survey, they immediately get an individual personalized report. we truly believe that everyone plays a part in engagement. it's not just the leaders pushing it top down, but as an individual, there are things that i can do, as well. so for example, if through my survey, i mention that i don't see career opportunities, my individual report might recommend that i have a conversation with my manager about my career growth opportunities here. and then, quantum workplace also offers a lot of communication tools that we can communicate the results across organization and communicate how we're taking action on those. and finally, even after we have successfully analyzed our results, planned to take actions, and have taken actions and communicated that, it's

difficult and challenging to do this again year after year and make sure it's continuous. you know, staff leave and they might take that survey knowledge with them, and sometimes the surveys may change? and so with quantum workplace, it's really easy to run an annual survey over and over again. the results stay within the system. everything is connected? and if we want to run other surveys, as well, for example, exit surveys, that will all be connected in the system. and we can look at -- excuse me -- if people are engaged here, and whether that is aligned with our exit survey results. >> so we just wanted to share some of the project details, including the timeline and next steps. we started in november .

those efforts were before our team was brought onto this project, but we started when we came on, and we engaged this that research process to see what we wanted to measure. as you see, we landed on engagement, but also what sophisticated tools can help us get there and get there right away, and we landed on quantum workplace. i also want to say faster than the slides were put out, a week or so ago, the office of contract administration actually approved the p.o., so we're getting the signatures and almost there. quantum workplace have already reached out. all the partnerships are in place with quantum workplace, which is great. we really want their expertise in best practices, and we're going to start the survey customization phase? they have a survey. it's important to stick as closely as we can to stick closely to that core engagement

survey. if we deviate too much, we will lose the benchmarking opportunities. it's really important for us to have that right now, especially with this the first time deploying this survey. however, we do have the ability to add onto that, and there's been a lot of talk about being able to ask our employees about our sfpuc values. there's some values orientation questions we can ask, do you believe in that value, do they hear their managers talking about it? i think that's really going to be important to know about other projects. so we're trying to start that as soon as we can? they have templates to help us, and we also want to start communicating early to our employees and managers, because this is something unlike they've ever seen. we want to make sure we get that change aspect right so everyone knows what to expect and what's going to happen in this project. we have the awesome ability to

merge the sfic data. this is also important for that confidentiality piece. any time in a survey, if you're asking people about identifying information, it could be age, gender, what group do you work in, they start thinking, maybe this isn't actually confidential. so instead of asking that, we already have that information through the hris data, we can just ask about engagement, and they won't feel threatened and worry that the survey is not confidential. we're hoping to deploy early may. recently talking to quantum workplace, they're floating the idea of may 7th? and the analysis happens really fast, so the survey will probably be open for a couple weeks. still some details to knock out, and then, they do -- even though we have instant results, they do a high level analysis that takes a couple weeks to present the executive team and anyone else in the room there to see those initial org level

results, and we want to start working on that internal results communication plan, and this is exactly in the process where we would be letting the employees know what we found in the entire organization. remember, employees, if -- managers, if they have somebody they can report to, they can start giving feedback to their employees. we can track who's actually carrying out their commitments and send them reminders. to get to that may employment date we actually worked backwards to the deployment stage because the most important thing we do in this project is what we do based on the results. so we don't want to run too far into the performance appraisal period in july. this data can perform everyone's performance planning going into the next fiscal year, which i think is going to

make that a much more valuable process. >> i'm going to go over the lod logistics a little bit. so workforce planning, like cindy mentioned, we're bringing to the table our survey expertise. we developed a project plan, and then, we also need to develop the implementation plan, which is really a big change management effort. this is entirely new to the puc using this kind of software tool for surveys, and so this will be a really important piece. we are also working with our external affairs team. they will be helping to engage our leaders, making sure that they're involved, not just informed but are participating in the process? communications will be a big part of this, as well. we want to make sure it's a huge campaign, really, to get our employees excited to take the survey. our hr analytics team along

