[applause] >> mayor breed: while. what a beautiful group of people. welcome to district five. [cheering] it has been a real honor to serve as a supervisor for the district that i was born and raised in. i am so excited today because this is a special community. it is a community that has had a challenging past. iit is a community that has consistently come together to solve our most challenging issues. it is a community that is such an amazing place, full of people who care about rolling up their

sleeves to get the job done. not only to make their neighborhood a better place, but to make san francisco a better place. so when i was thinking about someone who is just really a strong communicate just community advocate, someone who is focused on delivering for the residents of district five, i could think of no one better than valley brown. [cheers and applause] i first met valley brown over 15 years ago before she was even a legislative aide at city hall. she was actually in the lower elite with her own picker picking up trash. i thought, this really reminds me of what my grandmother used to do.

she used to clean the steps were relived. she used to make us clean up in our neighborhood and i thought, that is pretty amazing that someone would just take it upon themselves to go out there and clean up the community. she has been actively engaged, not just in her area where she has lived for so many years, but she has touched the lives of so many people across the entire district. when i reached out to residents in this neighborhood for feedback on someone to replace me as the district five supervisor, time and time again, i heard people tell me stories about what vallie has done to help them, to basically help plant a tree or remove a tree that was dead, to deal with a pothole, or to help here in the western addition with many of the challenges that you all know we face when we were dealing with some of the worst violence in the history of our city.

vallie has been there for us. cavalli has rolled up her sleeves. [cheers and applause] to not only get the job done for folks throughout the district including as far out as the inner sunset, but she has focused on the broader issues. the issues around equity. the issues around neighborhood preference. she was by my side on putting together that legislation to deliver neighborhood preference for the residents of the city where people who live in the community have a right of first refusal and access to the affordable housing built in their community. because of the history of redevelopment and what has happened here, you had a fierce advocate on my team to fight for what was right. because of it, you know the results of the kennedy apartment. we are able to get 23 african

african-americans in the apartment at 39 of those 98 units went to residents of this community. time and time again, when reviewing legislation, vallie has been the eyes and ears of the community character she listens to the needs of our small businesses and community members, and she makes sure that when legislation is introduced, that she proposes amendments or raises questions, or other issues so that the legislation and the work we do at city hall can actually have a positive impact on our community. this playground where we are here today, she was instrumental in working with the hayes vallie neighborhood association. working with the western addition to bring the community together and to help with city resources to raise the funding and to make this a place where all feel welcome. that is what she is about. bringing people together.

covering all parts of the district. young people, seniors, everyone has a place in the vallie brown administration. i am just excited because -- and what some of you may or may not know, vallie brown worked for me as a legislative age. she worked for a previous supervisor as a legislative aide to. let me tell you. i don't know how many arguments i have had with her over decisions, regularly. she stands her ground. she stands her ground to do what is right and to do what makes sense for the people of this district. we will have no more fears of an advocate on the board of supervisors than the amazing vallie brown. it is my honor today -- [cheers and applause]

it is my honor today to administer the oath of office to my friend and a friend of our district, vallie brown. [cheers and applause] [laughter] >> mayor breed: ok. do we want to do it in the microphone? ok. all right. come on, vallie. come on. hang on. i'll just hold it. >> mayor breed: i vallie brown. >> i vallie brown. >> mayor breed: do solemnly swear. >> do solemnly swear. >> mayor breed: that i will support and defend. >> that support and defend. >> mayor breed: the state of

california. >> the state of california. >> mayor breed: against all enemies. >> against all enemies. >> mayor breed: foreign and domestic. >> foreign and domestic. >> mayor breed: that i bear true faith and allegiance to the constitution of the united states. >> that i bear true faith and allegiance to the constitution of the united states. >> mayor breed: and california and i take this obligation freely without any mentor -- mental reservation. >> and that i take this obligation freely without any mental reservation. >> mayor breed: i will well and faithfully discharge. >> i will well and faithfully discharge. >> mayor breed: the duties upon which i'm about to enter. >> the duties upon which i'm about to enter. >> mayor breed: and i hold the office -- i hold the office of member of the board of supervisors. >> and i hold the office of a member of the board of supervisors. >> mayor breed: and the san francisco county transportation authority. >> and the san francisco county transportation authority. >> mayor breed: of the city

