úx [ gavel ] >> good afternoon everyone. i would like to call to session the regular meeting of the san francisco public utilities commission. today's date is tuesday, july

14th 0 , 2015. roll call, please. the mic isn't on? is it on now? did everybody hear what i said? >> president caen? >> here. >> vice president vietor. >> here. >> commissioner courtney. >> here. >> commissioner moran. >> here. >> commissioner kwon. >> here. >> we have a quorum. >> thank you. commissioners before you have the minutes of june 23, 2015. are there any additions or corrections? >> no, i will move approval. >> second. >> any public comment? all those in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? the motion carries. next item, please. >> item 4 is general public comment. >> i believe mr. decosta, are you to speak on item 4?

>> commissioners my name is francisco decosta. and and i want you to know that i have done due diligence, attending many of your meetings before. i am pretty busy now, so i don't get too much time to come for the meetings. but as director of environmental justice advocacy, and as a representative of the first people, i want to address an important issue about water. and i think we should have a hearing that why in the year 2015 we continue to use clean drinking water from hetch

hetchy to flush our toilets in the millions of gallons? one of the things that you commissioners have the authority to do, is to have a hearing. why are we building so many market-price condominiums, which are not being occupied? and some of them are being occupied where they waste a lot of water. where they use a lot of electricity. now in your deliberations, you will be talking about the drought. i have no control over mother nature, but we do have control over our old pipes that are leaking millions of gallons of water. and we do have the technology, realtime technology to monitor this, but we're looking the other way. while we're talking about other things, but not the relevant things about conservation. so

daily, millions of gallons of water leach into our watershed, and we are not addressing it. so we need a hearing. we also need a hearing to find out why the big primes are kind of defaulting? you know, what is really happening at irvington and so on and so forth? so you know, i have a blog, and i can address most any issues that i want to. but it's all pertinent and relevant for me to come over here, and look at you in the eyes, to tell you that i am alive and kicking. i'm a little bit busy, but i'm

alive and kicking. so that is good especially for small contractors. thank you very much, and go to the board of supervisors. >> thank you, and don't forget about us. >> i haven't. >> any other public comments? seeing none, the next item, please >> item 5 is communications. >> yes, commissioner moran. >> thank you. i have some comments on 5c and e. let's do the triple bottom line first. first of all, thank you for putting together that -- i think it not only explains the system well and gave some pertinent examples and i appreciate that. one -- well, two things. one is that i think it would be valuable to have those reports

as they come up over time. because it's clearly an ongoing part of the management thinking process. but as these reports are complete and decisions are made, to include those in the quarterly reports. and my interest there is that we from time to time do make decisions that aren't the least expensive and we do it for a reason and we do it after a whole lot of thought. what those reports can do is document that thinking process. so that as -- for people who are interested in how we are making those decisions, if we ever get into a position where we need to defend those decisions we'll have a record that is publicly available to support that. another comment that i would like to make, it appears that the financial part of it is relatively insensitive to price. and i would like to urge staff

to consider tightening up on that, and i can give an example of that from the report. lake merced early implementation plan. when you look at the cheapest and the most expensive, the most expensive is 41% more expensive than the cheapest. but it doesn't show up having either a plus or a minus indicator on that. and 41% is pretty significant. there are two reasons for that. one is the benchmark that you have built in is not the least cost, it's the average cost. that means whatever threshold you have, has to be twice as sensitive to pick things up. okay. and then on top of that, in order to have any plus or minus point, then you have to be 30%

or more at variance from that average. that is a very high threshold and i think if you have, from low to high, a difference of 40 plus percent, that certainly ought to show up somewhere on the ranking. i will leave that to staff to give more thought, but it looked from the examples that you had here, that it was almost insensitive to price. i think it's important as we look at three bottom lines we really look at three bottom lines and not two of the three. so that is my thing on the triple bottom line report. and i was getting nodding heads that they can be included in the quarterly reports. thank you. the next one is on the construction manager/general contractor overview and again, i appreciate the work that went

into producing that memo. i think it was reading the ordinance, the draft ordinance, when it came before us before is kind of heavy-slogging to get through and figure out what really going on and i think the memo really helped on that. i have a question and that is about the core contractors? i am not sure that i understand-- in fact, i am prettier pretty sure i don't understand what "core contractors" are and how they fit into the selection process. >> ivy fein, contract administration bureau. core contractors are key contractors that usually perform work such as mechanical, electrical, key parts of a project. and can be brought on --

brought on with the cm/gc as part of the team, or they can be on-boarded later. they go through a pre-qualification or an evaluation process of their qualifications before a core contractor can provide a bid, in the bid process; that bid is compared to a third-party estimate. if it's within certain percentage, usually around 3%, the project team may elect to use that core contractor's bid. if not, then it will be competitive bid, like all other trade subcontractors. >> okay. so as i understand it, then the advantage of having a core contractor come on early is that you have their knowledge and expertise, advising you about

constructability. >> on certain key parts of the work, right. >> which is a huge benefit. >> huge benefit in the design process. >> and part of -- >> and construction. >> and part of -- under prior rule as i recall, if you were involved in design like that, you could then not bid on the final contract. that was deemeds a conflict of interest and we had to deal with that before. in this case, you are allowed not only to bid, but you are allowed as a core contractor to assume the work without competitive bid, as along as you are within 3% of the engineer's estimate. >> yes but i would look at the comparison to the third-party estimate that the core trade contractors bid. you know, it is sort of a mini bid process. you are right. but it's not just that a core contractor can submit a bid and

we would move forward. there is validation of those costs. also, their role in the pre-construction phrase is very similar to the general contractor's role. where they are providing input on constructibility, maybe scheduling, you know, parts of that, but they are not the designer of record. >> okay. a couple of things come from that. one is that it looks as though, when you read through the management process that is in the memo, we put a lot of credence in the engineer's estimate. as a fundamental way of doing cost-control. one thing i would like from somebody and i don't know if that is from you or donna or kathy, but if somebody could go through for the last year and look at construction contract

awards and look at the engineer's estimate, the high and the low bid, and provide that to the commission. that would be helpful. as a general matter, and i saw kathy just volunteer for that -- [laughter ] as a general matter, i am having discussions with staff and the city attorney to make sure that the new rules that we're operating under will be as protective as the old rules and while business practices have changed over the years, human nature hasn't. as public contractors and contracting entities, we need to make sure that the process is on the up and up and that it's trans[p*-rpts/] transparent and that we have administrative procedures to keep it that way. that is something that there is nothing on the calendar today to accomplish that, but it's something that i just wanted to

mention, so everybody knows that is the thought process that i'm going to be going through with staff and our own procedures for administrating the new ordinance on contracting to make sure all of our interests are protected. >> can i make one suggestion to the information that you asked for -- you asked for the high and low bids and you also want the winning bid, which may not necessarily be the low bid >> okay. >> taking that into consideration there are other issues, too. the initial bid is different from the final bid. >> it's probably -- what i am trying to get at is our history with engineering estimates. how they comport with the market? because people bid what they bid for all different kinds of reasons. in some cases they just know

that they have a strong position and can charge more and in other cases they really need the work and will bid less or the cost of materials goes down or they have a good supplier or whatever it is. so there are a lot of reasons for variation in there and i want to test of the proposition that an engineering estimate can be an effective cost-control mechanism. >> understand. >> thank you. that concludes my comments. >> any other comments on communications? our next item -- oh, any public comments? next item please. >> item 6 is other commission business. >> commissioners? yes? >> i did want to raise a couple of issues before we go to the screen, over the course of the past several years we have recognized employees and vendors at this commission with certificates and photos and