with i.t. is helping to bring our data together and integrate it with the quantum workplace software, and then they'll providing any technical support. and then our final piece is our executive team, our leaders. we need them to drive parp participation, let employees know that we encourage them to take this survey. we want to here what they have to say. they will also be the ones to take action and hold their supervisors and managers to take action, as well, holding them accountable. and so how will we measure success of this project? what comes to mind first is probably level of engagement as a kpi? but actually, we decided not to use this as our kpi. we don't want to set a goal for engagement, and if we don't meet that, people might be worried. they might feel discouraged or

punished, and they might not want to do it again next year, and that's the worst thing that could happen because this is the first year that we're doing this, and so we just want to really set a baseline for the years to come. and so what we really want to reward is participation. we're aiming to have a 70% response rate for the survey, so 70% of our employees taking the survey. it sounds like a lot, but actually, quantum workplace does th does -- says that for an organization employee size, this is right. the second measure that we want to use for our kpi is not just whether our employees are participating in the process, but are our supervisors participating? are they making commitment or action plans, and if we're holding our employees to a 70% standards, our supervisors and manager should manage managers should be held to a higher standard.

we're looking at 80% of our managers making a commitment after the survey. and we're going to work with quantum workplace to make sure that this makes sense for us. and then finally, you know, it's great if they plan to take amount, but what are we really looking for? we want them to actually take action, and so we also want to measure how many of our supervisors are following through on those commitments. and we're looking, again, for 80%, but that's still tentative. we're going to be working with quantum workplace to make sure that's feasible. >> that was a lot of details about engagement and the project, but again, i want to bring it back to the big picture and the future we're shooting towards, and to get to that future, this is only one project, and i feel it's the beginning and the start that's going to help us get there. what we really want at the end of the day are engaged employees who give their maximum effort.

and that's a two-way street. we're obviously going to benefit as an organization, but engaged employees are really happy about their jobs. and even if someone offers them a higher salary, they have reasons to stay where they are and enjoy what they're doing. we're trying to build a culture of management that welcomes feedback. and we might be at a point right now where people are kind of scared of feedback but just not knowing what's happening doesn't mean it's not happening and, we hope that if we do this the right way and everyone sees how valuable it was to give the feedback and take action, and everyone sees the increases results over time, then we will start to think about feedback and think of other ways to get that. and hopefully that makes us a more dynamic and agile organization. an annual survey is not giving

us the most up to date data, and hopefully, this is the first step in learning how to get organizations to do a more often survey. by that point, managers will be used to the feedback, and employees will be used to giving it. and this gives us a strategic ability to capitalize on our known strengths and address our weaknesses. it's about that data driven decision making, and we know for sure that we're working on the right things at the right time. and ultimately, we hope amongst employees that the puc is known as a great place to work where their input is you will have aed, because they've seen when their input was given, action was taken, and they can help improve everyone's luck just by given opinion. maybe we'll have to drive hard to get employee participation, but it'll be part of employees and organizations in the future. thank you very much. if you have questions, i've put

the links up on screen just as a reminder what we've talked about, but thanks for having us. >> i have a couple of questions. commissioners. i have a bunch of questions, but really, the package team is complete. it's the whole banana. i want to remind you, the puc with all of those people, it's sort of a drop list. you're the mayor of this situation, and you're trying to get the pulse list. i would like to know what is the glassdoor rate for the puc, and then, you can tell me offline, and then, did i hear you weren't doing engagement surveys right now. >> of course, as you know all these efforts are very hard to administer. luckily, we have pretty recent data on those engagement scores, but we heard about quantum workplace in hr's effort to find a new tool to do exit surveys where this

administrative survey goes away. we could even start to predict things like turnover based on our engagement scores, which we're excited about. in terms of glassdoor score. we checked recently. it's about 3.9. that went up from the last time we did a report a couple years ago from 3.2, so that's very encouraging. and it'll also be interesting to do an analysis to see how the glassdoor scores correlate with our engagement scores. because a lot of people like to say glassdoor, oh, that's disgruntled employees. it's not representative. well, we'll see if it's representative. >> commissioner kwon: something that i want to touch on, i think you stressed is continuity is really important. staff participation is really important. i think it takes secure