and county of san francisco san francisco. >> of the city and county of san francisco. >> mayor breed: congratulations. [cheers and applause] >> thank you. >> mayor breed: supervisor vallie brown! [cheers and applause] >> crazy. i have to take a deep breath. this has just been a few hours that i have even realized that i am actually going to be the supervisor. i am. thank you. thank you. i am sure that will not be the last time you tell me something i need to know. [laughter] but i am so honored to be here today with everyone that i respect and admire. mayor breed, thank you for your confidence and trust and appointing me as the district five supervisor. i know it wasn't easy for you. because we have so many amazing

residents and advocates. when you told me and when you called me and told me congratulations, supervisor brown, but you said, not even skipping a beat, you better take care of my district and residents --dash residents. i knew that was the reason why it came to work for you in the first place. it is amazing to be at hayes vallie playground. everyone, this is such an amazing thing. the buildings and the grounds are beautiful. i walk by this place every day when i come to work. i see the community tending the flowers, picking up the trash, and making it their community space. i will tell you a little history. we used to call the building that was here eight leading to. because i think, th the coordinr here held it together with duct tape. i was an aide when we received

bond money to renovate the building. unfortunately, we were short about half a million dollars. when the city's early budget was revealed, this funding was not in the budget. so we decided to put it in adds back. and as a supervisor snow here, $500,000 for one place and add back can be a really hard push. but we fought really hard for the funding. it was really the neighborhood association that activists and advocates in the fillmore, western edition, cheryl davis, and then mayor breed was ed of the arts and cultural complex. she came out to city hall in force. and got this through.

got this ad back through to actually build this building. and now it is absolutely beautiful. what i really was about this experience is that as your supervisor, i cannot do it alone. it is the community that makes it a reality. it will be you, the community, that helps guide me in city hall. hall. i am your voice in city hall. i moved to san francisco three decades ago. i was looking to create a community without other artists and like-minded people. we lived in warehouses throughout the city, but then, as now, we were evicted and pushed out. one landlord, in particular, a good landlord, came to me and said, why don't you pull your money together and by the place? 's own three friends i bought a place. it was falling down, but it was

our home. right now in san francisco, families, teachers, nonprofit workers, and bartenders, they are struggling to stay in san francisco. i am not seeing the same housing opportunities we had back then. even as artists with part-time jobs, we were able to pool our money together and buy something. keeping people housed in a neighborhood that they love and creating more housing, affordable housing, it will be one of my top priorities as a supervisor. not far from here, i started my community activism. we worked to create a supervisor -- supervisor breed mentioned we work to create a neighborhood association and we cling to the streets. we helped the school, the elementary school. we improve the public safety. we planted trees. i realized that the power of a community coming together to tackle issues in a neighborhood.

it wasn't easy. it taught me that it is possible. i also discovered that i love community work. yes. [laughter] i'm not sure i will -- it will always love me but i loved it. it really was my springboard to take the next step to work for the residents in district five as a legislative aide. for over a decade, i worked for two supervisors and with the city to improve the neighborhoods in district five. the life i built in san francisco is a very different one than the one i grew up with in utah. i grew up with a single mother working odd jobs to support me, my sister and my grandmother. i never knew my father. i knew the fear of not having stable housing. we moved often. one day, when i was at school, i overheard a girl tell everybody that my mom was a deadbeat mom and she didn't pay the rent.

that is when i realized that nothing is guaranteed to. by the time i was 14, my mother and my grandmother had passed away. and it took a community to raise me. so you can say, good or bad, i am a product of community development. [laughter] now i stand before you today, your community partner, your district supervisor, your neighbor. i am ready to jump in now. i'm ready to jump in to work with japan town, the valley, alamo square, and the fillmore. shout out! and inner sunset. ashbury, cold valley, i i think i said lower hayes. when avista, lower pack heights. thank you to residents of the

five. [cheers and applause] [♪]

