not want to do it, and it doesn't really add anything to the bill. >> good afternoon, everyone. welcome to the san francisco p.u.c. commission meeting here, tuesday, june 12, 2018. before we get started i just want to congratulate the warriors on their championship. madame secretary, the roll, please. [roll call]

>> commissioner kane is exaccused today and we have a quorum. >> thank you. item number 12, i just want to announce, is being pulled from the agenda and it will be rescheduled to the june 26 meeting. so, item number 12 will be pulled. 'eel approve the minutes of may 22, 2018. commissioners, is there any discussion before we go to public comment? >> move approval. >> second. >> before we do the vote, is there any public comment on the minutes from may 22? seeing none, all in favor -- >> aye. >> opposed? >> all right. approved. now is the time for general public comment, item number four. i have two speaker cards here. first is mr. francisco decosta. welcome. >> commissioners, i don't come here too often.

i prefer to watch your deliberations at home on the tv. but when i want to make a point, and look at you all in the eye and i have to come over here and mostly because it is very pertinent. so, for the last nine months, i've been doing my own investigation on community benefits. and your commissioners have no clue that when the task force was created and i attended all of my meetings -- and if i'm not mistaken, i haven't seen one of y'all attend a task force, y'all were here when the commendations and all were given. but you didn't attend a task force. meetings linked to the sewer system improvement project. so you all know that a community is suffering. and you all are aware directly

and indirectly that many of our infanzes, our children, our youth, our seniors and those with compromised health have died because of some environmental issues. you all have the experts who can give you the reports. but i think it is pathetic -- and i repeat pathetic -- that when you set aside community benefits, the community that has been adversely impacted is not helped. and i've gone through all the grants, over 40,000 pages, the emerson reports, this project, that project and the other. i had to get some of my friends, 35 public accountant, another friend who specializes in compliance, a couple of attorneys who are doing pro bono work for me.

when i worked for the army, i was a congressional liaison. i understand how to connect the dots with law enforcement. so, i'm telling you commissioners very, very frankly, i'm disgusted. because i know how many of our children have died. our seniors have died. and we think it's a game. it says community benefits. so who in the community is giving out this grants. and why don't we have a hearing? an official hearing if you think they're so sacrosanct and see who's doling out the money and how it is being doled. >> i'd like to make a comment. francisco, thank you very much. first of all, we can't attend

meetings that we're not aware of. so, i would just like -- >> [inaudible]. >> no. no. i'm making a request. >> [inaudible]. i'm just making a request of staff -- >> [inaudible] is sacrosanct unless there is a very important question to ask. now if the commissioner says whatever he says in good faith and is my good friend, then i have to be given an opportunity to reply. >> but you have to let me finish. my point is -- >> again -- >> let's hold off for a second. >> you have to ask me a question. >> commissioner, you are making a statement. >> i'm making a request of staff. because it was alleged -- well, it's true. it's a fact. i haven't attended any meetings about community benefits, the task force you referred to.

that's why i said my inquiry. i can't attend a meeting that i don't know that exists. so all i'm asking for is notification of those meetings. that is my ask of staff. cool? ok. that's all i wanted. >> thank you. we have a second speaker card for item four. >> good afternoon, commissioners. president kwan. i wanted to call something to your mind. over two years ago, the commission adopted changes to the wisep. at that time, bosca asked for an accounting of the financing costs and in a letter to you, that may, your staff committed to performing such an accounting and prior to any future budget adjustments for

wisep to make that available. this april, you again adopted changes to the wisep, including budget adjustments and in our comments, we again asked for such an accounting by may 1. something that would provide documentation of assumption and financing costs and the resulting financial impact on the program. the commission asked if we could make it june 1 and i agreed. unfortunately that report is not yet prepared. i did get a call from your staff letting me know that it wasn't ready yet. and i understand that but this report remains critically important and i want to make sure it stays on your radar and on my radar so that it is completed and it provides us an opportunity to look at those costs so thank you. >> thank you. >> and i would like if possible when the report is ready, and hopefully that will be soon to come to the commission because it would be good for us to