leadership to welcome feedback about yourself. i used to work at a company where we did this every single quarter -- bless you -- and it can be brutal sometimes, but if we're secure enough, assuming that our staff doesn't want to run us out of town on a rail, we will welcome their feedback. i call it all the time, scratching the itch. i walk the grounds -- gesundheit -- and talk to the staff, but for the staff, other things may be important. communication is the key. will this tie into performance management at some point. i know you talked about kpi's and waiting a time. how about that tie into my waiting review if i oversaw a bunch of utility staff. >> it's a little bit alongside efforts. quantum workplace has some features that we're not going to be able to utilize right away because it has some other

data sets that we can't pull from easily. so in order to modernize all elements of hr and management, then one day we need to have a performance database, and through quantity tum workplace, we can see howen gaugement is correlated with performance. of course that means you need to be measuring performance accurately and storing the state a. that's where we hope to be in the future, but if we're talking about, let's say, how this integrated into manager's performance, the way we see it, there's the assumption that if you're a manager, you're already doing talent management and you're already trying to get your employees' feedback, and so we hope this isn't seen as additional work that has to be done, but really, it's the tools and technology to do the work you're already doing as a manager, with more data, more sophisticated tools -- sophisticated tools, i don't know what we have, but, like,

this is completely a game changer. so we hope it saves time and we can have more directed efforts? and i think there's a lot of organizations -- well i know this -- that have started incorporating engagement scores into how we're holding managers accountable. but again it's any time you're thinking about that and it sounds kind of scary, that's an indicator for us that we're not ready for that, and we don't want anybody to be scared in this change management effort, and we're excited about it. we've been to conferences where administration has included survey scores into a manager's performance. >> i would hope that you would move into that in a given period of time. commissioners, any other questions? that was very good. thank you.

do we have any public comment on the item? none? okay. we are moving onto the consent calendar. >> item nine is the consent calendar. all item listed here under constitute a consent calendar are considered to be routine by the san francisco public utilities commission and will be acted on by a sing the vote of tvote -- single vote of the commission. there will be no discussion about a specific event unless the item is requested to be removed from the consent calendar and it will be considered as a separate item. >> commissioner kwon: is there any request to remove an item from the consent calendar? i see there's a request to remove item 9-c and discuss it separately from the others. do i have a motion? second? >> that's for 9-a and 9-b,

correct? >> yes. 9-a and 9-b. okay. any public comments? all in favor? opposed? next item, please. >> we need to hear for 9-c. >> oh, that's right. mr. pillpal. welcome. >> david pillpal. just a minor environment cal concern on 9-c, on page two, the description of environmental review of this action, the city of san francisco is making an action that the sewer is exempt from ceqa. that may well be the case, but the action before you today is to authorize the license, and there's no discussion here of whether that license approval is itself subject to ceqa. i'm not sure that it is, but i think that language should be

in here because it's actually your action. further, i'm not sure, based on my prior research, that another agency's exemption determination under ceqa can be used by a different agency. there is a -- certainly a responsible agency relationship in ceqa for eir's and negative declarations, but i don't believe that that also carries forward for exemptions. but in any event, the action before you is on the license approval and not the underlying sewer's replacement that the city of south san francisco would be performing in the right-of-way under the license. i think that will make sense to some ceqa people, and it may be lost on the rest of the room. thanks. >> okay. can we have irena come up and address that question? >> commissioners, good to see you. it's been a long time.

irena torrey, manager of the bureau of environmental management. we routinely depend on other agencies' ceqa determinations when the project is in their jurisdiction. even though we're taking an action, this is the ceqa procedure we prepare responsible agency findings based on the findings of the jurisdiction. so this is routinely done for projects that are possibly on our right-of-way, where we have an action, a responsible action, and we do not prepare separate ceqa documents for these actions. so this has been going on for a long time. if you have any questions, i

can answer. and probably, general counsel could confirm. >> commissioner kwon: okay. thank you. >> does general counsel concur? you know, i'm not 100% sure i understand the question. i think it had to do with the license, actually, was the licensed public actually subject to ceqa review and exemption? is that the basis of the question? >> the license allow -- under the license, the city of south san francisco will perform certain work, and the work that's being done, the city of south terrific has do-- san fro has done the work, and rosanna, do you have anything else to add? >> commissioners, rosanna russell, real estate director.