everything. and that has been well-received. internally we have had a recognition program called the o'shaughnessy recognition program and i had an opportunity to have conversations with the general manager about potentially involving our commission in that awards program, expanding it and promoting it. because i think sometimes when you go through these economic expansions, you start to lose sight of the fact that the real asset and the real resource are the workers, whether they be our city employees or they be working with our contractors or other service providers. and i know that there are some fine-tuning that we can do, but i want this commission to be prepared and donna, if you would put the image up on the overhead? to be prepared the same way that the recreation and parks commission, for

example, via the resolution process and the mayor's office, is celebrating its 7th annual recognition event for rec and park employees. and we have some elected officials who are participating and enthusiastically in these events and it goes a long, long way to give back to the employees in the city departments. i want the commission, obviously through you president caen to consider engaging me in a conversation, a dialogue about putting together a resolution that meets general manager kelly's need and potentially kind of blowing out for lack of a better term, our own internal awards, reaching out not just to the public employees, but the private sector employees. and on a personal note, it's enjoyable. it's appropriate for us to do, but it's always fun that we look forward to it. the commissioners look forward to it. and the mayors have always

participated, but i just kind of want to give a head's up, that i'm going come at you guys with some kind of proposal. >> good. >> and everyone is invited to the event at the golden gate yacht club. thank you very much. >> we'll have one at our facilities. >> thank you very much. >> it's a very good idea. >> thank you, president caen. >> any other business? seeing none, next item, please. >> item 7 is report of the general manager. >> the first update i have four is -- for you is the drought update by mr. ritchie. >> thank you, steve ritchie assistant general manager for water. if we could have the slides please. to provide the latest information that we have regarding the drought. in terms of some of the -- routinely our levels of storage and hetch hetchy continues to

be high at 93% capacity and water bank is starting to increase. we're releasing water that we are generating hydroelectricity at home powerhouse, providing drafting flows from the tuolumne river, but ends up in the water bank. so it's three-fer at this time. i don't always include this slide. this slide is the status of other california reservoirs. particularly of note, new molonas -- don pedro reservoir at 36% capacity and quite low, anybody have gone upcountry, and you see how low it really is and those reservoirs are extremely low at this point. so we're fortunate to have one that is much fuller. precipitation, i have included this chart because we do continue to get some storms

upcountry. so the red line is current year, 2015. and we have gotten to the level we were at least year in terms of precipitation. not a great year, by well above 1977, which good news. i looked it up the snow pack, there is no snow. that is your answer. upcountry precipitation, you see in july we have actually done well, above median, .5". which is above normal for this time of year and we still have time left in the month with potential thundershowers out there. and locally, we continue to have no precipitation really at this time. some of the really good news is our customers performance on conservation. this slide shows total system deliveries and the green line continues to be essentially flat and well-below the reduction target, which is what

the black dashed line is. that blacked dashed line represents a 14% reduction, systemwide. below 2013 demand-levels, and we're well-below that. so people are performing quite well throughout the system in terms of their behavior. in particular, within the city, is this is a new chart here showing the reduction in demand as a percent by month from the beginning of the year. the 8% requirement that came into effect june 1st, but you can see in april, may, and june, we have exceeded that 8%, and in june, we actually saved in san francisco 19.4% below 2013 demands. so conservation is really taken hold quite well. so people are going a really great job in terms of conserving. >> can i ask a question about that? the implications for our revenue, because we haven't

really talked much about that, and we're so glad that everybody is conserving. but i do know that it does have an effect on our revenue? >> yes, it does. we talk about it every week and it has an effect not only on our water enterprise, but wastewater enterprise because the two are linked together as well as the power enterprise, because there is less water for hydrogeneration in the springtime and going into the summer. so yes, we have experienced a drop in revenues and we're using some of our reserves, and we're looking very oclosely at our budget and making sure that we stay within our budget means. as we prepare for the next two-year cycle, we are going to take into consideration how if the drought continues, what it's going to mean for our budget process as we go forward? >> at our next meeting get an update on had a? >> the budget projection numbers yes, we can get those numbers for you. >> thank you.

back to the slides and i will change topic to one that is great interest interest of us the curtailment notices that state water board has been senting out. i included this slide as a general description of what their curtailment notices are. from the state water board that water is unavailable for diversion and the stated purpose of that is so that would water can be provided downstream for senior appropriators and senior riparian water right holders. the most senior in the system feel the pain last and obviously we're quite senior, but there are other people who are definitely more senior than us. the notices require that diverters file a culturalment certification form, indicating that they have seized diverting water, which we call the full natural flow at the point of diversion. the notices do not require release of previously stored water and anything already put into storage is not curtialed

and that water is all available for our use no concern that somehow that water would be taken away. the first notices were sent to the san joaquin river basin in april. more recently there has been a number of actions of interest to us, on june 12th, curtialment notices were sent to post-1914 water right holders. several partis to started to litigate, making various arguments. one of the key arguments there was no due process before the curtialment notices were sent out, because they seemeds very much like orders as opposed to notices. the curtial diversion including that for camp mather. we responded on july 6th and both of these items of correspondence are in your

packets for you to see. july 10th, last friday, sacramento superior court issued a temporary restraining order. so the situation has been one we have been keeping real close track of. that court decision last friday, i think puts the state water board in a position of having to reevaluate how they are giving notices out and it's something that we'll watch very closely as things progress. so in summary actuallies, actually on the operations side, practically it may not make much of a difference because july 12th diversion into the system were about 230 cubic feet per second, but releases were about three times that much. so really water is coming in a little bit of water is coming in, but more than that is flowing out of the system. so, in fact, we're releasing about 500 cubic feet

per second above our full natural flow. so more water is coming out of our system than the river tully -- actually would provide at this time of year. so if we receive a curtialment notice of effect the flow is already going down the river. so in summary, again, dry year, but hetchy has been doing good. water bank has worked well for us. as i reported last time, if we have a really dry year, we could run out. conservation is still [stkro-pbg/] and systemwide demand hasn't been this low since 1976-77. happy to answer any questions? >> i have one question about the water bank. what is the general plan about the water bank? do we have certain dates or certain amounts that have to be in the water bank? how does

that work >> well, the two are 570 acre feet is the full capacity and we can't go below zero in the water bank. we got down to about 55,000 acre feet this year, the low-point of storage, but we feed water bank with the water we release from o'shaughnessy and release instream flows 500ique feet per second, as well as release from cherry, home powerhouse and we generate there. this time of year we start to feed water bank and bringing it back up again. we expect water bank, if it's a bad year, we expect it still to get up to about 160,000 acres feet. if it's a better year, the more the better. if it only gets to 160,000 acre feet as we take advantage of it next year, at some point it will get to zero next year, depending on exactly what demand is. so it's basically done its job for four years' running and that is really good.

we are going to try to stretch it as along as we can, but that depends partly on nature and partly on culture customer demand. >> and partly on water management. >> well, all on water management. nature and our customers have big hands in this. >> thank you. any public comment on the drought report? >> certainly the next item i have is actually recognizing cheryl davis, who has decided to retire. and cheryl has been with the puc, if you didn't notice for 32 years. so she is one of those employees that actually knows a lot that has gone on and seen a lot over time. she has been with the city for about 34 years. but one of the things that cheryl did early on in her career here at the puc is actually she managed the customer service bureau through

the last big drought and i remember that drought even though i wasn't working here. it was a tough time and she did an admirable job doing that. she has led our water supply and treatment division for a number of years. she has served you as assistanted general manager for operations and served you as the acting general manager for a period of time and finally what cheryl has beening is workforce development. not only just here in the puc, but across the bay area. she has been recognized by her colleagues at other utilities as being one that has brought them together in, i think, in a very significant way to bring this whole issue up to where it should be and the attention being paid to it. cheryl really has been the driving force behind it. so i'm very sorry to see her go, because it's truly a success. she ran an open house here last year and literally hundreds and hundreds of people attends those open houses. she has been recognized across