understand that financial accounting as well. >> yeah, not a problem. when we got the final product, we wanted to take a little more time to make sure everything was, you know, we felt good about it. and so we wanted extra time to do what we needed to do to make sure it was high quality deliverable and so we've asked to let him know that it is going to take a little longer. what we'll do is we'll give a date. certain to both you and the commission -- to nicole and the commission and then we'll provide that as part of the package to you. >> we have a sense of when that date certain will be? >> in the next couple of months. >> ok. thank you. >> sure. >> ok. do we have any other public comment, general public comment?

ok. next item five. communications. any discussion in any public comments on item five? >> oh, i'm sorry. on item five, i didn't see the water supply conditions update. in my package. and i'm wondering if i could be given a copy of that. thank you. thank you. >> ok. is there any other commission business? ok. now we have item seven report of the general manager. >> good afternoon, commissioners. the first item is clean power update. assistant general manager

barbara hale. >> good afternoon, commissioners. barbara hale. today's clean powers update will cover service to customer, enrollment and regulatory activities. under item 17 on today's agenda, we'll be asking you to approve contracts for resource adequacy products executed by the general manager. we might have a chance to talk more then. with respect to service to customer, we're continuing to serve about 81,000 customers. our opt-out percentage is 3.2%. so we're retaining 96.8% of the customers that sign up or are auto-enrolled into the program. the super green upgrade rate continues to exceed the opt-out rate at 4.2% of our customers. that is over 4,000 businesses and households in san francisco receiving 100% renewable electricity from us. good for them and good for us. everything is moving along quite successfully.

with respect to enrollment, we have auto enrollment under way for july 1. we're mailing our enrollment notices. that enrollment will increase our customer count to about 105,000. mostly commercial, but also residential customers. 132 customers so far have opted out. 108 customers so far have opted up to super green. so we'll be reporting on how this new enrollment is going throughout the period, two months before and two months after the cut out date when customers are getting u.s. mail about the program enrollment. we also have a comprehensive campaign out on the streets. making sure the folks are aware of our activities on the clean power s.f. front and the opportunity it presents for them. with respect to regulatory activities, i wanted to touch

on the pcia case and talk about the customer choice report that the p.c.u. issue. pcia hearings concluded and working with the city attorney and cal c.c.a., we filed briefs. we expect a proposed decision from the administrative law judge this summer on the pcia case. as i reported earlier, the cpuc published a report on customer choice. it raises questions about how the state will achieve its affordability, decarbonization and reliability objectives with the increased customer choice that is occurring in the electric market, both because of community choice aggregators and because of customers choosing to install solar on their homes or adding storage. it raises fears that customers making those choices will

compromise the goals of decarbonization reliability and affordability and it says there is no plan to mitigating the fears that outcomes -- the feared outcomes it raises. it offers no solutions and flags the need for, in their view, unspecified regulatory and legislative khaifjt as you know, c.c.a.s are contributing to these three objectives. c.c.a.s must and do comply with state law, regarding resource adequacy. and that takes care of some of the reliability concerns that are being raised. c.c.a.s are supporting the construction of billions of dollars of renewable energy projects and it's at a pace that's faster than required by current state law to meet the decarbonization objectives. for example, clean power s.f. just -- you know, our program has assigned 847 megawatts with

contracts with solar and wind facilities here in california to serve our customers and c.c.a. rates are lower than i.o.u. rates and the bottom line bills to customers are comparable. the cpuc has set a deadline for comments of june 11. that was yesterday. we commented on our own and also together with cal c.c.a. they have scheduled a legislative-style hearing for june 22 at the california public utilities commission on the report. we will attend and report back. we're expecting to be included on the agenda as speakers. so with that, i'm happy to take any questions you may have. thank you. >> thank you. commissioners, anything? ok. next item, please.