[inaudible] >> supervisor fewer: thank you. moved by commissioner ronen and seconded by commissioner pollock. without objections, these minutes are approved. madam clerk, can you please call item number three. >> clerk: item three, community choice agreg ation activities report. >> good morning, commissioner, michael himes, director for the program for the sfpuc. y i have a verbal update for you today, and i'm going to cover

the usual items with a couple of additions. i'll speak to our enrollment, outreach and status of service to customers. i'll also provide a planning update and some legislative work that we're doing. i am joined by suzanne murkelson of our policy and affairs team to assist in that discussion later on. so with respect to enrollment service, cleanpowersf service and the currently enrollment effort continue to move along successfully. as we've discussed in previous meetings, this month, we're enrolling a large number of commercial and residential accounts into the cleanpowersf program, approximately 27,000 in total. i've been reporting that the opt out rate or percentage has

been 3.2% for the program year to date. the opt out rate for the group of customers being enrolled is 1.6%. when we account for these two pools in the previous customers and the new customers, the cumulative rate is 2.8. so i've been reporting on these different percentages going forward. future going forward we'll just have one consolidated cumulative opt out rates. we've also been reporting that our supergreen rate has been 4.2%. that's been fairly steady, and that is he ai anumber that we've built up to throughout the past couple of years through outreach to existing customers.

the current large enrollment effort will bring this number down a bit to 3.4%, so that's a reduction due to the fact that we're bringing on a large number of new accounts. but we do expect it'll come back up over time with our continued outreach efforts to customers to sign up for supergreen. and i'll pause there and pitch for anyone listening to sign up for supergreen and cleanpowersf, you can do so on cleanpowersf.org. on the outreach front, i wanted to provide a bit more information to you on this. our team is really doing a lot of work. cleanpowersf enrollment advertisements are up, they're on-line, they're on the radio, and they're in print. our early data indicates that our digital ads are performing really well, and above our sort

of industry average metrics. i also wanted to comment specifically to outreach to communities of limited english proficiency. this came up at the last meeting. i just want to comment on a few things that we're doing to address this. we have program overview brochures that are in spanish and chinese. we're also in the process of translating them into filipino right now. we have print ads that are running in spanish and chinese language periodicals. our website is also being translated into spanish, chinese and filipino, and we expect that to be fully live this fall, and that's -- just in terms of timing, this is ahead of the residential focused enrollment which we're

targeting for spring of next year, so we're making a big push right now to make sure that we can communicate to our population. we're also looking at additional language -- languages for the website, including vietnamese and korean. we will of course partner with community groups ahead of that enrollment, that up coming residential enrollment. and then, one other thing that i wanted to comment on, and this is partly based on our discussion last time, we're looking into translating the joint rate mailer, and i think that was some feedback that we got. it'll either be a direct translation of that document or some other version of it that'll use that information, so you know, thanks for that input. and then, you know, something -- we talked a little bit about lafco and the executive director's work plan. i know that we'll have some

ongoing conversations, but we'd be interested in exploring further opportunities for programming around equity issues and disadvantaged communities, it's something that the p.u.c.'s already working on, but i think this could be another great area of collaboration. and in that convenient, cleanpowersf actually hosted an sf fellows. it's a fellowship program that the city runs, group praj that examined outreach to disadvantaged communities, so we'd love to build on that experience? a few other outreach items. as you're probably aware, the governor's global climate summit will be held in san francisco in september, so we're doing a lot of work around that. for example, we're hoping to have some supergreen customer announcements and press releases around that time. we're also going to be doing

social media and paid advertising campaigns to really encourage supergreen upgrades. i think a lot of what we're going to be working on is focusing on supergreen and using that opportunity to try to galvanize folks around taking that step. cleanpowersf is also a sponsor of the sf green film festival, and as part of that sponsorship of a film screening, there'll be a panel on green climate and climate change. and some other activities that are ongoing, we've done them in the past, we're sponsoring events including the golden gate electric vehicle association meeting. that's an annual event. and sunday streets. we table all the sunday streets. we've been doing phone banking