our industry by different associations. she was actually a founding member of the water reuse association of northern california and president of that association for a number of years and very interested in diversifying our water supply as well and as been recognized by her colleagues as well for that. it's very sad to see cheryl retiring because of her wealth of knowledge and she is always one to be open and free with information to all of us who are working here today. so that i say congratulations cheryl, on your retirement and hopefully if you would like to come up and say a few words, we would like to hear from you. [ applause ] >> someone i won't name, but asked me how i endured it? and the answer about how i have endured it is that it's such an

honor and privilege to work in an area that is so essential. both for people, and for the environment, and for the planet. so i have considered that an honor and a privilege. i particularly want to thank senior management of the puc for supporting the work that i have done in workforce reliability. because at this point, mr. harlan was referring to bay work that is 27 different agencies that are collaborating together. and the took a huge lead role in this and ed harrington called the first strategic planning meeting. his support as a senior manager of a major utility really set a tone for success for that and it's progressively grown. steve ritchie, who has been

supervisoring my work has been very supportive and harlan kelley and one outcome of this is that the bay work model, there actually isn't anything else in california like it. there is nothing else in the nation like it. i haven't been able to find anything like it internationally, and i am very involved with international water associations. so the kind of tone that the commission takes about openness to innovation has really showed up here and paid dividends for you that i hope will benefit you for many years to come. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. [ applause ] >> cheryl is probably one of the people around here who has been with the organization longer than i have, and now that you know, that you are leaving, i think the rest of us

are safe. [laughter ]. cheryl is always about people. she managed the people-oriented part of the business, the customer service section for a while. one of the things about her involvement with water reuse is that she started getting very interested in the ethical implication of water supply decisions that were being made. and really did some pioneering work, if you google her, you will find publication references all over of the place of the work she did in that and very much a precursor to the triple bottom line kind of thinking that we're looking at today. there were some of us way back then, who thought ethics in water? what is the nexus here? is it contracting? no, that is not what it was about. she moved the needle on that significantly. so i have said it before and i will say it again, thank you very much for that contribution to the puc.

>> thank you >> we do have something to present, do we not? >> we do have something to present, but before we present it, i just wanted to add that cheryl and i worked very closely together for many years. and i just can't believe this day has come that she is leaving us, but it's been a wonderful working relationship and i have really appreciated everything that you have done for us, and everything that you did for me. cheryl was acting general manager for a spell there, and that is not an easy job. and so we do have a recognition for you, that the secretary will read. >> certificate of honor presented to cheryl davis in thanks, appreciation and commendation for her 32-years to promote environmental stewardship and contributions that have benefited the san francisco public utilities commission and the city and county of san francisco.

>> thank you. >> do we have somebody with a camera? i mean everybody has a camera. [laughter ] so cheryl, why don't you come up and we'll have a picture? [ applause ]

>> that concludes my report. >> any public comment on the general manager's report? next item please. >> item 8 is the consent calendar. all matters listed here constitute a consent calendar, are considered to be routine by the san francisco public utilities commission and will be acted upon by a single vote of commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of commission or public so requests and if so the matter will be removed from the calendar and considered a separate item. 8a, authorize agreement pro.0008 not to exceed $4 million and duration of five years. b, accept contract 2673r, approve modification no. 3, decreasing the contract by $478,716 and authorize final payment to the contractor.

c, approve plan and accept cations and award contractor no. wd-2746 in amount of $4,316,950 to the lowest qualified responsible and responsive bidder azulworks, inc.. >> any items to be removed? >> item no. 10. >> 8a. >> i would like to remove 8c. so may i have a motion on 8b on the calendar. >> move approval. >> second. >> all of those in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? the motion carries. now we'll discuss item 8a. >> 8a, i really just have a comment on it.

and that is that this is a procurement, whereby virtue of there only be one bidder that we would work with, they were able to dictate terms to us that were in excess of what we indicated our maximum would be. and because of the fact that they are the only people we can do business with at the moment, that that is -- we don't have much of a choice on that. what i would just like to ask our contracting and management folks is that we desperately need to get somebody -- find somebody else in the market that can provide these services. it's just an example of where market control like that works very much to our detriment. with that, i would begrudgingly move the item. >> we'll continue to work and see if we can find others to provide those services as well. >> thank you. >> do i have a second? >> i will second.

>> all those in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? motion carries. item 8c. i want to understand all our cisterns are in the northeast quadrant of the city. so the new ones are all proposed for the west. now how about the southeast/southwest? >> so there are actually located in different locations throughout the city. so this is just a new one that we're putting in. >> well, that isn't what the item says when i read it. it says that most of them are in the northeastern and the new ones that are listed are all in -- well the avenues, around you golden gate park, south golden gate park. so how about the other areas of the city? i

don't see where any of them are located? >> we can provide you information on that, but they are located -- mostly on the eastside of the city, not just in the northeast side of the city. and they are located also on west side of the city and we're just expanding them out to the avenues where the auxiliary water supply system does not exist, the high pressure firefighting system. >> in northeast we tend to get good afternoon, president caen, in the northeast we tend to have pipelines and the south and west part of the city, we don't have that pipeline system. that is why we're putting more cisterns in the west arnold ends of the city. >> how about the southwest and southeast what do we have there? >> i think in the southwest we have put in some cisterns and in the southeast? >> we have pipeline systems there. so effectively, it's been developed more on the pipeline system on the eastside, than on the west side

it sort of stopped around 19th avenue and never expanded out to the beach. and that is why the cisterns are going in out there. it's more cost-effective for us to do that than expand the pipeline system. >> okay. may i suggest this was not really a thorough report in terms of the overall situation. >> we can provide an update on the entire program, to show you, it's not just the cisterns, but pipeline expansion. >> i would like an update and more thorough report, because i had questions related to how the locations are selected? and we don't have to answer now, but i think it would be good to have a more comprehensive. >> we can definitely provide that, because we had an consultant who does quite an extensive analysis of the

entire city and the awss system and we provide that to you in a summery summary form. >> we did that in con junction with the fire department as our partner at the table. and we're actually putting in some of the new systems. >> okay. good. that would be great. >> thank you. >> with that i will move the item. >> i will second it. >> all those in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? the motion carries. is there any additional public comment on the calendar? next all right, please. >> item 9, approve and recommend that the board of supervisors approve the conveyance of an easement over approximately 3627 square foot portion of property owned by the city and county of san francisco on sfpuc parcel 656 for the city of modesto and conveying the easement to

modesto and execute an agreement conveying the easement to modesto and agreement with jw gibson mcelhaney henry, llc.. >> i would like to move the item. >> second. >> further discussion? all those in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? the motion carries. >> thank you. >> item 10 -- -- approve the consent agreement for switching contract no. cs-169 approve modification no. 1 and authorize the general manager to negotiate and executive a consent to assignment to the existing agreement from mwh/urs joint venture to mwh americas, et cetera. >> through the chair, i'm going to have a number of questions and my primary

concern is that my questions are going to lead to other questions. it's more procedural than anything. i'm not comfortable moving forward today. i'm also not comfortable with the situation that may end up being practically a hearing. if i was able to get an opportunity to discuss in more detail some of my concerns about just the process here, and i would ask that we remove the item and place it on the next agenda, if there were no objections. >> i would have to inquire with legal counsel about this. it's on the agenda. can that be done? >> maureen ambrose city attorney's office. yes, you could remove an item from the calendar and re-calendar it to the next meeting. i think the question to staff is whether or not it would have implications from that point of view -- >> we have put everything on hold for this particular project, waiting for this amendment. it was on calendar last time

and we pulled it and we thought we had addressed all of the questions. if we haven't, we can put it to the next calendar. >> the matter is subject to the board of supervisors' approval and can't be approved by the board until the beginning of september. so as along as you hear it by the -- well, you will lose two weeks in september if you don't do it today. that is right. >> cathy, does it have any effect on the schedule or anything else? >> at this point, it doesn't hugely impact our schedule. >> okay. >> at the pleasure of the commission. >> commission is that quite all right with you all or not? or do you want to start to hear it, and if it looks like we're at an impasse to continue it? >> my concern is just being respectful of everybody's time.