we have over 700 licenses and leases in my division. all of them go through at least three city attorney reviews. one, a real estate attorney, and then one to two typically review before we go to the commission. this is a discretionary action, but it's been vetted about 1,000 times over, and while we appreciate the public's comments, we rely on irena's group. she's just top notch, and if she tells us we can rely on these findings, and we can rely on the city attorney's findings, who am i to disagree? >> so i still don't understand. so we approve the license once the ceqa review has been done by a sister agency. correct? >> just so i understand what the process is and what we're actually running on today. >> okay.

so every discretionary action requires ceqa, as you know. and the first discretionary action will produce a document or a statement that it's not a project under ceqa, many of which we have, as well at the puc. so the first -- this was south san francisco. the first discretionary action was taken by them, and they prepared a categorical exemption. now, there's no need for us to prepare another document. ceqa allows for the second discretionary action to rely on the ceqa document. we do this all the time for many, many licenses.

otherwise, we wouldn't have time to prepare eir's and our mitigated negative declarations, because we'd be busy preparing documents for every license, and there's no need for it. it's been done. it's already part of the law. it's being approved, adopted, and it's part of the law. >> great. thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioner kwon: all right. ready for the next item? >> we have to vote on it. >> oh, we have a motion? >> yeah. >> commissioner kwon: second? >> second. >> commissioner kwon: okay. all in favor? opposed? >> commissioner kwon: passes. next item, please. >> item ten, authorize the general manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with the lawrence berkeley national laboratory for an amount not to exceed 250,000 to be funded by

the city departments with a duration of three years. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm the project manager for this work. could i please have the slides. sorry about that. so again, i'm an arosen, and i'm the project manager for this work, and i'll be providing a brief introduction.

first of all, i'd like to know the objective of this work is to provide us with another point or data tool if you will, in the san francisco puc related to climate change. i wanted to let you know that kristina patrickola with lawrence berkeley national laboratory is here today if you have questions after my presentation. first, i'd like to quickly review work that has already been undertaken and has been a precursor to this work. as you know, the commission adopted a level of service goal for the sewer system improvement program to modify the system to adopt to climate change. in order to address this goal, the waste water enterprise produced key climate change related documents or tools, for example the sea level rise inundation mapping that became the backbone for san francisco's guide in incorporating sea level rise into capital planning, and it was initially adopted in september 2014. at the completion of this work, mayor ed lee convened an

interdepartment agency task force to develop san francisco's sea level rise action plan which was finalized in march 2016. the report calls for standardized citywide vulnerability analysis. the resulanalysis is ongoing, results are expected this fall. in addition to the sea level rise action plan outlined -- sorry. in addition the sea level rise action plan identifies actions or next steps which is what brings us here today. we are collaborating with sfo, the board of san francisco to fund work with lawrence berkeley national laboratory to develop climate motion denied ellig situations to help us better understand the effect of climate change. in addition, we are collaborating with the office of resilience and recovery to fund a separate task order with sylvestrum climate associates

who will help us translate the lbnl model into a tool set that can he wi that we can utilize in terms of decision making. currently we have a good understanding of sea level rise, storm surge and temperature, but we don't have much information about future extreme precip. so why now? why haven't we initiated this type of work before? one reason is because the resolution of availability climate models is approximately 100 kilometers or 62 miles. as you can imagine, that level of resolution would not be very helpful for a city like san francisco. however because of advancements in climate science, increased computational capablities, lbnl has one of the top five computing systems in the world, and the publication of peer reviewed work by lbnl on this exact type' of modelling, they

now have the ability to do this resolution of three to four kilometers, which is about a mile, that will provide usable data for san francisco. so let's talk about computational capablities. as they have improved, the more realistic and refined the simulations have become. what lbnl is proposing to do is to simulate storms that have occurred in the past. these will be storms of our choosing in the historical conditions in which they occurred by giving the model the observed storm's conditions. next, they would run a model simulation to estimate how the intensity of similar events would be different in a warmer climate. in other words, how different would a specific type of rain event that we've already experienced be in a warmer climate? they do this by adjusting the model to reflect an thrthropog