oh, i'm sorry. any public comment on that item? none? ok. next item, plea. >> the next item is sewer system improvement program quarterly update. karen cubic. >> good afternoon, president kwan. remembers of the commission. karen cube uk, director of the waste water program. if you can bring up the slides, please. great. two brief reports today. the first on the ssip and second report on the waste water capital. so, this is our usual chart. these are 70 projects in phase one and the status of those projects, these projects represent the $2.9 billion that have been authorized. we're currently at 22.6%

complete with expenditures of $582 million. and we're starting to see the green portion, the construction portion of this pie chart expand because headworks is now in construction. we have 20 projects that are currently in construction as they're shown on this chart. just to hit with some key milestones for the summer. on may 8, the commission awarded the contract for construction management staff augmentation. that is going to go to the board the end of this month. the teams working on the 95% design and we're looking at early packages that can get on the streets so that we can get bids going for things like sewer replacementment, demo and utility work. the 95% package will be by the -- complete by the end of november. we did have -- as part of our

environmental review, have to have some mitigation, which involves filming the existing central shops to document the historical significance of those facilities. next, headworks, which is really one of our more complex projects because it is nestled right where the existing headworks is now. scope one is in construction. and that is the site prep. it's really rerouting a lot of the flows so that we can be operating during wet weather and dry weather. we have the design completed now for the pump station improvements and sole-source approvals came to the commission and were approved for the grit removal and washing. lastly, we'll be preparing the 95% for the main headworks and that is the last part that would be complete this fall. and next is a quick check-in on our labor numbers.

on our prime contracts, we're close to 435,000 hours that have been worked by 1400 workers. so we have 32% in terms of local hire for san francisco residents. 32% equates to residents' earning a combined $9.1 million in wages and benefits and this is from our workforce and labor group. our outreach efforts are continuing and we're shifting from program to projects. it shows our cumulative numbers to date. we had 18 media mentions. some of it was the griffith yard opening. our communications staff have been out attending meetings, manning the tables, all those summer street festivals that are going on from the mission to surf riders, palace of fine arts. educating the public. and when they're not out at meetings and presenting, they are manning the construction hub at the southeast community facility so that neighbors can

come by and hear what's happening and hear when the construction is starting. now i'd like to spend a minute and go to triplele bottom line because there was interest in discussion, i guess that was the end of last month. so i thought i'd do a quick high-level update to the commission on our triple bottom line and how we're using in the ssip. so ourselves as well as other utilities have been interested in trimle bottom line. but i think the p.u.c. took a bigger step because we're very interested in customizing our triple bottom line where we would look at projects and alternatives from a social standpoint and environmental standpoint and a financial standpoint and making the values of san francisco, our legislator, our state policies be reflected within triple bottom line. and here's some of the outputs that came out of that process. these are some of the values.

we assembled work groups that were made up of city staff as well as p.u.c., bureau of environmental management, the folks that do our ceqa analysis, rec park, all kinds of factors that were playing in. we also took a look at our mayor's objectives that have been put into place and we established our a.a.a. bottom line. and areas were developed in areas of financial. these are shown here. and how we use these is actually in a pie chart. and when we're at the point of a project where we're comparing different alternatives that meet our level of service and will perform and are constructable, we compare alternatives. and i'll give you some examples. and while we're looking at pie chart, we're looking for a higher impact, higher level of positive, which is darker blue, positive is the lighter blue.

neutralle if there is really no change from what's there now. negatives when comparing alternatives, one being worse. and then red being significantly negative. so, what we're doing is when we're coming up with alternatives for the different projects in the ssip, we're pausing, comparing those alternatives and then running it through this analysis. one quick example is one of our green infrastructure projects and this is -- this has been extremely helpful with green because there are so many factors kit hit within that pie chart that i showed you. sometimes it's a little less exciting with the treatment plant projects but when looking that the particular project, we looked at three different areas to build a green infrastructure.