with the sierra club and 350 sf -- excuse me, 350 bay area, and those have been one really excellent vehicle for us to get these sign ups to supergreen. and then, we're doing presentations to various associations throughout the city, especially business associations now that we're doing this very commercial focused enrollment. so that's on the outreach front. with respect to contracting, and i wanted to inform you of one specific action that's underway. on tuesday, we presented to the board's government audit and oversight committee, a resolution to authorize an amendment to cs 247-r. that's a contract with calpine energy service solutions? under that contract, calpine provides essential business services to the cleanpowersf program, including meter data

management, billing, and customer service? and part of the customer service element, calpine staff manages a paul center for the cleanpowersf program. the initial contract under cs 247-r was awarded in november 2015. it featured a three-year term and provided the city with options to extend the contract for two additional three-year terms, so we're looking to exercise one of those extensions. and -- and calpine supported the support since its launch in may of 2016, and this is really sort of a critical time, obviously, because we're growing the program, so having a business continuity of these services is really important. the extension -- the total value of the contract extension will be approximately $18.8 million. the contract costs are based on the number of customers served by the program and supported by

the contractor. it's a peraccount service, which is why the overall size of the contract's going up. as part of this process, though, we did negotiation a price reduction, and that's going to amount to about $2.2 million in savings during the term of the contract. and, you know, wanting to comment, too, that this extension, you know, it ensures continuity of really critical business services for the program during the enrollment period. it's also going to provide time for the sfpuc to further develop internal resources and capabilities to in-house some of these functions? and in particular during this next three-year term we intend to do that with the call center, so as part of that, p.u.c.'s budget has included new positions to start staffing a call center within the p.u.c.

to support cleanpowersf, so that work is all underway. in fact, the contractor, through its local business enterprise requirement, is now placed for customer service representatives in the sfpuc, which will start picking up the phones for cleanpowersf probably beginning in august? so we're very excited about this development, and it's really heading in the direction that the city intended? so last point on this is that this item will be in front of the full board next tuesday. and then, on the regulatory and program planning front, i wanted to let you know that our team, our staff have been working on an integrated resource plan or i.r.p. for the cleanpowersf program. an i.r.p. is a plan to examine how an electric service provider can cost effectively and reliablely meet its future

needs while also meeting other program goals and objectives? the i.r.p.'s required under state law, and it's also a policy of the sfpuc that we prepare an i.r.p. every two years. this is good utility business practice, and the power enterprise for our public utility operation has also done this and completed a draft late last year. we retained the engineering firm black and fee at technical consult -- as technical consultants to conduct the i.r.p. analysis and support the draft report. the -- you know, the intent, again, of this analysis is to help the cleanpowersf program and to help the p.u.c. make its form procurement decisions as it embarks on full enrollment and scales up its program demand? it's intended to identify resources and actions that will help us meet city and statewide

mandates when it comes to renewable energy and greenhouse gas reductions? we do have a draft of that i.r.p. report, and we will share that with the lafco? and i am suggesting we present on the i.r.p. work at one of lafco's up coming meetings. and i also wanted to mention on the requirement side, the cpuc has responsibility for overseeing the i.r.p. process for retail sellers. that includes the investor and utilities and c.c.a. cleanpowersf. and they adopted a decision in february that required a compliance filing on this in august, so we are going to be submitting a compliance filing on the i.r.p. in august. but one thing i want to emphasize is this is the i.r.p. process is a living process.

it's an ongoing process, so there's a lot of opportunity to engage on this. we'll be preparing a report every two years. so any way, i want -- i want to introduce that to you because i think it's something that we can have quite a bit more discussions about going forward. >> and that concludes my report. >> supervisor fewer: i-- [inaudible] >> yes, it did. >> supervisor fewer: as cs 27-r. >> cs 247-r. >> supervisor fewer: and then, another thing with the call center, there'll be people that can speak different languages? >> yes. >> supervisor fewer: and which languages are those? >> let's see...i think it covers all of the language ordinance requirements, but

even beyond spanish, chinese -- i believe we have russian, tagalog. i would need to take another look to get you the whole list, but it's about six different languages that are supported. >> supervisor fewer: okay. that's great. >> and to be clear, the staff that are placed in the p.u.c. right now don't cover all of those languages themselves? we do outsource language translation services if needed? >> supervisor fewer: okay. got it. that's great. seeing no comments, let's open this up for public comment. any public speakers, thank you, mr. hyams. hello, mr. brooks. >> hello. eric brooks, san francisco clean energy advocate and californiians for energy choice. so i just want to focus on state level legislation. thank you for in your last meeting putting a stop or saying no to ab 813.