warming. it has been site tested in colorado and the results published in a peer reviewed paper. it is an eventual component in the validity and quality control in the scientific community. this outlines a proposed example of lbnl's system which was used to introduce the climate change during the 2013 colorado floods at a resolution of 20 kilometers or approximately 15 miles. the top figure indicates the actual observations. the lower figure shows the results of the modelling exercise. as you can see, the graphics are very similar, illustrating the accuracy of the model. this same model was further

developed to estimate increases in future hurricane rainfall as resolutions down to three kilometers or close to a mile. this animation shows how well the model reproduces hurricane katrina's observed track, represented by the receid dotso the i shading which is satelli imagery. it can be configured to the same level of resolution which is lbnl is proposing for our chosen rain events. so how will this work be conducted for us? in collaboration with the san francisco airport and the port of san francisco, we will choose four events for lbnl to

model. once they build the model, they will produce two different projects, rcp 6.5 and rcp 8.5, and they represent different ghg emissions. they will look at changes in precipitation and wind speeds, wind speeds being a secondary goal that can help tell us more about storm surge and waive run up. they will provide additional tools or data for decision making within the sfpuc as it relates to climate change. that concludes my brief introduction to the work, and as i said, this is very highly technical work, and kristina patrickola is here with me if you have any questions. >> i'd like to move the item. >> second. >> commissioner kwon: any public comments? all in favor? opposed? next item, please. >> thank you.

>> commissioner kwon: thank you. >> item 11, authorize the general manager to execute a design agreement with the department of the army-army corporation of engineers for an amount not to exceed 280,000 with a duration of one year. >> commissioner kwon: do i have a motion? we need to present? >> didn't we just do this item? >> 11. >> we're on 11 here. >> that was ten. >> there's no presentation here, but i can answer questions, if you have any. >> i'll move the item. >> commissioner kwon: all right. any discussion? any public comments? all in favor? opposed? next item, please. >> item 12, award a grant agreement to the san francisco unified school district in the amount of 528,000 with a duration of one year. >> i just have a question on

this. is this one of our grants -- the structure of grants -- grant? >> brian henderson, interim waste water agm. yeah, we have no presentation on this item, either. to answer your question, no, this is not part of our infrastructure grant, this is from a waste water capital add back from 2014. >> i'd like to move the item. >> commissioner kwon: all right. discussion? i see we have david -- public comment? >> hi. david pillpal again. again, under environmental review, this isn't a huge concern, but the language on ladies and gentlemen two in that box says that the bureau of environmental management determine that the proposed project is categorically exempt. actually, based on their letter to planning on page eight, the puc recommended that the planning department determined that the project is categorically exempt.

the puc does not have a delegation agreement that mta has for making some determinations. only the planning department makes the determination, so it just dcould have said bureau o environmental said, so it could say the plabing department determined as such, determined that it was exempt, so it's just a minor language issue. the resolution is correct, and i don't think -- i think we're good, and i'm happy to follow up with staff on my other concern on the previous item, but thank you. >> commissioner kwon: thank you, mr. pillpal. >> i'm sorry, manager of the bureau of environmental management, mr. pillpal is actually correct. it should say the planning department determined, and the bureau of environmental management recommended.

[ microphone feedback ] >> commissioners, since the -- the ceqa language in the resolution and the error is in the staff report, i don't think there's any amendment you need to make. >> commissioner kwon: okay. okay. so i think we're good. do we need to take a vote? >> yes. >> commissioner kwon: all in favor? opposed? next item. >> item 13, approve project number cwwsipd 01. [ inaudible ] and adopt the required california environmental quality act findings, including a statement of overriding considerations in the mitigation and authorizing report program and authorize the general manager to proceed with construction of the

project. >> good afternoon again commissioners. karen cubic, waste water program capital director. the biosolid environmental review by certified by city planning last week, march 8th. yea: so i am ve [applause]. >> so i am very excite today bring before you an item. it's sad that commissioner caen isn't here, so hopefully someone can fill her in later. today we're requesting your authorization to move forward to construction, and if we can -- skipping the slides. thank you. -- [ inaudible ] at southeast treatment plant represent a unique opportunity for the bayview-hunters point