one was along lake merced boulevard. the other was hallway and last was brotherhood way. and we looked at several different design options. and just very briefly what we found, you can take a look at the alternatives there was that hallway was the superior alternatives. in this case, it had to do with cost, it had to do with the establishment of bicycle lanes, pedestrian improve. -- improvements and trees. they with respect neutral in terms of both met our performance octoberives and we used it to inform the process. now in some cases, i'll get into one that's a treatment plant project and you'll see that there is not as pronounced a difference. this is whats the hallway ended up looking like and several of you went to that opening.

now we have one for headworks project. this is a great project. our alternatives are all adjacent. one was a site used for metal storage and wrecking, cal train site which is just across evans street. and this is profound and a little -- you know, we get to the grade point where we have neutrality. we don't see as much blue on the chart. the things that were good were good consistently across the board. but what different yaited the alternative that we went with, which is keeping our headworks in the same location was

preventing more facilities from spreading further from the plant, keeping the plant together and adding a small amount of habitat. things like climate, energy use, some of those things. they were the reasons we have negative on cal trans because there was a higher energy use, habitat did not score as well on those additionally. and this is a shot of what the new headworks facility is going to look like. now along the way, we've been doing this on every single ssip project except for a few. this shows you the chart of the 70 projects when the analyses were done and we can certainly come back or provide additional support, as needed, to provide more information on this. but the reason some of the analyses weren't done were when

we're doing the interdepartmental projects. those are projects that are led by other departments and we are basically replacing a sewer line along with that. maybe doing some green infrastructure. maybe doing a water line replacement, too. if we're doing some things like improvement to an existing structure, it does not have a new foot print. we're really going to see less going on than we did between the headworks analyses. if it's a study. we're not doing a triple bottom line or if it's a renewal and replacement. we're replacing a sewer, replacing something that is a control system. improving electrical system. but this gives you an idea of the 70 projects and one thing that seems to be covered with the text is that four are still remaining to go through the triple bottom line. we get a lot of requests from other agencies because we went so far on this development.

when our project managers use the system, they're actually going into an excel-based format. so, they -- one worry was we didn't want project managers to influence because, you know, they might [inaudible] one alternative to another. and contacted through this excel format and the excel data is based on qualifiers and metrics and objectives that our commission and that others have. everything is found in its executive summary. we ended up getting so many requests for more information about this that we wanted it to be available and readily available. so that's what this link is if you do want to drill down more into the triple bottom line. some of the next steps on triple both line because there was a briefing held with

commissioners are to start talking about this a little bit more. have a presentation with spur. continue to include the data and our quarterly reports. we do conduct project management training and project engineer training so that our staff knows how to use this and those criteria and procedures are updated periodically because we do need to revisit them occasionally as things change. also we'll be integrating this into our communications materials. so with that, a little thank you to all of you. and if i can conclude this one report, i'll go to the next one and then explain my slide. we might have to look at that again. because that was fun. so i'll conclude the first ssip report if there is any questions? >> commissioners, anything? >> on the triple bottom line, i appreciate the presentation.

and also the inclusion of those analyses in the quarterly report as they come forward. when you talk about enclosing i in the communications materials, what does that consistent of. >> i think it is really explaining that there are -- sometimes i think it is probably confusing for members of the public and all of these objectives and policies that are laid out, you know, by the city. things like use of roofs for greening or for solar. reduction of energy use. things like safety, how do we coordinate? how do we all work together? and i think this is a great way to demonstrate how we really do work together with other departments. so, talking about how we consider social issues, jobs, the planet. as part of our regular day-to-day business, when we're, you know, improving the

waste water system. i don't think it may readily come to mind that we have all of these underlying factors that go into infrastructure. some people, not us, some people think infrastructure is boring. but they may not realize we have all of these thing going at the same time. when we explain the thinking that goes into our projects, they're just boggled. but we'll put it in a light way, a friendly way. that can show all of these other layers that are involved in our ssip projects. >> the reason i ask that is the first and most obvious use of the triple bottom line is to help us make decisions. and make sure that those decisions are multifaceted and as complex as the issues are. and i think that the format demonstrates that and is also -- it forces you to ask, i think, the right questions. it's not formulaic.