that was really crucial. the one that you've got on your agenda, sb 247 would be even more damaging to community choice. i was a little bit late and missed some of the presentation from the sfpuc, but the last conversation the advocates had with the sfpuc, it didn't look very promising to get them on board to hope oppose these bills and help get cal c.c.a. to oppose these bills. they're an agency that has very specific focus on its own internal needs and objectives. san francisco public utilities commission especially, and also, other existing c.c.a.s are pretty much only looking out for their own back yard and they're not thinking about these bigger implications of these bills, and that's how we ended up with this vote at cal c.c.a. where seven of the people that voted supported ab

813 and five of them were, you know, were -- basically decided to abstain. one of those that supported it -- i can't name, but one of the ones that voted in support has actually change his mind so they didn't really even pass this at cal c.c.a. however without pressure from the sfpuc and real proactive action from the sfpuc, we're going to have a very hard time, and the only reason ab 813 got out of committee is because cal c.c.a. supported it. the lejs laytors said so. so we -- legislators said so. so we need you to get them on board on the public front. >> supervisor fewer: all right. thank you. any other public comment? seeing none, public comment is now closed. colleagues, comments, questions? nothing? i would just say to mr. hyams

that it would be helpful to have a written document to follow just because we have a lot of different -- i mean, i think when you're telling us verbally, i don't know about my colleagues, it's just easy toer follow when there's a written document for -- easier to follow when there's a written document for us to follow. now there's no further action on this matter. madam clerk, can you call item number four? [agenda item read] >> supervisor fewer: thank you, and i see our executive officer, brian goebel, to address this item. and teresa strickler is reaccusing herself. thank you. mr. gobel. >> i just want to give you an update of the proposal for lafco public services.

i have a draft r.f.p. that will be sent out in the next week or so. since the contract language for legal services hasn't been updated in many years, i've just needed a little time so review the duty so that i can be thorough in the r.f.p. i should have a significant update at our next meeting on sept 21 as the r.f.p. would probably have been issued by then and we probably would have received submissions, and i expect the whole process to be completed by november . >> supervisor fewer: thank you, mr. gobel. commissioner pollock? >> commissioner pollock: thank you so much for working on this. i know we have been long overdue to take a look at our legal services. in the last meeting that we had, i had made some comments that in past years that our legal services specifically with ms. miller, that it was hard to know if there was a conflict of interest, and i just wanted to clarify my

comments from the last time, which was this was in regard to the last time when there was a stall at the sfpuc in terms of the commission and we were asking for legal advice then. so it's not been in the recent years, and i just wanted to make sure that that was well -- that that was noted and that you understood that it wasn't a recent issue. >> okay. >> commissioner pollock: okay. >> thank you for the clarification. >> commissioner pollock: thank you. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. okay. let's open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public? hi, michael. how are you today? >> legal services should also be applied to the most vulnerable disadvantaged people to the city, people with disabilities, both mental and physical and wheelchairs and our veterans. the city is making millions off the backs of this class of people, and it's not fair. for example, the wynton hotel went for about 30 years, numerous health and safety code violations and violations of the americans with disability

act. i got put in that building by barbara garcia, and i stayed in that building for five months. as a result, i had to conduct my own investigation and standup for my rights and the rights of other people who were living in the building nine and ten and 15 years. turns out a white skinned colored male to my right, he'd been living in that building for 12 years. hundreds of bed bugs, roaches, mice, all in his apartment. black skinned colored male to my right had been living in the building seven years, same living conditions. was wondering where this infestation was coming from because both of these people both sides of me, not coming from me. so i ended up filing a complaint. and as a result, investigators came town. high team's looking at me like i'm crazy, saying we've got the best building we've got. i said if that's the best building you've got, i'd hate to see the worst building you've got. and then, i got a call from the health department saying the