like i said, my honest opinion is that one question is going to lead to another, and then i'm still going to be short the information that i need to be able to vote on it today. so i am asking that i have an opportunity to meet with you, cathy, just to flush this out in the interest of just moving it forward. >> okay. >> i would be supportive as along as we are assured that there isn't a scheduling delay, and that hopefully, the information can be provided. >> i would like it to move forward, but i'm willing to meet with commissioner courtney, because i want him to be comfortable with this. we did spend a lot of time with mwh and go through their whole process and how they selected to add a major subconsultant. we looked at the lbes and what was on the current contract and we considered whether we should rebid it or put out another

rfp? or whether we should do this amendment? so we do spend a lot of time on it. so i am happy to meet with commissioner courtney on this. >> okay. >> should we continue to the next meeting? i want to point out though that we only have three commissioners at the next meeting. >> i do really need that motion the next time. >> wasn't that item already -- ? >> yes it was on the calendar two weeks ago and we moved it to this time because we still had some follow-up questions with our consultant, mwh. >> noreen ambrose, city attorney, if it's heard today you could get it introduced by the board at at the end of the month and hear it the first week of september.

if it's heard at the next meeting or the one after that in august, it's irrelevant. you won't be able to get it introduced until the first meeting in september to the board. so you will necessarily -- if you don't do it today, whether you do it on july 28th or august 11th, it won't make any difference. >> okay. i just want to make sure that we have a quorum for the next meeting. it's very important. all right. thank you. >> i promise i will be here. [laughter ] >> you better be. >> do we have to make a motion to continue? >> so moved. >> you can do it by motion or the president can do it. >> okay. president just did it. >> okay. >> thank you. >> next item, please. >> item 11 authorize request for qualifications and subsequent requests for proposal for agreement no. ww-628 for an amount estimated

to be $225 million. >> good afternoon, commissioners. president caen, this item is for our sewer system improvement program project and this goes right back to the memo regarding cm/gc and we're asking to put out a request for qualifications and to put out a request for proposals to have contractors apply for this contract. because we would like to bring a contractor on-board early on to work with our designers. and so in answer to commissioner moran's question earlier, it really does remove the conflict of being able to work with the same contractor that then does the construction the with the traditional low bid, we cannot talk to one contractor versus another and

it's a conflict for us to talk to the various contractors on means and methods. and so going the cm/gc route would allow us to work with a contractor in constructability. >> mr. moran, i think you had an amendment to the resolution. >> well, we had talked to staff, and as i indicated before as ongoing discussion of administrative procedures we should put in place around the new ordinance. i had proposed a "further resolve," that basically says this contract would be subject to whatever administrative provisions this commission adopts at a later time. >> that is correct. we talked earlier today. we came up with some language in antpation of this question coming up. if i could read into the record, the language, further resolved that the award and

administration of any agreement entered into pursuant to this authorization will be subject to any administrative provisions subsequently approved by the commission's applicable to cm/gc contracts. >> and i'm not sure what the appropriate process is. i can move that amendment. that might be the best thing to do, and i will do that. >> okay. >> i will second that. >> discussion? any public comment on the amendment? i will call for the question. all those in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? the motion carries. >> excuse me, may i ask for clarification, is that the last further resolved? >> yes. >> okay. >> thank you. >> now we have to vote on the motion itself. i have a motion >> so moved.

>> second. >> further discussion? public comment? all those in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? the motion carries. next item. >> item 12 approve proposed modifications to the floodwater management grant program. the sfpuc will seek appropriations to increase its allocation to $2 million. >> i would like to move this item. >> second. >> i have a question on this. does this remove any further legal action against these properties, or from these properties? >> brian henderson, wastewater enterprise, filling in for agm

walla. the simple answer is no. i do have -- if you would like, i do have a summary of the changes. we have a very detailed description of the modifications in your packet, or i can go through a quick summary, if you would like. >> a quick summary would be good. >> okay. about two years ago, this commission approved a grant assistance for floodwater management system to encourage san francisco property owners to make improvements on their properties that will lower their risk of damage due to flooding. the current program reimbursed property owners for removalable flood barriers and sewer back flow preventers. we kicked off this program to the public at a workshop, where supervisor campos, sfpuc management, and the appropriate vendors. outreach since then has included presentations to community groups door-to-door

outreach and drop-in session where we helped the applicants with their paperwork. our grant administrator and staff have personally communicated with over 35 individuals about the program. flood barriers and back-flow preventers have been installed by some property owners as a result of the grant program, but many face more site-specific challenges and have not been able to take advantage of the program. today we're asking the commission to approve a set of modifications that would expand the program in several ways. based on a feedback that we have received from one-on-one meetings with residents, small business owners, and property owners. the modified program would additionally reimburse concrete flood wall and special projects such as ceiling of garage -- sealing of garage doors, modifications to plumbing and

increase to $2 million. coincidentally today, supervisor campos is also introducing an ordinances to the board of supervisors that would exemption these grant-funded projects to help further incentivize the program and one of which is this grant program modification. as with the current grant program, the modified grant program would be administered by the sfpuc and applicants would be -- applications would be reviewed in coordinate workers' compensation dpw and dbi. we believe these modifications reflect the needs of the

affected communities and hope you will consider approving this important resolution to help property owners lower their risk of damage due to flooding. >> we have a lot of public speakers, but commissioners, any comments? >> yes, i have a question and comment. so the uptake from the first program two years ago -- because i remember we spent some time reviewing -- >> right, right. >> has it been pretty successful? it sounds like you have done a bunch of outreach and have people really been applying for the grants? >> yes. we have had several people actually going through the grant process right now. but we have run into challenges, because the flood barriers and the back-flow preventers didn't necessarily meet everybody's needs. hence, flood walls, in further meetings we decided that we can meet an awful lot more of these needs with flood walls and grade changes, perhaps plumbing changes. different plumbing changes than

the back-flow preventers. >> if people are still applying have they been in the areas most prone to flooding? >> yes. >> they have. so that part it sounds like has been successful at least from the outreach perspective. and i do hear that there are projects for el ninos coming potentially this winter. so i think that probably would include some pretty heavy rainstorms. >> every rainstorm spawns a whole new initiative to get this going. >> yes. i'm just wondering a little bit about the timing, and with the hope that if indeed the forecasts come true, that they bob able -- would be able to have the barriers in place by the next time the rains hit? >> it's an individual base. property owners actually responsible for all the construction work. they don't go through a standard process through approvals and what not. they go through what any private construction, if you

are modifying your house, you go through the exact same dbi and dpw approvals. absolutely. some of these can be done very quickly. >> great. i would just ask if we approve this today, that you really get out there and do the outreach. because we're in july, and if people want to get prepared for what could potentially be a heavy rainstorm winter, it would be great to make them aware of this program. >> we will definitely continue an aggressive outreach program. >> thank you. >> good. any other comments from the commissioners? okay. to the general public, because there are so many speakers, i would like to limit it to two minutes, if you don't mind. i'm going to call three people at a time. robert hanson. dennis casey. and chris hinkley. come forward, please. [ inaudible ] >> all right.

