process. like you said, the 8s and the 99r, it's a really good problem to have as far as from a sustainability standpoint. it's great that there are so many people that want to ride that service and we have to find a way to get them better and more frequent service and reduce some of that crowding. but we heard the same comments that you just said add news nauseam, numerous times over the last six months so. >> out of curiosity. since you switched to the 60-foot bus on the 9s, i kid you not there was a fight. >> i believe it. so, the incidents have gone down. we get -- if an operator reports that one of the patrons calls our 3-1-1 system and tells us there was a fiesing -- there was a fight on there, we have noticed that the numbers have gone. it's self-report so ited's hard to say that definitely the

numbers have gone down. but it seems to be in a downward trend, as does crowding on the line. i think those really kind of go hand in hand. if you are not face-to-face with somebody all the time, everybody can move out and tensions can decrease a little bit. not just the 9r. but we have seen less incidents over the last several months after we implemented that. >> thank you. that's all. >> commissioner brown? >> i see that the western edition is one of your focus neighborhoods and i was actually in supervisor breed's office as a legislative aide when this process started. and i know you were out in the western edition a lot. and community centers talking to the seniors and there were a few things -- first of all, i don't see anything on here, on your list of what you are going to do, improvements for the

western edition. i didn't see it on your list. that is number one. and then number two, and then i'll let you answer the questions. and then number two, as i know there were a lot of the seniors had a lot of issues around that area. you know, we have a lot of the h.u.d. properties, senior sfrrs. we were moving bus stops at the time and they felt like walk ago few blocks for seniors was hard, especially if there is an increase in climb. and then the second was of safety. because a lot of the bus stops were in dark areas and they didn't feel safe going to the bus stop or being let off on the bus stop. when it was dark. can you address that and let me know what is happening with the western edition since it wasn't on your list? >> you bet. so, western edition has been really the focus -- in 2016, we

implemented the 5r service in relation to the equity strategy. drastically increased ridership and reduced crowding just like on the 9-r and we've continued to work on mcallister street and fulton for that matter to improve those services. and we're looking at improving, making some small-captal adjustments and the 31 balboa, for example, is that on that list. it's indian daughtered with stop signs, especially outer portion of the line which throws it off getting through the western addition. one of the things we serious doing is working on improving reliability and frequency of the 31.

we're rolling out new signage at our stops that include a small that include a new beacon of light at the stop of the stop sign. really am by cents light. -- ambient light. there is more safety with eyes on the street type of idea. there's probably people waiting there, that time of thing. but we don't have a program right now, at least of developing, you know, electrical capabilities at every stop. where we do have electrical capabilities, we've been putting in nex bus, for example, and work on putting out a new nex bus in the future with solar panels and solar way to light the next -- unfortunately that takes a lot of power. so that is something we need to find a way of addressing specifically in viz valley and a lot of neighborhoods that we're talking about. especially safety issues

waiting for the bus x amount of sometime a real issue and something we need to work on. >> thank you, commissioner brown. and thank you, again, mr. kennedy s. there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed and this is an information item. can you please read the next item? >> item 15, update on the district 10 mobility study. this is an information item. >> ms. hyatt. >> good morning, commissioners. rachel hyatt. rachel hyatt principle planner and this is a status report on the district 10 mobilities study which is the district 10 end tip planning project and the big picture here is supporting health and livability throughout district

10 as it grows. so a significant share of the growth in residence in the city will happen in district 10 and this is an effort to look at ways to support the mobility of existing and future residents through this growth to support health and livability by reducing vehicle miles of travel, strategis that reduce vehicle miles of travel and are independent of muni. talking about noninfrastructure strategies in addition to that would supplement muni service. these are recommendations that could be deployed as pilots in district 10. could be included in developer strategies, to help them meet their trick caps in major development areas or as pilots sponsored by the private sector. we are building off the needs that we know. there's been a lot of planning in transportation planning in district 10 in recent years and