attorney general wants to use my testimony in a lawsuit. then, you used it and you sued the family for $1.5 million, and they don't get one penny. i had a heated discussion with the director about that. you should have gotten money for people living in those conditions. it turns out senior citizens were living like that get. now, it turns out you're doing that again. you need representation for people who are actually on the receiving end and punishment of those kind of violations. >> supervisor fewer: thank you, michael. seeing no other -- oh, yes. >> sorry. so eric brooks with our city san francisco, san francisco green party, and the clean energy groups i mentioned earlier. i would agree with the commissioner that in -- in her comments that the relationship between legal and cleanpowersf

moving forward has been a lot better recently, but i do want to reiterate what i said the last time, which is that especially when we're getting into public banks and what to do about housing and homelessness and issues like that, where financial interests are directly involved, especially in the housing and homelessness issue, it's really vital that we have a law firm that is local, here in our community, that has to give a darn about the community and has to be responsive to pressure from the community and accountable, so i would hope that's where we end up, and also with a firm that hopefully is less -- more into public good and things like that and lesser into things like real estate interests. thanks. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. seeing no other public speakers, public comment is now closed. no action needs to be taken on this matter. madam clerk, can you please call item number five. >> clerk: item five, update on

state lemgs lation. california assembly bill 813 and california senate bill 237. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. mr. gobel, i believe you have a presentation. >> madam president, i do. i just wanted to give you an update on 813. at the last meeting, you wanted me to provide a letter of opposition from lafco. i've prepared that and it'll be going out today in advance of the 'emly appropriations hearing in midaugust. the -- assembly appropriations hearing in midaugust. the other thing i wanted to talk about today is sb 237. the legislation by southern california senator bob hertzberg also scheduled to be heard in the appropriations committee next month on the assembly side. i have been taking a look at this. environmental and clean energy advocates say this legislation really poses a direct threat to

community choice energy programs across the state. it could certainly take a chunk of business away from cleanpowersf. that's because it would essentially lift the cap on the amount of electric service commercial and industrial customers can directly acquire from energy service providers. so these customers who would normally signed up with investor owned utilities or c.c.a. programs could choose to directly purchase power that would likely be or could be cheaper dirty energy. historically, direct access customers from real -- have really done the bare minimum to comply with the carbonization mandates in contrast to c.c.a. which are collectively exceeding these mandates. so it could harm california's climate goals and san

francisco's climate and renewable energy goals. cal c.c.a., our association of community choice energy programs has argued that this bill may cause california energy markets to race to the bottom for the cheapest power that barely meets state mandates. and they argue that it would lead to higher greenhouse gas emissions. commissioners, i could agree with the commission's greenhouse gas assessments, and i would ask that you authorize me to write a letter of opposition on behalf of lafco. suzanne merkelson is here also if you have any questions. >> supervisor fewer: thank you so much. commissioner pollock? >> commissioner pollock: thank you so much. mr. gobel, just looking at the draft letter for 813, has that already gone out? >> it has not. >> commissioner pollock: i

want to ask if there's any way we could add language that sort of gives it a time stamp in terms of noting that we're opposing the legislation as it's written because i know that the sfpuc is -- and others are talking about some amendments to add. and so just to give, you know, that -- some air in the room in terms of the room that they're doing is to just clarify that we're -- guewe are opposing it it's written at a later date -- you don't need to put this part in the letter, but at a later date, we may become neutral or change our position on that. >> okay. i'll be happy to do that, and i'll also confer with miss merkelson from the p.u.c. >> commissioner pollock: thank you, and i would trust you on the language that went out. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. is it miss merkelson? so on sb 237, could you give us

sort of the view of the p.u.c. or the opinion of the p.u.c. >> sure. at this point, we don't have a position on the bill? we find that it's -- you know, we have concerns about the bill and cal c.c.a. shares those concerns especially regarding decarbonization? and -- oh, thank you. so we think it's actually preferable and more strategic and effective to let environmental and at -- like, consumer ad row cass see organizations lead on this. we're supporting them, we're working with them, including sierra club, turn, 350.org. so this bill would only impact commercial customers, it would not impact residential customers? and you know, we see these community choice programs are choice, and we're already competing with the i.o.u.s, so we'll have to do our best to compete with direct access providers should this bill pass. >> supervisor fewer: okay.

