there are some unknowns, i am complaining on the other end for my district. where is the transit coming? this can be built. let's not wait for the 25,000 more people and make a decision. in that regard, there some room for me to defer the decision to the rep to that district. >> thank you so much. >> i agree. i also want to complement commissioner kim. i have been sitting with you for the two years that i have been on the board of supervisors and your thoughtfulness and your engagement on behalf of the residence that you represent is really impressive. and your care for them and your

advocacy for them is something i just wanted to commend you on. thank you for that. and of course, i will defer to what you think is best. but i also want to appreciate this dialogue. i think that the place -- every time you present on this topic, which is very complicated and a really hard new program to implement when is the first of its kind, and not happening anywhere else in san francisco. it feels like you move closer to something that everybody can live with and having finally taken my first trip to treasure island, thanks to the t.a. staff , and having a dutch arrived on ferry and seeing how quick that can happen, if done right, it really is a very exciting new transportation option for the island. i believe once it is implemented

, it will be widely used and very -- in a very efficient way of getting to and from the mainland. but i just really think this is the best of government when you have a highly competent staff that is really thoughtful about the way you've been working on this project, and a very engaged and effective advocate on behalf of the constituents. i have been a spectator watching it go back and forth but i want to complement you all on this process. >> i should thank you for being a part of this committee. it is not -- it is a micro- topic within our overall transportation system. thank you for spending a lot of time. i do have to say, when i was reading through all the material last night, i did think, it must be so much fun to work for the transportation authority. as much as i am being critical of the program, it is a lot of

fun to imagine a different way of moving around the city and to develop new islands that will have 20,000 residents, and to think about what mobility looks like into the future. so as much as i brought up a lot of these concerns, i do think that it's a lot of -- i hate to use a word fun, but it is very adventurous to brainstorm and be creative about ways of ensuring that people are able to move on and off the island and raise the revenue to pay for those systems it is incredibly exciting. i'm glad that this has been an incubator space for us to explore these different ideas. i know treasure island will pilot many of these concepts, and it can spread across san francisco and to other parts of the country. that is all incredibly exciting. thank you, again, commissioner ghee and commissioner ronen. i do want to open up for public comment so we can take that opportunity to hear from the public first before we continue

this conversation. i do have two speaker cards. base on the case, and ariel fletcher. any member of the public would like to speak on this item, please approach the microphone now. >> thank you, supervisors. this is my first time coming before this commission. it probably will not be the last my primary objective today and in going forward, i would like to commend them. i'm also concerned about five years, my presentation will be about this period you're talking about 20,000 residents. i am also going to talk to the commissioner and i respect you for all that. her and i are black. you can't change that. we go to sleep, we wake up, we are black. i am talking about the situation of the population of the city by the bay. we will not be nowhere around.

we as black individuals are not african-american. i'm black american. i didn't try to emigrate into this country. we were brought here on slave ships and broke up with families all over this country. my last name is washington. i do believe george washington is my great grandfather and shall not tell a lie. from here on out, the city by the bay, we are in a state of emergency. my children, my grandchildren, and my great-grandchildren are in a state of emergency. all these plans always billions of dollars that you are planning for the city by the bay, we will not be involved. commissioner, i expect -- i respect what you are doing, what you know as well as i know, and the mayor knows, she was on that committee of migration. i am so happy now because i elected governor -- i elected

governor newsome. i am the only one in the city, the media that has every meeting they had. by the way, i don't have time to talk right now, me you go ahead and do what you want to do. i want numbers from everybody. we are in a state of emergency. the black folks, brown folks, and everyone who is indigenous in the city by the bay. all these plans. >> good morning. my name is ariel and i am a transportation policy associate. we support the toll for treasure island pick really appreciate the issues and concerns about the rollout and the impacts of current residents that were discussed today. we think it's important to commit to solving these so development can go forward. tolling will be essential to ensuring people don't sit in traffic, contributing to economic loss for the region and in the climate.

the proposed tolling and driving over taking transit, putting us in the wrong direction in terms of meeting the goals for the program. we encourage you to implement dynamic pricing. we appreciate that the total hours match those of the bay bridge. this is important for legibility but why adopt the policies of the past, tolling rates at inflexible time thresholds. this is an opportunity to look forward. we agree there must be measures in place to ensure that access to and from the island remains affordable for existing residents and buildings and businesses. while there are good reasons to provide a stipend, we need a resolution that is more transit focused.

they are derived from transportation see. we think it should contribute to the island share goals and current just encourage transit use. we should subsidize the behavior we are trying to support. we think it will be more advantageous to provide a transit pass for free in a chopped or smaller cash subsidy. transit holders are more likely to use transit for all kinds of trips. a pass is a really important achievement to support the neighborhoods. we thank you for the opportunity to comment, and we appreciate all the hard work that has gone into developing the program to date. >> thank you. >> thank you. i am one of the businesses on treasure island. i am the owner and founder of treasure island winds. i started at 11 and 12 years ago briefly, i want to characterize the feedback we have given to the s.f. c.t.a. and the board that happened recently.