so we've heard a lots from the community about what their needs are. we're not starting from scratch there. we are coordinating with the studis that have been done in district 10. the equity strategies, starting with them, starting with the bayview neighborhood transportation plan that this agency conducted in 2010, working with m.t.a. and their parallel plan, the community transportation plan at the bayview, we're working closely together with m.t.a. on these compatible efforts. we just wrapped up outreach events in june and july, including in spanish and we partnered with the community use stror do the language outreach. and the purpose of this work was to engage residents in sort

of imagining and creating a transportation sthafs would meet a need that they have. so, we drew pictures and designs with residents, a transportation service that would address a particular trip that they have. and coming out of that is about 25 different ideas. so to inspire folks going into exercise, we sort of suggested four types of categories. the first is emerging mobilities and on-demand transportation services. like car sharing, scooter sharing, like micro transit and we heard a lot of interest in microtransit. we heard a lot of interests in car sharing, this time of on-demand service to supplement muni for things like senior travel or for use of school or recreational travel.

we also looked to gauge interest in tools that would support people's trip making, make their trip planning and way finding easier. i guess the name for these types of tools could be moenlt as a service. what that means is tools that support tripen mraiing, trip payment, navigation all through one interface and weave your elements of your trip together and show you different options. these can be tools on your phone, on your smart phone or on the street through a kiosk and there are photos there from chicago and from brooklyn where they're piloting kiosks that support transportation and other services. another type of strategy,

noninfrastructure strategy that we're looking to gain interest in is rewards and incentives. such as bart perks but expanding that idea to other types of trip making and types of trip purposes, other travelers. we did hear one of the participants in our group was enthusiastic about a program in his workplace where he gets amazon reward for taking transit and there was interest in rewards. people getting rewards for local businesses, for instance, for taking transit. and lastly, and this really applies to any of the type of strategis that we're talking about in this effort, partnerships between community organizations and the entitis that would implement these strategies like developers and

like the service -- private service providers themselves. like the transportation coordinators who will be designated in many development areas there. will be transportation coordinator, identified on site. is there a way to expand the reach of those services beyond the development areas. we heard interest in that in the outreach that we've just done. no that we've heard and created, i guess, communities about 25 different ideas. we need to screen those and identify the parties and the partnerships that would help implement them. whether it is a developer resources, whether it's private services that could help sponsor the efforts, put those teams together and work on refining the ideas. we will bring back more finite

set of strategies and the teams that would help to make them a reality. and we will bring recommendations, final recommendations by the end of the year. thank you very much. happy to take any questions. >> are there any questions for ms. hyatt? i thought maybe commissioner cohen might have some questions for you, but she is off the floor. so why don't we open this up to public comment. is there any members or members of the public that would like to comment? seeing none, public comment is closed and commissioner cohen has no questions so thank you for your report. and with that, we will read the next item. >> item 16, investment report and debt expenditure report for the quarter ended june 30, 2018. this is an information item.

>> ms. fong? >> this is typically the time when we report back on our quartzly investments and quarterly debt reporting and assets and liabilities. since we're approaching the close of june 30, 2018, we'll be reporting out our financial information later in november when we complete the annual fiscal audit. today aye like to report out how we're doing in our investments. as of june 30, 2018, we have approximately $43.6 million of cash sitting in the bank. 47% of the funds are invested in the city and county treasury pool. we alsos have sufficient liquidity in funds in terms of meeting our fiscal year 18-19 budget at this point in time. in terms of debt reporting, back in november of 2017, eight months ago, we issued the t.a.'s very first sales tax revenue bond. as of the first eight months,

we are approximately 43% spent on these bond proceeds. this is healthy for our program and we've been spending them on the five major cash flow projects. there is a document in this packet that lists out how we've been spending these funds over the past eight months. >> thank you, ms. fong. another healthy financial report. any questions or comments from commissioners? seeing none s there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues s there any introduction of new items? seeing none, is there any general -- oh, i'm sorry. commissioner ronen. >> i just wanted to make a motion to excuse supervisor -- >> i was going to get to that in just a moment. apparently, colleagues, commissioner mandelman did not realize that we were having a t.a. meeting today.

so, it happens to new commissioners and with that, is there a motion to excuse commissioner mandelman? made by commissioner ronen, seconded commissioner fewer. without objection s. there any general public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed and the t.a. is adjourned.

