potential customers bringingen and how to implement those in a better way and pay attention to when is the c puc process and knowing we have that money we can go after that money in an aggressive way to get into that mix of the c puc money and get those programs lined up so his team, i'm not getting into this program and can run the best program possible. finally just being able to go out to the private sector and say who has good projects to build and seeing if they are better than we have identified in the report. those are things we are doing now and we don't know exactly what that is and we know what a contract is for energy procurement and we know those are going to be needed to be readjusted. we get all of those things in place. i have already talked about the timeline

and what needs to be done there. i already mentioned we should go out and do new market research. we can do that sooner rather than later to find out what the products looks like and on the light green if we are setting pg & e's price, we are going to set that. everything we've had has been a more expensive product and if you have your freestanding homes that don't have good rates of retention in the program because of the more expensive products. i know some parts of the city may want to be on the program and i know many of them get solar panels on and we can utilize that program to benefit a local build-out quicker by transitioning from if you want to go solar sf you have a program and be part of it, join us and we have funds that are available, some that can come from cca funds originally. if

you don't have that $5 million in the program you transition there to having a permanent long-term funding source for go solar sf and by launching through other parts of the season if there are retention happy people to utilize go solar sf program and get a lot of programs in place. >>supervisor john avalos: we anticipated that last year when we had the discussion of the budget. >> correct. and the final thing, those are my comments at this point that haven't been touched on thus far and i want to thank the puc staff. they were very helpful and anytime we had questions and enernex had questions they were able to answer questions as much as they could and they were very busy and they still helped with the answers to keep the program going. we thank you for that.

>> we have a question from the panel. ms. crews? >>cynthia crews: i have a question for you. you mentioned that, you indicated that maybe a bifurcated approach in terms of setting the rates. i think that's what i was looking for in terms of an out of the box approach that would save us some time. and i think that would certainly be something that i would suggest that we look at. we know the light rates are pg & e existing rates. what have you seen in terms of marin and sonoma county and how they compare to the dark green rates? >> dark green rates are more expensive and we have nothing compared to it yet because pg & e doesn't have that product. when you look at what's been around the longest, on average they are cheaper but there are times of the

year and certain portions of the four 4 years they have been in existence where they have been more expensive than pg & e because pg & e changes their rates but on average since the last time i talked to them in april of last year they have been below pg & e's price. that's what we are going to look at and explain to people, we are giving you a stable price and pg & e changes it's rates. there are periods when it maybe more expensive and less expensive. on average our goal is to be less expensive over time and given the length of the years and multiple years how we are doing in price comparison through pg & e. i think it's going to be extremely important. it doesn't take much to get above or below marin because they tend to get

above pg & e's rates but on average their below. >> the model is to change the rate every year? >> that is the explanation to me when i was going to the community meetings, people like knowing to be able to count on the rates and all af sudden the rates don't go up in the summer and especially on the business side it's something that was very interested on the business and industrial sides they were very interested. they wanted to have a set price they can easily budget themselves because they have master sheets to have energy to use. it's to them much easier to budget than to have this fluctuating rate over the year. >> do you now how often march

marin and sonoma county change their rates? >> i know marin is once a year but not sure about sonoma. >> anyone else? commissioner crews, okay. we can go on to our next presenter. john marshall. >> good afternoon, supervisors and commissioners. thank you very much for having us today. we are delighted that this issue has rapidly come back onto the table. my name is shawn marshall with lean u.s. local aggregation network a non-profit organization that works with government and allied organization on the successful and responsible