nowhere in there did you add up points and say that the project with x number of points will be the winner. but it does force a discussion and i think -- and we've seen these come forward and there's usually a discussion attached that basically says this is the preferred one and here's the reasons why and that discussion is consistent on and elaborates on the pie charts that you have. the other real benefit of it is, as documentation, after the fact. it's a transparency mechanism and i think it really does put out, as you said, the complexity of the decisions that we're making and the efforts that we're making institutionally to make sure that our decisions are not financially correct and protective of our rate payers but dealing with environmental issues. and i think being able to demonstrate that after the fact is also important. so, having -- i guess a question for you. do we have these in any

compiled form, you know, it says that for the clean water program here, a significant and deciding decisions that we've had to make and here's the way that we made them? >> i think when we began, we were doing almost a white paper on each and now it's a formula where the output spits out and where there are differences, those translate to a slice of that pie and then it basically is an output. but i know we have begun assembling those and making sure on our document control site that every project manager is storing this so that it's part of the archives for each project. >> i think that explanation is importants as well. the decisions are not just a matter of something scores but a matter of judgment applied to those scores and i've been -- one of the things that some critics could be concerned about triple bottom line is that it ends up selecting the

grossly overpriced project. that is not the case. the ones i've seen anyway turns out very often the best project from social environmental standpoints are also cost effective and i think that is an important piece of information to have out there. so i would encourage, as we develop a history of developing the projects and making decisions on projects that we also document what went into those decisions and part of how we continue for the people who pay them for this work. >> prefer each alternative to talk about the pros and kons of each one. you run it through the triple bottom line and then we'll recommend one of the options and say why it compared to each other. what are the factors that led us to recommend this alternative. is that what you're looking for?

>> yeah. it's tempting to go through and count the pinks and reds and blues and stuff and try to figure out, ok, just visually which one is best. and that gets you almost there. in most of the cases. but a lot of times there will be some subtle issues that aren't there from that. there are factors in addition to that that are important, too. it's important to explain that. that it's not, you know, that we ignore the obvious. it's that the obvious led us part way and a few other things led us the rest of the way and that is just as important to document as we go forward. >> thank you for the presentation. i wanted to just echo that and see if there is a way, because i think it is one thing for the project manager to check the box and archive it. but i think it would be interesting to find a way from

a communications perspective to distill it to the extent that commissioner moran and i think general manager are saying. to something that is a little more understandable and take it a step further so it can be somewhat of a public document on the website even. i haven't looked at the assessment that you provided or even what it says. but even as we get really hopefully more rigorous about using t.b.l. and making decisions, to be able to say to the public that we do go through this process where we do analyze not just from a cost perspective, but also from a social and environmental perspective the value of this project and not only does it help us with decision-making, but it helps us stay true to our mission of protect environment and community and find the best price for our rate payers. which is really the intent of using that tool. so how can we then market it, publicize it, communicate it in a very simple way.

you know, t.b.l. itself is a wonky term and concept but i would just ask that our communications team take crack at like, you know, taking it to this point and really making it much more of a public communications document. >> so what i would recommend is that, first of all, we make it part of the process of evaluating projects and we'll give the format of each one, you have to explain the pros and cons so we have that document. because i want to make it part of a process of giving your project delivered and not check a box. what we can do is just pull those reports out of each one of the projects if you want to showcase that or showcase the calculations, i just want to have it -- i want to identify it as a tool that we have and we use it on all the projects that, you know, and if it is a project that you don't use it,