>> hi, i'm lawrence corn field. welcome to building san francisco. we have a special series, stay safe. we're looking at earthquake issues. and today we're going to be talking with a residential building owner about what residential building owners and tenants can and should do before earthquakes and after earthquakes. ♪ ♪

>> we're here at this wonderful spur exhibit on mission street in san francisco and i have with me today my good friend george. thanks for joining me, george. and george has for a long time owned residential property here in san francisco. and we want to talk about apartment buildings and what the owner's responsibilities might be and what they expect their tenants to do. and let's start by talking a little bit about what owners can do before an earthquake and then maybe after an earthquake. >> well, the first thing, lawrence, would be to get together with your tenants and see if they have earthquake insurance or any renters insurance in place because that's going to be key to protecting them in the event of a quake. >> and renters insurance, there are two kinds of insurance. renters insurance coffers damage to goods and content and so forth. earthquake insurance is a separate policy you get after

you get renters insurance through the california earthquake authority, very inexpensive. and it helps owners and it helps tenants because it gives relocation costs and it pays their rent. this is a huge impact on building owners. >> it's huge, it really is. you know, a lot of owners don't realize that, you know, when there is an earthquake, their money flow is going to stop. how are they going to pay their mortgages, how are they going to pay their other bills, how are they going to live? >> what else can property owners do in residential rental housing before an earthquake? >> well, the first thing you want to do is get your property assessed. find out what the geology is at your site. get an expert in to look at structural and nonstructural losses. the structural losses, a lot of times, aren't going to be that bad if you prepare. an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. get in there and get your property assessed and figure it out. >> so, what is a nonstructural issue that might cause losses?

>> well, you know, pipes, for instance. pipes will whip around during an earthquake. and if they're anchored in more numerous locations, that whipping won't cause a breakage that will cause a flood. >> i've heard water damage is a major, major problem after earthquakes actually. >> it is. that's one of the big things. a lot of things falling over, ceilings collapsing. but all of this can be prevented by an expert coming in and assessing where those problem areas and often the fixes are really, really cheap. >> who do you call when you want to have that kind of assessment or evaluation done? >> the structural engineering community is great. we have the structural engineers association of northern california right here in san francisco. they're a wealth of information and resources. >> what kinds of things might you encourage tenants to do besides simply get tenants renters insurance and earthquake insurance, what else do you think tenants should do?

>> i think it's really important to know if they happen to be in the building where is the safest place for them to go when the shaking starts. if they're out of the building, whats' their continuity plan for connecting with family? they should give their emergency contact information to their resident manager so that the resident manager knows how to get in touch. and have emergency supplies on hand. the tenants should be responsible to have their extra water and flashlights and bandages and know how to use a toilet when there's no sewage and water flows down. and the owners of the building should be proactive in that regard as well. >> so, george, thank you so much for joining us. that was really great. and thanks to spur for hosting us here in this wonderful exhibit. exhibit. and thank you for joining us - working for the city and county of san francisco will immerse you in a vibrant and dynamic city

that's on the forefront of economic growth, the arts, and social change. our city has always been on the edge of progress and innovation. after all, we're at the meeting of land and sea. - our city is famous for its iconic scenery, historic designs, and world- class style. it's the birthplace of blue jeans, and where "the rock" holds court over the largest natural harbor on the west coast. - the city's information technology professionals work on revolutionary projects, like providing free wifi to residents and visitors, developing new programs to keep sfo humming, and ensuring patient safety at san francisco general. our it professionals make government accessible through award-winning mobile apps, and support vital infrastructure projects like the hetch hetchy regional water system. - our employees enjoy competitive salaries, as well as generous benefits programs. but most importantly, working for the city and county of san francisco

gives employees an opportunity to contribute their ideas, energy, and commitment to shape the city's future. - thank you for considering a career with the city and county of san francisco.

[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 onest'