community and san francisco beyond the advanced technological improvements. the biosolids project is the largest ssip component of this campus that will exemplify the confluence of all those items. the division for southeast plant was developed based on many years of engagement between the puc and the community starting with the digester task force. that was '08 to '09, southeast working group, the community facility commission throughout, and the waste water cac and their many different members. the biosolids project cornerstone for the ssip, it's the project that everyone knows about. it has incorporated the values of the community and it's been formed by our l.o.s., as well as the campus design guidelines

so it has a consistent work and feel. it's also been informed by our environment cal justice analysis to support positive outiums for the community. today we're here to get professional and get authority to move forward with the construction. a lot of the team is here, a lot of people that have been following the project as well throughout are here, but i want to take a moment to introduce our biosolids project manager, carol chiu who has been working on this for quite sometime, and she's going to give you an update on the project, very brief, and how we are proceeding with the project. very brief. carolyn. carolyn. >> good afternoon, commissioners. echoing karen, i'm very happy to be here, because this is quite a milestone for this long awaited project. so this project addresses the ageing infrastructure and

outdated facilities at the southeast plant. as you know that plant is our largest and critical to our waste water infrastructure. we are basically replacing one half the plant. all of the solids facility and replacing it with brand-new facility at -- in an area adjacent to the plant outlined in the blue in the bottom. here's an aerial view of what's out there at the existing site. you'll see it's very constrained. you can see the caltrains kind of on the right side of your screen, and then, on the other side, you'll have below on gerald, what is now the asphalt plant, and right above on the north side of gerald, the old project. so in consideration of the neighbors and all the

businesses surrounding, we plan to have construction workers park off-site and be shuttled in at the beginning and end of their shift. we also anticipate closing a portion of gerald, the portion inside that blue square to really facilitate this heavy construction job, and to also ensure worker and public safety as this job goes forward. we've identified alternative routes that are still away from the residential areas, and i think as you know, if you have approved it previously, we are also bringing on a program cm to help with all the logistics with not just this project but all the projects taking place in the area of the southeast plant. so at the end of the day, i am -- we are going to have a great well reliable facility. you know, the beauty of this project, and i should say i've been involved since we started this planning back in 2011, at least my version of it, wins since we're able to build it from the ground up, we were very selective in our strategic

planning, and laying it all out, and as karen said, implementing all of our puc goals into the selection. so we're employing best available technology, so you can imagine, we can do more with less. today we have nine active digesters, going forward, we'll have five. simile, we're going to also improve the level of treatment we apply to our biosolids, from a class b to a class a, which opens up more opportunities for reuse of this treated biosolids project. as you know, biogas is a by-product of the digestion process, so we're going to utilize all that biogas. we're going to utilize it and convert it to heat and power and take the extra to actually make energy, power. and in, you know, full build out, we can see making up to five megawatts of power, any extra going back to the rest of the plant.

lastly, we're achieving that level of service goal of limiting odors within this facility to inside our fence line. and here's a massing diagram here. you'll see once again, the energy recovery facility kind of on the left side of your page in that triangle, and you'll see the digesters lined up along the caltrain tracks furthest away from the neighbors. that was probably one of our first comments we got when we started the task force in 2008, was to move those digesters furthest away. from there, we built the rest of the project's facilities. and also, you'll see on the edge of gerald, we have those two main nance buildings, but we front of

you possible. [applause]. >> so to get to the business ds hand toda -- at hand -- for adoption of the ceqa findings, and mitigation and monitoring program, and authorization for the gm to proceed with the construction phase subject to the board of supervisors

release of funds. with the project currently in 95% design and # cmgc already on board, and hopefully today with your approval of this agenda item, we can continue to proceed forward with the implementation of this important project. so thank you, and at this time, i can answer any of your questions. >> what is the estimated completion date? >> right now, we are looking at may of 2024, and there's a significant startup and facility optimization period after that construction is completed, as well. >> thank you. sk >> so i saw as the bull pen took over and did its own presentation that there was a slide, and i'm curious to hear a little bit more about the environmental justice analysis. i think that's a very exciting component of this project. i mean, we've done a lot to establish and kind of activate