you explain why you're not using it on the promise. it's required on every project. you just have to say well this doesn't -- you know, you get an exemption or whatever it is because it's a study. so i think that is probably the best way to move forward. so maybe what we can do is present a format so that you guys can see if it meets and be able to elevate what we're doing. i think the t.b.l., the process we were doing is great and i think we should showcase it. >> yeah. and sorry, one other question on the t.b.l. and it is part of the evolution of this kind of work which i think is very dynamic and i already think we're in a leadership position of doing. which is almost like, you know, looking at monetizing and valuing additional benefits that are not purely financial, if you will. and i don't know if that's

really been done. if we look at something like public safety, for example. there's actually a cost to that. right? and so it's this question and we were talking a little bit about it around the green infrastructure space. you know, how to really, you know, quantify from a financial perspective some of the nonfinancial benefits. whether it is the social benefits or environmentletal benefits. just as something in the t.b.l. model and i don't know if this goes back to the people who designed it or what have you. but as an additional evolution because that starts to shift it a little bit, too, when you factor in some of the financial costs of the nonfinancial components of the triple bottom line. right? the environmental and social benefits. so kiemds of want to plant that seed because i feel like that's industry and what we're looking at and it speaks to a lot of people and could have implications, positive implications from a communications perspective to our rate payers. to be able to say, look, we're

really analyzing this and seeing additional financial savings and benefit to you in this environmental and social space and it is why we selected this project. does that make ?ens i'm not sure there is a direct request in there. >> i do understand what you're requesting. i know some software attempts to do that. i think one of the things that we wanted to be careful was putting a value on other -- because what you're asking for that once we monitorize the other, we can determine what is the best solution, the computer can calculate and recommend. >> some of it might be easier. >> i understand. it's hard when you have some that has and some not. but i think you pointed uts to

some software that is actually trying to do it. and we talked about it with the -- actually, this model is really detailed and specific to san francisco and we spent a lot of resources of making it that way. we'll look to other software and sort of move in that direction because it kind of helps get the subjectivety out of it. >> and i think we'd have to definitely think about it. one thing i didn't go into are all the underlying metrics that are in here. the e.g.a. areas where we've had bike accidents or there's pedestrian fatalities. so many layers that i'm not sure there is a direct match. so i think we have a lot to think about that. >> i think it is the next evolution of this work. i appreciate where we are and i think there is good work ahead. thank you. >> before public comment, i want to say this work is really great on the public side, too,

because your work is givesen equitable access to information and also the process. some people are overwhelmed by all the factors that go into metrics and analysis and i feel like they somehow quantify this. so you've done great work there. before you sit, i want to ask is there any public comment on this item here? all right. >> [inaudible] and it's called k-i-s-s. keep it simple, stupid. so in the year 2002, we had a bond merger to address both the water system and the sewer system. this commission, after the people voted to have both to be addressed, let the community down. the focus on the water system improvement project and only

very recently raised the sewer system improvement project. now of all the factors at rest over there, you can review your presentation. no mention is made of health. now when the experts gather together for this t.b.l., chronologically, they have to be educated on issues. some of you do. and that's the expertise that comes into water treatment plants, sewer plants, how does it benefit the community at large? now if you look at your own promise, proprietary in some norwegian or swedish company when we had the same type of

expertise here in the united states of america, and if you look at it in any timeline, it hasn't met its goals. how does that factor into your t.b.l.? now if you go by the treatment plant, there's no much improvement in the stench. and the environment, how does that factor into your t.b.l.? can you put a price on the health of a child that dies? how does that factor the t.b.l.? t. b.l. is good for engineers and some philosophers, some people who like to dip into the muddy waters and then filter it somehow. that's fine.