from the business community that we are categorically against this for a couple of reasons. one is i have already had feedback from customers and my employees saying if there is a toll, they will not work on treasure island. specifically, vendors are already pushing back and i'm getting questions already about is the toll already there, i'm already getting impacted just from the press reports. i think to your port does your point, a great point. i can speak for a lot of the businesses out there that the toll is a regressive tax on the existing residents and businesses for services that are there only to mitigate a problem that won't be for 5-10 years. we would more than happily pay something and contribute to the transportation cost. we want to make sure that those transportations are at cost and that we will be getting the service that promotes our

businesses, helps the residence, and also builds a the businesses going forward. the proposed toll, right now as i see it, and looking forward for your development plans for the mixed use of the commercial use of treasure island, would be very difficult. i can't see a lot of businesses that will be going out to treasure island if they have a specific toll that will prevent customers, vendors, and employees from being -- from coming out there peerk we want to be part of the solution, with the question is, there seems to be a quick rush to make this proposal before we actually really have a significant input into it. a final note, the first couple meetings that we had with over 60 people, businesses, we had four days notice before that meeting happened. four days notice. i want to thank you for the opportunity to speak. i would love supervisor can for you to come out and talk to mark the businesses out there directly.

thank you. >> a quick question to you back when do most of your customers come visit? >> i have two different sets of customers. i'm a production winery. we have customers that come out -- customers that are production commercial customers and they come up during the week primarily off peak because they are trying to avoid the traffic just like i do. i timeshift when i work out on treasure island. by retail customers however are primarily 10-5:00 pm on the weekends picked by the way, i want to make a point. my customer base is 95% local. east bay, north bay, san francisco, i have a few tourists bet the tourists are just beginning to come out there and getting to know that. having that burden on tourists itself is great. i understand we need to get the revenue from but primarily, when i'm getting feedback from a lot of customers, and i have one club customers that are regular customers, they are primarily

from east bay. if there is a toll, i will probably lose a good proportion of those customers because it is an added expense. they like the convenience. they like what we are doing out there, but the reality is i could see the same thing goes for the restaurants and other customer facing businesses that are on treasure island today. >> thank you. either any other members of the public would like to speak at this time? director, you are welcome to speak at any time. >> good morning, supervisors. i would be remiss if i don't come up here today just to pass some comments. so one of the directors so far, treasure island, let me tell you here that in addition to all of the public comments and meetings that sfcta have engaged in, you should know that for the last two years, the board has

embarked on a very comprehensive meetings they the public are raising all the questions that you have been raising today. at issue here, we need to have a take away from all of the discussion is that in 2008 is one the state legislature enacted what we are now discussing here and you are taking all this time to put these together. as you know, you managed to pass all the milestones of the development for treasure island. they are planning -- that could take decades. we have gone to court and now we are beginning the infrastructure in order for us to develop this massive project. we have to start from the infrastructure. back to the cult told. one of the reasons that we cannot weight until we have 25,000 people there, is that this is the only project and the

only neighborhood in san francisco for the first time. it will be served by ferry. we are actually subsidizing that we are also subsidizing m.c. transit and munimobile. i hope i can have some more time here. i think the board of questions that we need to really concentrate on here, and it is what supervisor he was alluding to, so wet after the five years? what i'm proposing, and i think we need to begin a very comprehensive -- we are actually doing original transportation. in the region, all the decades, they have talked about regional transportation. it has never been enacted. sfcta, we are really proud of them. you have an agency and a leadership position for us to begin a very comprehensive transportation of discussion for

the region. this is what the treasure island project represents. everything should be subsidized with major transportation in munimobile. i know supervisor kim will be leaving soon. you need to begin now. how do we deal with this? let's look at additional sources of funding. after 2021, where do we start? we have made it clear that i am concerned about the low income, i am concerned about the disabled, i'm concerned about youth and i'm concerned about small businesses. what we have is the sfcta staff as the finest of the country.