>> just real quickly, i'm dennis casey, five-time president of the san francisco motorcycle club. we're 111 years old and we had mayors of the city of san francisco as members of our club. we're about 100 members strong now. we're the largest motorcycle club in the world at one time and we're first to allow women members. we have been in the building at 2194 folsom for many years. we are not an outlaw club, just a regular motorcycle club. we are not the sons of anarchy, but the sons of san francisco and particular folsom street. our clubhouse is a -- our club is non-profit, we use our clubhouse for weddings, birthdays, christmas parties special events. it's just a clubhouse. it's open to the public. and we have always been very generous to our neighbors and never had the police there

except one time 30 years ago for a noise compliant. if we are in the clubhouse right now, and the last flood, you would be the only people on dry ground. so the other thing we have done, we spent almost all of our own savings -- i can't mention specific numbers. it's way in excess of $50,000 to support our own foundation on our own dime. we can really use some help with waterproofing the front door and with the plumbing back-flow items that we would get funding for if this were approved. thank you very much. >> thank you. our next speaker dennis casey. >> i was dennis casey. >> oh, sorry. too many pieces of paper here. >> go ahead. >> my name is chris hinkey and i have had my building

three years. there has been three floods there. after the first flood, i realized it's going to be a lot of work to get this fixed. i spent almost $ million on the building to prevent water getting in with doors and flood-prevention systems and pumps and everything. i urge you to get this motion passed so all the other residents can do the same things to protect their buildings. it would really be helpful, particularly before el ninos come in and global warming and so on. the bigger picture, we would like to get this fixed permanently to prevent the surge waters getting into our builds. there are proposesals and one is to put a proposed park on 17th and folsom street. but if we can put that in, it could actually prevent the water getting into our buildings anyway. so i really hope we could look at this further and meanwhile today, let's get this first stage passed. it could really help a lot of people. thank you. >> thank you. now do we have mark jordan? okay. >> good afternoon,

commissioners. my name is mark jordan. i am a 13-year member of san francisco motorcycle club, the same club that dennis casey just addressed you about. dennis has told you about our history in san francisco. we are really an institution here and i believe a true asset to the city. in addition, to the things that dennis mentioned that our clubhouse does, one thing that i would add, we do a lot to support not only the motorcycling community, but all of the folks in our peripheral communities when they need help. we do a lot of fundraising and so forth and now it's us to do fundraising efforts to waterproof our building. we're having to rebuild our foundation because of hydrocompaction that happened over the 100 years or so that the building has been there. this is one of the lowest-laying areas of the city. on march 19th, i attended the public seven-day forecast safety and neighborhood

services commit, where they discussed improvements on folsom street. i'm not hydrologist or engineer, but the takeaway i got effectively there is no easy solution to fix the flooding problem that we have in that area. what was discussed was large numbers and large reservoirs to be constructed. so i urge this body to approve the motion before you today, the modifications. and i also have an estimate actually from a company called flood -- i will submit that to you to give you an idea of the numbers and amount of money. it's about $20,000 to flood-proof the top two feet of our wall and add a floodproof door. thank you for your consideration. >> thank you for your time. the next three speakers: hans

arts. angela sinocropi and francisco garcia. >> hi. my name is hans art. i'm an auto mechanic and i have been running my shop for 45 years in the mission district at 17th and folsom. we had to mop out our shops more times than i can remember because of overflow of the sewer system. i want to support this program, because we will -- i tell you, we will very effectively use the dollars available to help keep the waters out of our properties. one of the difficulties that i have is that i have a parking lot that acts as a conduit that floods the restaurant next door. so that is the sort of specific solution to a problem that the earlier program didn't have the money to support. so

we'll save you a lot of money. >> good. thank you. >> hi my name is angela and i own a building that is both my business and residence on 16th street. we got flooded off and even more in 2004 and got flooded against -- this last year and to thank the puc and meeting with hans and others and discussing in depth the changes to the grant for our buildings. because the dam was just not the right solution for the majority of the buildings. i think very, very few people actually went through that, because it won't work. you know, it would prevent you from entering your building. you would have to be there to install it and know ahead of time. things like that. so the

changes would be so each of us could individually do something that would specifically prevent our buildings from flooding. and we really, really need it. you know, i mean it's really stressful. it's really expensive. it's an ongoing problem. so we need this, so we personally can hopefully immediately act on it to prevent damages, rather than repair thing after they have already been damaged. so i think it's a really good solution to at least get things started and that is about it. thank you. >> thank you for coming. our next speaker. mr. garcia. >> hello commissioners. i ran a restaurant in the mission, cafe and we have been flooded five times in seven years. so we support 12 families, all mission residents. it's a little hard to keep

going with a business, you know? when we have every winter is a headache. we can barely sleep and we appreciate that the city helps us cleaning and opening again. this time, we were closed four months from december to april. so really actually were doing our best. we already installed the barriers, but we get 70% of the water -- so we really need the help. and we really want the issue to be solved on the ground, and not just cleaning every year. so we really need to be able to grow. so we really appreciate that you help us in this matter. >> what was the name of the restaurant [speaker not understood] . >> thank you. >> it's on the property of

malcolm davis. we opened seven years ago and we flooded five times. every year, every winter, especially now with el nino coming it's very scary. it's hard to run a business, when you know that you close and you have to re-open again or have the funds to start again from zero. this is all mission san francisco residents that we support, low-income people. thank you very much. >> thank you for coming. next speakers, malcolm davis. and mr. picasso, is that pronounced correctly? and are there any other speakers that want to speak to this item? >> i'm malcolm davis. >> i'm sorry, some of you have

already spoken. [ inaudible ] >> fine. fill out a form. okay. mr. davis. i think you called sam picasso and malcolm davis. >> that is me. who is on first? [laughter ] malcolm davis, could you please speak? >> yes, i just wanted to show something on the overhead. >> may we have the overhead, please sfgovtv? >> there is actually a possible solution for our problem at 17th and folsom. there is an existing parking lot there. there is an existing parking lot that is currently sladed to be a park and affordable housing. and if that area was lowered by 4', it would hold 1.5 million gallons of water and be a

straightforward and simple way of doing a temporary fix, that would keep all of these buildings in the area from flooding. right now it's currently planned that they are going to start the park construction. it's imminent. i haven't been able to get a straight answer from anybody about the park. i have talked to supervisor wiener and representative from david campos' office and i can't get a straight answer when the park is really supposed to start? i think it's really foolish to take the park out of conversation about the solution to the problem. because it's half the site. and once we were talking about three-levels of problem solution. we were talking about immediate, sort of short-range solutions, mid-range solutions and long-range solutions and working through the grant program, which i'm very much in favor of. we have gotten down to the grant program being the mid--level solution as opposed to ground storage as the solution what i am talking about here is this is from

december 12th, when midterm solution was subsurface storage underneath the park. i think a lot of people think there is going to be storage underneath, but it has no storage. so i think it's a silly long-term plan for the city to be spending money on a park that is either going to make the problem worse. because if the park is higher than the flood-level, it will go first evangelical lutheran church and if it's lower than the flood-levels, it's going to flood and it has a play yard and vegetable gardens. so neither one of those is a good solution. like really this piece of land needs to be part of the solution. so that is what i wanted to say. >> so mr. carlin, can you put somebody in touch with mr. davis? >> we certainly will. >> i can leave this with you, if you would like.