but when dealing with this kind of infrastructure, and this comes from my experience with the maintenance, technical and support group and real estate and property management group, you have always to have in mind quality of life issues that improve human beings. thank you very much. >> all right. thank you. any other public comment on this item? i think you had a couple of comments. >> the second item is the waste water capital program report. and we did go through our hearing i believe a couple of meetings ago to do our updates. at this time, we do not have any deviation. if we can bring up the slides, please. pull up the slide. so this is my last commission

meeting. this is my last of the day of physically being, well, at the p.u.c. and it's been an absolute pleasure being part of this. longer than i thought i would hfp-it has been nine years of doing this so it's been wonderful to see all the progress and wonderful people we have on board and it's been an honor working with all of you and having your support. i was lucky enough to work on a few other capital programs, too. the power, water, wesip and this was sort of the whipped cream and cherry on top of the entire fun because the waste water system is just a wonderful system, lots of great people in waste water enterprise. so it is time for me to head out to france and portugal. so i will check in with everyone at the end of the summer.

>> i would like to say, you know, this is, as you know, karen's last report to the commission and karen and i go way back. i won't say how way back we go. but we are at the d.p.w. and, you know, she worked on a lot of amazing promises and she was working on the clean water program back in those days and there was a point in time in 1996 where she decided to follow the p.u.c. and andy was part of that whole effort of separating er from d.p.w. where her home was and where i was at. and she actually left and then she came over here and she really was the architect of the water system improvement

program because she actually started the project management bureau and she hired a lot of the project managers at the time and it was just amazing the work that she was able to do. when she came over, she said that the p.u.c. had money and d.p.w. didn't -- [laughter] so i followed her lead and when i came over here, to work with her, it was a great -- because she actually helped me kind of get up to speed and then she decided to leave and go work for the consultant for a year. and then she found the light and came back. and then she started working on the power side, she worked on the power side. she worked on the water side. and so as an opportunity actually to run the sewer side,

and i thought i asked her, but the way she tells it that i told her. but she came and really dove right in. there is a culture there that the p.m.s and everyone really enjoy working on the sewer system. they have great pride. and i just wanted to say, i give a lot of credit to karen for, you know, bringing the team together. i think the program, you know, the capital programs are really, i think, well-tuned. especially the latest revisions that we've done. i feel very comfortable and confident in that and i just want to thank you for that. again, more importantly it is going to be hard for me not to see you because we have been working together for such a

long time and i'm personally going to miss you and i just wanted to tell you that here today. >> a round of applause. [applause] >> can i say something on behalf -- >> it a public comment on this item? >> yes. >> all right. >> the commission, as you know, karen is one of the few who have embraceds the bayview hunters point community answer i want to thank her for it. but i remember one project which i opposed and so did dr. espinola jackson and those were the combustion turbines. and i liked karen. she heard us and in the end, that project was killed and we

were supported by one commissioner, the ambassador to bosnia, but also a very experienced person in infrastructure and everything. karen has played an important role with a sewer system improvement project and tried to accommodate us, the constituents as best as she can. certain things are not her control so i wish her all the best and i wanted to thank you again on behalf of the bayview hunters point community for all of your hard work. god bless you. [applause] >> we're on 7d. >> yeah. so the last item, just wanted to give everyone an update. as you know, last tuesday the election happened. although we don't know who the mayor is.

we do know the results of prop a. and i just am so happy that prop a passed. in fact, it passed close to 80% and that will really help our power enterprise abilities to debt finance so we can invest and continue to deliver power to our customers and i just wanted to thank everyone for all the support and really encouraging us and the board to put it on the ballot. so, again, i want to thank everybody and just really happy that it passed. >> any public comment on what the general manager just reported on? ok. moving on. item eight. >> all right. the next item, recognition of -- where is he? oh, there he is. tracy, come up. so, tracy, come up, please.