thank you very much. commissioners? commissioner pollock? no. any comments? none at all. let's hear from our public comment speakers, please. >> yes. eric brooks again, san francisco clean energy advocates and californiians for clean energy choice. i really have to strongly challenge what i just heard from sfpuc staff. the only reason ab 813 got out of committee is that cal c.c.a. did not opposed it. had they opposed 237 in committee, it might have been held back in committee or at least would have gotten less votes which gives us a stronger ability to kill it in the future. i really -- and the idea that being in a neutral position and claiming that you're working with environmental groups that have an opposed position, when

your agency, your trade association is the reason that these bills are moving forward, is not legitimate. and i'm sorry to get back into a position to have to strongly challenge the sfpuc, but this is one of those times. if direct access is opened up, every large city that has large commercial and industrial customers, especially those that have not established community choice yet, all of those companies will be decimated. all the companies will leave even if they're getting clean energy because they're getting a better deal with bigger companies with lower economies of scale. so this is not really good. we need the board of supervisors to pressure the sfpuc. i'll mention this more on future agenda items, but these bills are now being conegotiated with some fire bills that i've notified the chair about and the executive officer.

sb 1088, ab 33, and sb 901 that would all take the liability of companies like pg&e for fire damage that they cause and put it on consumers. so i'll talk more about that on the next items. >> supervisor fewer: okay. thank you very much. >> my statement is related to senate bills, as well, but not the ones that's on point here. but you have senate bills by david chiu pertaining to testing assault kits, information has produced facts that there's a minimum of 1,600 untested assault kits. i suspect there's at least maybe -- no, 1,600 assault kits -- no, 16,000 assault kits that hasn't been tested. i suspect there's about 1,000 or more kits sitting at the hall of justice. i made a demonstration before the police commission, and you

should create an additional bill to follow up on that $2 million that was given to the police department to test those assault kits. assault kits, i believe, wasn't put into the electronic codis systems. i talked to one of the police officers, he says they are. and i believe that the backlog that they admit that they have need to be tested, so i believe there should be some bills and legislations to enforce that because my demonstration pertained to continual injury where they're under the impression that those old kits cannot be tested because of the statute of limitations is a false narrative. and if you do so, i'll predict that numerous assaulters will be caught because of the d.n.a. evidence. those are the most easiest kind of cases to prove because they've got your fingerprint of your body fluids, your sperm and your fingerprints and skill

cells within that assault kit, and they're sitting on a shelf at the hall of justice. it's not fair to the female victims. i suspect mr. deangelo, you've got his evidence in other cases because you haven't tested all the kits. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. commissioners, questions, comments, would anyone like to make a motion? yes, commissioner pollock? >> commissioner pollock: a question for mr. gobel in terms of senate bill 237. is there an idea when this will actually have a vote? is it a two-year bill? it's gotten out of committee, so do you know if it's been agendaized? very least that

we could actually write a letter because we can't speak for the san francisco board of supervisors, but we can actually speak for san francisco lafco, that on behalf of the san francisco lafco, we would write an opposition letter. >> commissioners, i would happy to work with you and your staff to draft that letter and send it out as soon as possible. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. miss wong, do we need to have a vote on that to take action on that. >> clerk: no, not required. >> supervisor fewer: okay. thank you very much. so let's call item number six, please. >> clerk: item number six, executive officer's report on executive officer work plan update, emerging mobility services update, and cleanpowersf 2.0 service

updates. >> supervisor fewer: hello, mr. gobel. >> hello, madam chair, commissioners. i have a few updates, starting with the work plan which i approved at the last meeting. first of all, i wanted to let you know that i have been meeting exami meeting and talking with staff. we are mandated to monitor cleanpowersf, but the language in the m.o.u. in the original 2007 ordinance which commissioner pollock, we talked a little bit about at the last meeting, was written cleanpowersf started and really addressed lafco's role in the program's beginning stages. what i wrote in the work plan was my assessment after reviewing the m.o.u. and the ordinance, but i think it's probably time for that language to be updated, so what i would like to propose is that i