our community benefits program that used to be a policy. and this feels like a real landmark moment to -- with our environmental justice analysis to really look at the programming of that piece, as well. so i'd love to just hear a little bit -- i don't know if it's on a slide or if staff wants to just present a couple of high-level take aways of that analysis and what the next steps are for that because it's such a critical piece of what's going on in that community and sort of what was found and what the plans are to -- to mitigate those portions of it. >> all right. so good question. so i think as you know, we can do an environmental justice analysis for the biosolids project. it was a separate process. you know, separate from the ceqa and eir, but very much a companion document, if we can call it that. i know for the biosolids

recommendations of the cj's, we will address most of those recommendations in the design and/or the operation of this biosolids facility. you know other people are behind me, but i can see there's a lot of specifics to the ej report, and if we may want to come back and give its own presentation, as well. >> so actually, my recommendation is that we actually come back and give you a presentation because it was an awesome approach of trying to minimize the impact of this project had on the community, and not only look at that, but we looked at -- as part of the ej, we assess what are some of the challenges in the community and how this project can help benefit the community in the way that we deliver this project. so it was a lot of things that we're trying to do to actually improve the community as part of the ej analysis, so we would just love to come back and talk

to you about how this -- 'cause this is the first one that we were able to do, and i'm really impressed with it. >> yes, and i think because of the timing, we were able to incorporate a lot of the thinking into the way we made our decisions that you see with the biosolids project in front of you. >> i would love a deeper presentation into this ej analysis, and what the impacts are beyond this project implementation for other ej communities. i think it's very exciting, and i want to thank the team for that piece of work, as well, in addition to the team, because i think it's very exciting that we've gotten to this point, so if we can get that calendared through the chair, i'd really appreciate that. >> yeah, let's do that. that's a good idea. >> and then, can we have david gray come up to add a little more background information before you vote. >> fantastic.

thank you. great question, commissioner. david gray, acting community benefits director at the puc. as you mentioned, there were a number of recommendations that came out of the ej analysis, both fore the biodigesters project team as well as for our community benefits team. i'm actually happy to report back that a lot of those recommendations arunde underwa. for example there was a recommendation for to install electrical charging stations as well as bike paths in the neighborhoods. we are in conversation with the mta as to what that project looks like as well as other cobenefits that mta would usually want to talk to us about. there are recommendations around monitoring emissions from the southeast treatment plant. those are things that the project is currently analyzing, and if for whatever the reason there isn't that increase in the emissions, we've been working very closely with the project team to look at potential offsets to make sure

we can bring that net increase down, things like reducing woodburning fireplaces in the community or street sweeping in the community, so things that are really specific to bayview that we know that cause air quality issues in bayview. around this cbc stuff, community benefit recommendations, a lot of those things are under "ay." the ej analysis spoke a lot about the disproportionate social impacts in bayview as compared to the rest of the city, things like unemployment and poverty, child care access, and the cost of child care, so some of the recommendations included things like providing paid internships to 150 to 200 bayview residents annually. we currently do that through or city works program, or project pool program, and other internships that we sponsor as an agency. it talks about supporting the jobs training and opportunity program as well as the corresponding vtop initiative, and we do that as a community

benefits team, large leah by working in close collaboration with cathy howe. if individuals have issues with child care or issues with soft skills development, then we work closely with infrastructure and with our community partners in bayview to eliminate some of those barriers so folks can participate in apprenticeship and preapprenticeship programs that will help them land jobs. so we are willing to come back and do a more comprehensive overview of those ej recommendations and what programs are underway, but in looking at my list, i can safely say that everything was recommended are either things that we are implementing or we have implemented that stuff, or we are in the planning stanl for all of those recommendations, but everything is being acted on, which is