so actually tracy has an interesting background. tracy yamaguchi, started her career in 1981. make sure i'm correct. and you were working as a secretary for the controller i.s.d. which is now known as d.t.e., right? and in '84, you were actually at the airport with the police commission -- airport police commission where you're actually responsible for getting tickets in front of the airport. now back then, they didn't have the security that they had right now, right? >> right. >> and they go and see her and take off. in fact, one took off and hit you, right? and since you decided this is not for me. so she was placed at the p.u.c. and you were working with the i.t. department and you were responsible for delivering and installing hummingbird, which is a product that i really didn't like. [laughter]

but now i see your point. and you also did a lot of g.i.s. support with the gate and c.d.d. and that was something that they really valued. and then you eventually returned back to the help desk and where is you really helped our customers on all their issues and then also you worked on streamlining the process with our mobile device acquisitions organization and distribution and track all of our mobil devices at the p.u.c., which in fact when i had to get a phone because i was going out of the country, at the last minute, someone would show up at my house and here's your phone. [laughter] so, now i know that during your retirement, you love animals and after 27 years, you are

going to spend most of your time. you already know what you are going to do. that's great. but you are going to volunteer at animal shelters and also work at the zoo. san francisco zoo. and you are going to travel and more importantly you are going to sleep. and not wake up at 4:00 a.m. right? so i just wanted to thank you for your service at. the p.u.c. and really, really enjoy your retirement. >> thank you very much. [applause] >> why don't you say something? [laughter] >> i'm not a public speaker, but thank you very much. i really enjoyed my time at the p.u.c. and i'm a little nervous about leaving but it's time to moves on. so, yeah. that's it. [applause] >> congratulations.

>> good. nice. one more. [applause] >> there any public comment on the retirement of tracy yamaguchi? congratulations and thank you very much for your service. but if you want to see some

cool animals, come to my day job. >> good idea. >> standing offer. no disrespect to our zoo neighbors. ok. item number nine. >> item nine is green infrastructure early implementation projects,:monitoring and lessons learned. >> a rough day for the p.u.c. here. we're going to miss karen and tracy immensely. good afternoon. brian henderson, acting a.g.m. for waste water. i'd like to introduce polly perkins who has a presentation for you on the green infrastructure monitoring program which you asked about in the past. and sarah blume who will talk about the first phase of the lessons learned on the first phase of our green infrastructure projects. the staff in the utility division, they have done a

great job documenting and analyzing these efforts so that we can use the results to continuously improve and i think you'll really like the presentations. thank you. >> thank you, brian. and hello, commissioners. my first time up here with you guys and i'm thrilled to be talk about green infrastructure monitoring. >> hopefully not your last. >> hopefully not my last. thank you. can we get those slides going, please? >> i'll be updating you on the e.i.p.s that have been monitored to date. they're highlighted here in blue. the wiggle neighborhood, green corridor has completed its monitoring. and we've finished the second year of the sunset boulevard as well, just this season. so each e.i.p. will be getting at least two years of monitoring.

and the -- i know summer just started but i live for storm water. looking ahead to the next winter rainy season we'll be monitoring mission valencia at green gateway and green street and once the final phase of the sunset boulevard project is built out, we'll be continuing to monitor there. our two main goals are to evaluate the performance of these projects and build knowledge on green infrastructure in san francisco. we're measuring the reduction in peak flow and storm water volume to determine if these facilities are performing as they were intended and designed. and we also want to use this information that we're gathering a feedback loop that helps inform green infrastructure project planning and design. but before we get into the e.i.. s, i wanted to take this opportunity to show you the result from the cesar chavez project. this is not an e.i.p., but it is a project that informed our

streetscapes synergy program which sarah blume will be talking about a little bit later. this is an opportunityistic project. partnership with the department of public works and it was built before our construction standards were in place. there's a few by retention that are smaller than we'd probably install today. despite that, we're seeing really great benefits for our sewer system. as you can see here, this project removes an average of 1.5 million gallons of storm water per year and we monitor this project during the 2014-15 rainy season, which if you recall was when san francisco experienced a sequence of very large storms that. makes these monitoring results particularly exciting because we got to measure how these build-outs performed during those storms. storms that exceeded the level of service. a number of the larger build-outs reduced those very large storms by up to 75%. [please stand by]