>> our next speaker. >> buenos tardes. >> translator: my name is samuel picasso. i live in folsom and 17th. for 44 years. in these 44 years living in this area it has been flooded 37 times.

okay he is saying a lot and he doesn't see a solution, unless something big, like a big step is made, like changing the pipes or maybe making what malcolm said. he says -- never fixed -- never. >> never. >> never, >> translator: he said his child saw him 20 years ago, there is a big canal under folsom could be the solution -- that is all. >> that is it. >> thank you. >> thank you for coming. the last speaker is mary anne robertson. >> hi, my name is mary anne robertson and i have a business at folsom and 17th, and own the

business at the -- or own the building that the business resides in. it floods every time it rains, even though we are in a drought year, last year it flooded twice. so we do need this grant program and hopefully it -- i mean i'm not even sure that this is going to help my business actually. it's right on folsom and 17th. hopefully it will, and hopefully a long-term solution can be found, like sammy said. increasing the pipe size along folsom street, particularly when there are more residents in the mission. there's new buildings going up all the time and i don't really see any increase in the sewer system capacity that we so desperately need. so i'm here to reiterate, thanks for the grant money and hopefully a permanent solution can be found. thanks. >> thank you.

no further comments from the public, any further comments? yes. >> i would like to request -- i mean, i have been on this commission for seven years now and i have heard a lot of flooding stories about 17th and folsom. i know there has been work and all kinds of possibilities looked at and i have followed the affordable housing and what has happened within the city family to really take care of that property on the corner? that piece i think is heading in the right direction, but i just have not really heard about what the solutions are, that are going to address these ongoing flooding issues at 17th and folsom. so i would like to request that we have a presentation from the puc on what we can do to solve this problem permanently, and for the long-run? and whether that is potentially part of the -- related to the storm watered or separate and what it's going to

take to resolve this issue? >> i think we need to give you a history of what happened at 17th and folsom it's a low-laying area in san francisco and also, all of the projects that have been approved by the puc over time, have been built in that area and some of the solutions that we're talking about as we move forward in time:the issue on the sewer capacity is not there is an efficient sewer capacity with dry weather, but it's when it rains. the storms are getting more intense with more run-off and frying -- trying to combine our programs to take on that peak flow. so when you say you want the permanent solution, we have lots of ideas and lots of proposals, but we haven't landed anywhere yet. we can present that to you. >> thank you. any other comments? >> if i could add to commissioner vietor's

questions, i would be interested to see what the health repercussions are. i grew up near the river and it would overflow on the sewers as well. it was clean enough that we could swim there it, which i know sounds disgusting, but would i like to know more about the impact of any overflow sewage? if that sits anywhere for a period of time, does it have a health effect only the community? >> we can give you percentages of what we call sanitary overflow and there are some issues, regulations how you can reuse that water and under what conditions? so we have costed that out as well and we can present that as part of the discussion on 17th and folsom. so you understand all of the different facets of what we're trying to solve at this point. >> would you also mind including where the housing and park project is and the timeline for that build-out? >> we can contact the mayor's office on housing and the

department to find out what the timeline is. >> thank you. >> make i have a motion, please ?>>i will make the motion. >> second. >> all those in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? the motion carries next item, please. >> item 13, approve 2015 updates cw-area community choice aggregation implementation plan and authorize the general manager to file the updated implementation plan with the california public utilities commission for certification. >> good afternoon, commissioners, barbara hale. i have the action item and i have thestants updates on how we're doing with the clean power sf implementation schedule and our key mile stones. sfgovtv, if i could have the overhead screen, please? the laptop? you will notice that in terms of updates, on june 30th we hads a very successful

conversation with many stakeholders discussing our program marketing and communications plan. the communicates staff from the puc presented some ideas and got a lot of good, helpful feedback from the stakeholders who came. we're going continue to have those sorts of stakeholder sessions. we haven't scheduled our next one yet. our focus right now is on getting our requests for offer for supply together. so that we can make our next milestone on the schedule here, that early august activity. today is the day when july 14th, when we will be talking with you about our implementation plan and that is the action item. the other thing that you see as a change here on our implementation schedule and milestones is to roflect the fact that we will be presenting risk analysis when we come to you in september for approval of the supply contracts that we

hope to execute to support the program. commissioner moran, you have mentioned that a number of times and i thought it was worth making a note of when we expect that to happen in the schedule. it could happen before this date. but it won't happen after. we will definitely come to you with a risk analysis prior to asking you to authorize execution of those contracts. >> thank you. >> excuse me, with that risk analysis, would you mind also pulling any data that other ccas, particularly marin might have around the risk analysis work that they have done? >> certainly. >> thank you. >> now we have three operating community choice aggregation implementation plan, marin, sonoma and the city of lancaster and we'll talk to them. we have regular con necticut tact with them. so the action item is before you seek yours

approval to update our community choice aggregation implementation plan filed with the california public utilities commission. that plan, the existence of that plan and your support of it is a required step for all perspectives ccas under the california law that allows community choice aggregation programs to operate in the state. we initially filed our community choice aggregation plan in march of 2010 and received certification from the california puc in may of 2010. so we have been certified since then. we did update that plan last in 2012 to incorporate some privacy -- customer privacy rule changes that the california puc implemented. and now we're before you with changes to that plan that i

will summarize, that reflect the changes that we have discussed on the program design. specifically that the program, the clean power sf program will lead with affordability. that the program will offer two products to launch. default product, that will be up to 50% renewable. with an optional premium product that will be 100% renewable at a price that is competitive with pg&e's green tariff program. the commission adopted not to exceed rates, and rate methodology is described in the new implementation plan and power enterprise staff will take on a larger role is one of the changes and finally, the fact that we have issued a new rfp in may of 2015 to solicit bids for our program billing and customer care services. so that is a quick summary of the changes that this

implementation plan includes as it goes before the california puc, with your approval. the action item itself asks that you approve the plan and the statement of intent and authorize our general manager to file that updated implementation plan with the california puc for certification. the california puc process is by statute is to take 60-90 days. now there were some clean-up and corrections to the implementation plan from the version that was published by the secretary on our website. the corrections affect five pages, which have been distributed to you. and a complete, corrected copy is included in the binder, on the table here for the public. to summarize those corrections quickly, on page 3, the introduction clarifies that the default or light green product that our clean power sf program

will provide includes a greater amount of renewable energy than is currently available from pg&e under its standard product offering. on page 4, we have added a new summary section, highlighting the changes since the last ip, since the last implementation plan, the last changes i reviewed with you. pages 6-7, we added headings to improve the readability of the document and page 28 we clarify that in the unanticipated event of program termination, notice will be provided and the added language is "subject to any applicable restrictions." so that brings you up-to-date on the changes in the implementation plan and the steps that we propose moving forward with. i would be happy to take any questions as i seek your support for moving forward. thank you.

>> does any of this change the timeline? >> no, it does not. >> commissioners, questions? >> just have one question that is somewhat related, that you note about -- if you wouldn't mind addressing that, what the cpuc is doing with electricity rates? >> yes, sorry. i forget to address that question. yes, so you may have been reading in the newspaper recently, the california public utilities commission is making some rated structure changes for residential customers and those are rate changes that affect pg&e's customers. the changes that the cpuc, the california puc will compress pg&e's four-tiered residential rate structure into two tiers over next few years. this will increase the total cost of electricity to

low-usage customers, and it will reduce the cost to high-usage customers. it won't really have an impact on clean power sf and the rates- the not to exceed rates that you adopted. the new rate structure that has been adopted by the california puc for pg&e, redistributes costs between transmission and distribution functions, from high-usage tiers to the lower-usage tiers. the clean power sf program competes with pg&e's generation component of the rate, not the transmission and distribution component. so that generation rate was flattened several years ago for residential customers, which means that these customers pay the same rate for generation, regardless of how much they use. so the rate compression that the california puc adopted affects

transmission and distribution costs, not generation, and the clean power sf program competes with the generation component of the pg&e supply -- of the pg&e bill. so we don't expect the adoption of these changes to pg&e's rates to affect the clean power sf program or its competitiveness or require a change in the not to exceed rates that you have already adopted. >> if we're -- if the customer is responsible for paying the pg&e portion won't that portion of their rate go up? >> yes, it will, but it's not going to affect our costs or the rates that we charge. so the component of service will be responsible for, which is only the supply portion, the generation component of the rates. so the effects that we're talking about on pg&e's

residential customers, that increase in transmission and distribution costs for low-usage customers, and the decrease for the high-usage customers, that is going to happen to them, whether they are receiving their supply from pg&e, or they are receiving their supply from us. >> so we don't have anything to do with it? >> we don't have anything to do with it, but it's going to affect our rate-payers, both cca and pg&e. >> it's going to affect san franciscans >> low users will seize see their rates go up and high users will see their rates go down, which is crazy. >> any other comment, commissioners? any public comments? i don't have any cards. >> jason creed, executive officer for lafco i want to