continue to meet with sfpuc staff advocates, your staff, to come up with some more detailed language on how lafco will continue its important role monitoring cleanpowersf, how we can effectively work together and then update the work plan language and bring it back to you for approval after the august recess. >> supervisor fewer: great. >> second, at the last meeting, commissioner pollock directed me to move forward on an r.f.p. study on c.c.a. 2.0 or the next face of cleanpowersf. quite frankly, as the new executive officer, i'm still trying to understand what c.c.a. 2.0 means, but i think in the broader sense, it gets us thinking about the future of cleanpowersf and energy independance in san francisco. so as we consider cleanpowersf's future and addressing your request for a clean -- c.c.a. 2.0 study,

commissioner pollock, one idea that briefly emerged was how cleanpowersf can develop more programs for disadvantaged communities it would identify what under privileged meaned in a c.c.a. context and generate a list of program ideas. if we did this, it would be very useful for other c.c.a. programs across california. so i haven't really had an opportunity to get into detail on this, but this is something i've discussed with the sfpuc staff and with some of your staff, commissioners, and i wanted to call your attention to it today. i'd be happy to develop a scope for this and bring it back for your approval if you're interested in pursuing it. finally, i wanted to briefly update you on the study on mobility services. i had a chance to meet with

staff from the san francisco county transportation authority, and i'm working right now on completing a draft scope. hope to have that ready in the next few weeks, and i will have a presentation for you on the scope at our september 21 meeting, thank you at the last meeting, commissioner ronen, you asked me to include in that study how we can help taxi drivers who are struggling to payoff their medallion loans. so today, i'd like to ask for direction on this. the m.t.a. as you know hired a consultant which has produced a draft report on how to improve the health of the taxi industry, and they do address briefly in their report some of the issues that medallion holders are having in terms of struggling to pay their loans. what i would like to propose is instead of doing a separate study on this, is that i

analyze the m.t.a.'s report and other work that has been done in this area and come up with our own list of recommendations on how to help these drivers. so i'm proposing to do this separate from the study on emerging mobility services and labor. and lafco is authorized to do this work under our special studies authority. so with that, madam chair, i'll turn it back to you. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. commissioner ronen. >> supervisor ronen: thank you. that might work. i -- what i -- i want to provide some relief to particularly the group of taxi drivers who bought their medallion at a very high cost, right when its value basically plummeted. and i -- i -- i -- i -- i'd move to ask chair fewer perhaps

to talk a little bit about your conversations with these workers and with the m.t.a. because i know you've done quite a bit of work to give some feedback because the report that you referred to, it -- my sense of it is it's not going to help those workers to the degree that they need help, and they're -- they're in dire straits. >> supervisor fewer: so i agree. >> supervisor ronen: yeah, go ahead. >> supervisor fewer: i have to say, that report is inadequate. after reviewing that report, it doesn't give them any relief, and actually, it doesn't explore how the m.t.a. could give them financial relief, which i think they shied away from. i think after speaking with the director of the m.t.a., it is his position that they will not offer financial relief but rather incentives to make the

medallions more valuable, and i think quite frankly we are we're at a point where the medallions have lost all value. so i welcome a deeper analysis. i cannot believe we are the only city that are suffering under this, the impact -- the financial impact of t.n.c.'s. so if you could expand your search to the medallion sales in cities such as new york, which their taxi drivers are suffering from the same thing, too. that if you could look at these same types of situations where they have sold these to taxi drivers, and they have found these permits now or medallions are a burden, but there's no

way to give more value to the medallions or the permits. i think that's the situation we're under, and so we can compare and bring some ideas forth. i think we waited for the study. i think i found the study wanting and also inadequate, so i welcome a fresh set of eyes at it in a deeper analysis to do that work. and so if you don't mind, mr. gobel, i actually think this is something we're very much involved in. if it's within the scope of lafco, even better. commissioner pollock? >> commissioner pollock: thank you so much. it's so good to hear commissioner ronen and fewer's comments about just clarifying the need and the importance and the sort of gap in and what the m.t.a. study is really getting at. and so i would support doing a separate study where you do analyze -- you analyze the