really exciting. >> that's great. i think it always comes down to the implementation piece of what you find and what the recommendations are, so i really appreciate your work in that direction and look forward to learning more. >> just on behalf of community benefits, i want to thank the commission for asking those kinds of questions, want to give a hats off to the project team and cathy and carolyn and that whole team for really thinking outside the box with us, and working with us to implement these environmental justice regulations, so they deserve just as much environmental justice did in community benefits. >> when you raise the -- [ inaudible ] i want us to triple drill down on that, and we've been talking about this for a few years, and i know that folks in this community who are looking at other industries, right, brand-new industries, communities that have been impacted disproportionately by

a failed war on drugs with respect to the khanna disindustry, but also, this incredible undertaking that we are about to get involved in together. we just need to know what is preapprenticeship, what does that entail, what are the expectations, what are the accountablity mechanisms, who's going to administer, that what are the certifications going to be, what are the apprenticeships going to be after the preapprenticeship, how are we going to do effective outreach in the communities that we claim to want to serve? these are our people, and i think we really need to flush that out instead of waiting for all the questions to come, just flush it all out there. because the opportunities are going to be there, and we don't -- we don't need to wait any longer, so i'm looking forward to that. >> yes, sir, and commissioner, i think you're 100% on point with that. it's really not about just

saying here are the jobs and here are the pathways, but designing programs and on ramps that are hyperlocal and that speak to the real challenges and opportunities that bayview residents on the ground face. and if we're not getting hyperlocal and very specific and very detailed and all in the weeds, we're going to miss the mark, so i think you are 100% on that. >> this is in collaboration with the vtop or the jtop. >> yes, sir. so we do a lot of work in collaboration with workforce and economic program services team, which implements the jtop and the vtop program work. massoud takes the lead on the i implementation of jtop or vtop, but there might be gaps or things preventing people from completing certain

apprenticeship programs. in community benefits, we make sure we're helping to mitigate what those barriers look like, so we're happy to sit down and have a more detailed conversation about that. it really is hyper, hyperlocal, because the strategies that we implement in the country are different than the needs we implement in bayview. if you're trying to do one strategy for the whole system, people are going to fall through the cracks. >> i appreciate your comment, harlan. i understand what massoud does, and jtop. our success rate, this success rates are really connected to making sure that the candidates are clear fair and fair from day one wiabout the promises tt are being made. the problem that we've had

historically, are promises get made, and they don't get kept. i want to make sure that somebody is holding everybody accountable kpor executi accountable for execution, and i want to be a part of that conversation. i think everybody wants to be a part of that conversation. then, will we only be successful in saying that we kept all our promises. >> yes, sir. agree 100%. [applause]. >> thank you. i think -- anymore questions for me? >> no, david. thank you very much. >> thank you, commissioner kwon. appreciate it. >> commissioner kwon: okay. do you have more? you're welcome. okay. all right. do i have a motion? >> i'd like to move the item. >> second? any discussion? >> public. >> yeah -- no. to public comment, i want to call up steve good and lavon king from the southeast community facility, and commission president, and also

want to say welcome. >> good afternoon, commissioners. we're here to speak in favor of this project. we are very pleased to see that it's moving forward. the southeast community facilities commission and the bayview community have worked closely with the puc staff over the past few years on this project. we commend the staff for the commitment to stakeholder engagement, stewardship, transparency, and garnering public opinion input on this project. like i say, we're very exciting this is moving forward. while we support this project, we also want to see the puc to make sure they deliver on their recommendations from the environmental justice analysis which commissioner courtney and david were just speaking about, we view them as crucial to the success of this project and to the bayview.

we reject any other departments or individuals or organizations that seek to derail this project. [applause]. >> we are very concerned about outside interests and possible those within the city government that have actively taken steps to delay this project project or prevent it from happening. finally, we thank the commission for working with

local schools, nonprofits and community members to ensure this yields opportunities for jobs, for contracts, for public art and for a new southeast center that will serve the community well. we support this project, the environmental justice recommendations for both this and the new facility, 1550 ech evans. thank you very much. >> good afternoon. thank you, steve. my name is la vonne kelley king, and i am the past immediate chair person of the southeast facility. i want to stress the importance of the environmental justice analysis recommendations and providing healthier, cleaner, and safer out comes for the southeast community. as a bayview resident for over 50-plus years, i have seen the impact of southeast treatment plant's operation. this project provides a new opportunity to make things