[-eurg/] you to approve this. so the nowline is in your hands -- so i don't want to encourage to you do that and i want to address one of the things commisioner vietor you mentioned about the pg&e rate structure changing. i do agree with you and agree with agm hale it doesn't impact the rate structure we're talking about. one of the negative impacts of that occurring across the board not just for ccas, a lot of time you go to the tier users, paying a lot more and do energy-efficiency work. it can go for higher or more expensive products that they can utilize to reduce their usage and do behind the meter solar. adu you have reduced that down a little bit and make it left cost competitive for solar and behind the meter efficiency work to occur. once again, that is a problem that will be seen by cca and pg&e customers and doesn't directly impact cca, but if one of our bools is to did a lot of

energy offense behind the meter type of work, there could be a small negative impact. tier 5 customers in the city, last time i saw the numbers were 5% of the load. you are not talking about a lot of customers that this would impact. so i think it's something to be paying attention to. there is also a state legislative bill by assembly member tinge, ab 1110, could have have negative impacts on how greenhouse gas get reported. some of the behind meter solar rooftop may not be counted as greenhouse gas-free. i know the puc has some discussions with assembly member tinge's office and that is another area we're going to potentially see changes at the state-level that we need to keep our eyes on that could have a negative impact on ccas and how we can go out and market and advertise programs that we're trying to

do that are good, clean, green program and because someone is trying to monkey with the definitions, all of a sudden "solar" no longer becomes a green product somehow. so to keep in the back of our mind as we move forward how these could potentially impact us later on. thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. eric brooks, san francisco green party local grassroots organization. our city and co-coordinator of san francisco - san francisco clean energy advocates. first i want to just touch on what commissioner vietor and jason just spoke about and that is that there are impacts to clean power sf. to the rate changes. because as to amplify what director freidsaid, if we offer a much cleaner project -- product and we're offering

incentives for businesses to get energy-efficiency and rooftop solar as part of the program; and suddenly suddenly their wasting of the energy has been less expensive, they have much less incentive to go with clean sf and that is a factor also regardless of the fact that it's transmission and distribution where the excess charges are going. that is going to affect both community choice and pg&e customers. we have got to really make sure that the staff studies and aware of dynamic of when we start rolling in customers, are they going to get a rate hit? that they think is coming from clean power sf? so we need to pay attention to that and be careful about how where we enroll customers and look at what is happening with the rates around that as well. to the item itself, it's a little behind. so it's good to see that it's moving forward. i just want to speak to the

timeline. it looks like the timeline is still hitting final approvals at the end of october, just before the election. and as we now know, there are going to be at least two ballot measures regarding clean power sf, and clean energy reporting on the ballot. and if we want to avoid being caught in a firestorm around those ballot measures that affect our ability to enroll customers and educate people, we need to get this timeline continued to push forward to be accelerated to make sure that all of the approvals are done by the end of october and no later. because otherwise, then we're in that election session, where pg&e is going to be spending millions of dollars to attack this program by using that election as sort of a manipulative device. and we need to be prepared for that. so let's just make sure that the schedule keeps running. and the last thing is we do need -- we met with staff,

and we do need commissioners to help us get the build-out planning going. and so anything that you can do to encourage staff to get separate stakeholder process going, to really get all of the agencies, like workforce development and san francisco environment and yourselves, et cetera, involved in planning the build-out, as much as possible. while taking into account ceqa issues. we need to get that ball rolling so we can show labor what is going to come from this and we can guaranty labor gets what we have been promising. thanks. >> hi. thank you. president caen and commissioners, jed olson from 350 san francisco. definitely obviously support your approval of this document. it's really great to be able to be here at this milestone day

with you all. and hopefully these other few decreasing number of milestones on this chart will be happening on time or even early, and with we can keep ringing in the good times. i want to point out we were at the puc commenting on their rates and your public comment is much better. thank you very much. everybody is talking did the news like it's happening on january 1st, but this is not happening for years. it was just preparing the groundwork for them eventually doing this. so i think this actually provides a stronger incentive for us to roll folks in quicker, do really strong pushes on energy-efficiency and demand response quicker. if we can get that stuff rolling to 2018-2017, a lot of

financial incentives will still be on our side. they won't actually be disincentivized as was pointed out. so i think this really incentivizes. i would also urge the commission and the city to put its legislative folks in assembly member tinge's office to ensure that the kind of renewable energy credits that are coming up that are the focus of some of this bill, they are talking about categories 1, 2 and 3 which is what we mainly talk about, but pg&e has category 0, that are grandfathered and not called out in the building language in sacramento. those might actually be able to

be called clean green, et cetera, when category 1, 2 and 3 recs can't. so i would urge the city to make sure that we are doing apples to apples and oranges to oranges and we have an equal playing field and whatever we do going forward is look the same for all players in the market. which we can all agree is fair. lastly in the report, i know this report is not really the place where this would necessarily come up a lot, but there is not a ton of mention of sf environment. and with the exception of outreach activitiess, we do really think that they have a lot of technical expertise to play as well in the program and hope that that will be taken advantage of. thanks. >> good afternoon. san francisco bay chapter -- it's been a long few months. i really appreciated the

implementation plan, urge you to approve it today. i also really appreciated the page that brokedown the staffing roles for every phase of the program. and then each component of it. because it says what puc or lafco or city attorney or board of supervisors -- kind of on-point for what we are hire a third-party to do. and i had a question that keeps coming up it says i program governance." sfpuc and board of supervisors." how is the board of supervisors formally involved in governing this program? they can pass resolutions that is a this is what we like to say, and lafco obviously get ing regular updates from puc. what is the process for ensuring that the board is fully aware of what is going on with the program? and that their input is actually valued

and being part of how the program moves forward? i think that is really important that officials that are elected by the people of san francisco are part of this process somehow. and not that you don't have amazing expertise and we're very happy that you are serving and providing this service to the people of san francisco, but it is also important to involve the board of supervisors in the governance. so since that is listed here, i just wanted a little more information about what is the process is for them to be officially involved in the program governance? thank you so much. >> thank you. do we have any other speakers? seeing none, may i have a motion? >> i will make a motion. >> second. >> further discussion? all those in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? the motion carries. all right. madame secretary, i would like to change the order of the following and i would like it to be permanent: in other

words i would like you to read the items for closed session then i would like to take public comment and i would like the motion. so if you could read the items for closed session, please. >> item 61, larry wasserman vs. city and county of san francisco. item 17, ccsf vs. pacific gas & electric 18 conference with legal counsel. 19, existing litigation, restore hetch hetchy vs. city and county of san francisco. >> 20, existing litigation, city and county of san francisco vs. pacific gas & electric. >> 21, existing litigation, city and county of san francisco vs. pacific gas & electric. 22, existing litigation, pacific gas & electric. 23 existing litigation, pacific gas & electric.

24, existing litigation, pacific gas & electric. 25, existing litigation, pacific gas & electric. 26, existing litigation, pacific gas & electric. and 27 will not be heard today. >> okay. are there any comments? public comments on the items to be heard in closed session today? >> noreen ambrose city attorney's office. i just wanted to ask for a motion to recuse commissioner courtney from item 16. >> correct. may i have that motion? >> so moved. >> second. >> all those in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? the motion carries. i also need a motion whether to assert -- >> move to assert. >> second. >> all those in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? the motion carries. okay. we are now going to take

>> the commission has now reconvened into open session. the announcement following closed session is that items 16 and 17 were settled. items 18-26, no action. now i have a motion regarding a vote to disclose? >> move not to disclose. >> second. >> all those in favor? aye? >> opposed? motion carries. >> any us in business. >> madame president, before we start the birthday party -- [laughter ] -- there was an item earlier today we had a brief dialogue about item no. 10 and i want to thank my colleagues for indulging me. there were a number of questions that i have. my concern was that those questions would lead to other questions. i know that cathy -- cathy, do you mention answering a quick question for me?

is there a way that you might be able to provide not just to myself, but to any of my colleagues interested in reviewing it, documentation or summary related to due diligence with reference to item no. 10? >> yes, can i provide that. -- i can provide that. i had responded to a number of questions regarding our process for this amendment, and coming to this point. so i can definitely put that into a memo format for all commissioners . >> that would be great. thank you very much and thank you for staying today >> well, my new business is i want to thank you all for my birthday card. and the only announcement that i have about my birthday is that my nephew said now is the time to start counting backwards. [laughter ] >> smart fellow, your nephew. >> so with that, this meeting

is adjourned at 4:09. [ gavel ] >> hello, i'm the deputy assistant manage and project manager for the control system bureau i consider any department as my extend family i know every member of my department the folks are that that talented and

skilled and have their credentials since the people in the site are coming to before they're put in operation it's a good place to visit we share information and support each other the water system is a program we got 26 national level with regards because of the dedication of any team the people are professional about their work but their folks they care about their community and the project i did this is a great organization with plenty of associations in you work hard and if you really do your job not only do you enjoy it but the sky is the limit we had a great job

>> good morning, everyone. my name is ken mcneiley and president of at & t california. i want to welcome you today and thank you all for being here and spending some of your morning with us. we are happy to be celebrating the most incredible work by san francisco's finest non-profit organizations and we are happy to have our mayor ed lee to join us in this announcement. [ applause ] >>mayor edwin m. lee: all right. thank you, ken for being here and certainly for at & t and for your team. i just want to recognize mark blake man and jason chan and cammy blackstone. i hope, ken, that you have enjoyed all the different hair styles that jason has been having. cammy is going to add to that as well.

good morning everybody. this is a great time. another wonderful moment. i know a couple months ago ken and i shared the stage at palace of fine arts when we were inaugurating the celebration of our art history. it's helpful to think of at & t not just today in what they are doing but 100 years ago when they were making that first trans-atlantic hall with linking with our city's history has been wonderful. fast forward, 100 years later, at & t is doing it again. i know the board of supervisors and my office just announced a pretty big budget but a budget that continues to be in the works because whatever revenues the city can do to help our communities, the communities and non-profits that serve

directly our communities are also saying they need more help. this is a time when all of us and particularly our business leaders like at & t can recognize the vital role that keeps san francisco accessible, keeps it vibrant and literally helps continue making at it the world class city that it is because the world class city has to have a heart. i know that at & t has made these grants. i have eight wonderful community organizations that represent the service that they do the most vulnerable of our residents. they help protect the environment and culture of our city. i'm proud that our private partners recognize the

innovative and hard work they do and what they do in the city by supporting our people families, seniors and youth. today i'm pleased to announce a significant campaign that at & t is sponsored. it's called the sf summer of giving. it's an 8-week initiative and i can slip the tongue and say the summer of love because ken and i know that love is about giving. but the official time is sf summer of giving and it's an eight week8-week program that is going to help san francisco. each of these awards will be a minimum of $20,000 and more to non-profit organizations. we are going to announce each one once a week so each organization gets their

week where they can celebrate. the total is over a quarter of a million of dollars of love that we are sharing through at & t's generosity. and you know, these grants are to agencies that are doing great work in our city. at a time even when we are probably considered the richest of the most unaffordable city in the country maybe next to new york. affordability, accessibility are everybody's concern. and certain is one of my top concerns. so, i want to remember that the organizations that help us deliver our services is not all government. it could be community based agencies in many ways are more culturally competent when they are working with our immigrants in particular, working on the ground in the community. so by design, as non-profits they

invest everything they have to the betterment of our communities. so we wanted to acknowledge them through these grants and through this fantastic campaign that we are lucky to have. specifically today, you have organizations like the asian pacific american community center in the visitation valley. somewhat isolated community admittedly because while we try to reach all communities in san francisco we have isolated poverty areas of our city. well, a pac has been there from the start and they are trying really hard to provide culturally competent services to moderate income to immigrant families to allow them to be more successful. so i want to thank at & t for stepping up. this is the first of a total of eight. eight is a lucky number,

ken. and it's also one that i believe will set yet again another great example in this city that businesses and you are going to hear, after we announce these and i know at & t will be thanked by the city because others will follow their lead as well and they will be making announcements that will be shared by other community based non-profits that need our help. i look forward to following this campaign on twitter and i know we are getting the details about how you can find out all of those details, ken, thank you for this generosity of at & t and also with the great partners with all of our non-profits. [ applause ] >> thank you very much, mr. mayor. we are very excited to kickoff this campaign and this is the first sf summer of giving that

we've done and we have constructed it in a way that each non-profit organization gets it's time in the spotlight. over the next 8 weeks we will go to the organizations and thank them for their work and we will spotlight each organization on twitter to get the word out about what they are doing to improve the lives of san franciscans. i hope you follow us on # sf summer of giving and see how they are celebrating the contribution to san francisco. i'm about to announce the very first award to the asian community pacific center. [ applause ]

a pac helps strengthen asian pacific american families living mostly to low and moderate income families. we are extremely pleased to present a pac for training and english proficiency. congratulations. [ applause ]

>> [ applause ] . thank you. >> thank you very much for all the wonderful work you do in our community. as i said before, this is week one of our sf summer of giving campaign and we have not revealed the other organizations that we'll be visiting in the next 8 weeks. but i would like to ask that they raise their hand as i introduce them and tell you a little bit about the organization. the first, the next recipient, the san francisco aids foundation. [ applause ] the san francisco aids foundation is one of the most

highlight respected aids organization in the entire country. we thank you for all the work you do in our community. next up, that's right. let's hear another round of that. >> the university of san francisco girls tech power program. [ applause ] thank you very much. the university of san francisco's girl tech power program supported educational opportunities in science, technology, engineering and math for students from under served backgrounds. a very special thank you to the president paul fitzgerald for joining us today. [ applause ] >> next up. nature bridge. [ applause ] nature bridge delivers environmental science programs

to san francisco youth. thank you very much for the work that you do. next up, the arc san francisco. [ applause ] >> the arc san francisco is a non-profit learning and career center for adults with developmental disabilities with their families. thank you for being here today. [ applause ] >> meals on wheels of san francisco. [ applause ] >> meals on wheels of san francisco worked to alleviate the food insecurity and loneliness experienced by seniors who want to stay in their home but cannot shop or prepare meals for themselves. thank you for being here today. [ applause ] >> the california historical

society. [ applause ] >> the california historical society which is working with the san francisco recreation and parks department to create educational opportunities for low income students as part of the centennial celebration of panama. thank you for being here today. [ applause ] >> last, the coro northern california. it's based in san francisco and works with -- emerging leaders to inspire leadership success. thank you for being with us today. [ applause ]

>> congratulations to all of our recipients. [ applause ] >> at at & t we believe that invest ning in our communities is a smart thing to do to keep our communities safe in the environment. it helps to lift up the programs because you lift up san francisco. thank you for all the incredible work that you are doing and i really do hope that this spreads. [ applause ]

>> >> >> >> pilaties. it's a creation, an old regimen of exercise. really based on core engagement and core structure and core development. we do a lot of exercise in developing that and think about lengthening of the spine and our muscles. if you're a runner, if you're into kayaking,