residents are coming in. they need to be served by ferry. they need to have a.c. transit in place, and they also need to have the on island shuttle. yes, they are the first. we must provide for them even on the onset. i foresee that supervisor yee and supervisor ronen, that you will have a bond measure at some point to look at transportation for the longevity for treasure island. it is a public private participation. they are putting in 30 million. the resident of treasure island is also a resident of san francisco. in order for us to help the small businesses, in order for us to make treasure island a destination, one of the finest projects in the country, we have

to think outside the box, and we have to begin to rally the region and oakland. what about this? white to upload the traffic on the bay bridge? why can't we have ferry services bringing people from here and stopping at treasure island and going to alameda? from their -- there are many creative ways that we can help right now. and sfcta as the agency that can help us to lead there peerk we would depart to you, supervisors , and we are part of the discussion. we must start because 2021 is right at the corner. we have the set of the residents coming in and we need to make sure that treasure island is welcome to them. in the interim, let's continue this conversation for the first time. looking at the comprehensive comic -- confrontation and making sure we have improved munimobile service. i think we all work together and

we can head to the region and help m.t.c. we can help everyone for the first time in the history of this region, help to put in place a very comprehensive transportation system that will benefit all of the regions. thank you so much for your time. >> thank you. is there any other members of the public that would like to speak what if not cacti --dash public comment is closed on this item. i just want to appreciate the conversation with commissioner staff and members of the public, after thinking about it, i'm really happy we had a public discourse. i want to move forward with what i would feel comfortable with supporting today, understanding a lot more studies will happen and a lot more unknowns will get answered over the course of 2019 to refine the program. what i would feel comfortable moving forward as our program

total policy is to move forward with the proposed additional toll policies which is the hours and the total amount. i would like to make off-peak zero dollars, but move forward with 350 at peak at two dollars -- and two dollars that weekend. with further studies, this may change. as a baseline, this is how i'd like to support the total program. to move forward with the affordability program recommendations, and maybe perhaps add in a note we will be studying the accumulator transit pass to ensure that low-income residents have a way to pay for their pass over the course of the month. i feel comfortable with $300 stipend. i calculated it. if you go on and off the island every day, it is roughly $168 and 300 seems to be a comfortable subsidy to ensure mobility for current active leaseholders as of 2018 to receive this $300 stipend.

under the transit pass program recommendations, i would just like to add in the free munimobile for youth, and a study on free ferry for low income youth as well. and so i would feel comfortable moving forward and approving this policy understanding again that over the course of the next two years, they there would be changes and refinements as we continue to understand revenue and what the expenses of the program are. i don't know if there's an idea to put this into the program that we passed, but a study of a.c. transit and whether they were both -- there will be usage at an hour or a 60 minute headway. a survey of what both residents and tourists and visitors and clients who move on and off the island and further study with businesses. particularly for employees. i think that to the point that was made by members of the public, there will be a toll on

the weekend. that is going to be in place. i know that visitors go to napa, they go to sonoma, we all pay tolls on a bridge to visit those places on the weekend. i am not as put off by that revenue generation at that point so that is what i would feel comfortable moving forward with. director chiang, you had stated that staff would draft a resolution asking the city to evaluate revenue options, and budget contributions to transit and affordability programs for treasure island residents. if we can move forward with drafting that resolution, i would feel comfortable approving the policy as is. i don't know if you have anything to add, commissioners. commissioner yee? >> would you consider including staff to study an extension of the beyond five years?

>> i'm so sorry. i meant to include that. commissioner yee suggested we study beyond five years. the transit pass options for existing 2018 leaseholders. i think that that is a comfortable base for us to move forward with studying the budget and spend the next supervisor on the board will really get to refine the program and make sure that it works. on a side parking lot, i really hope that we are able to move forward with the downtown congestion plan so that all of our residents are helping to raise revenue to pay for other transit modes, and we really have to reduce -- and i strongly believe this is why i am moving forward with this today, we have to reduce vehicle miles travelled in our city and we have to get people out of their cars. all of this growth is going to work for our city. so that is the motion that i

would like to make to the recommended approval of the transit pass total toll policy and affordability program. any questions from commissioners or staff? okay. can i make a motion to adopt the amended language into the program? and we can do that without objection. can be take a roll call on the approval of the program? >> on item three pack [roll call] >> we have first approval. >> could you please call the next item. >> internal accounting report for the three month ending september 30th, 2018. this is an information item. >> we have the deputy director of finance and administration presenting. >> thank you. this is the first report for the agency as of september 30th

2018. we have assets of approximately 1.2 million, liabilities of 257,000, revenues of 257,000, mainly coming from the several advanced transportation advantage and dish management technologies deployment grant and we have expenditures of $214,000. during first quarter, we have not initiated major engineering activities yet due to a revised project law and state in the last presentation, to july 20th , 2021." anticipate starting these engineering costs in quarter three. we are definitely within budget at this point in time period do you have any questions, i am happy to answer them. >> we will now open up for public comment on item number 4. public comment is now closed. this item is an information item the committee does not need to take any action. mr clerk, can you call item five

and six? >> introduction of new items. information item. item six is public comment. >> is her introduction of any new items costing none, we will move on to public comment for item number 5. and general public comment period are there any members of the public would like to speak? scene none, public comment is now closed on items five and six before we adjourned our meeting, i want to recognize and thank the staff. i want to say that a lot of thought and creativity went into this process and i'm very excited about what will come forward to. i want to recognize the entire team at the treasure island mobility management agency, and also want to thank our commissioners for dedicating so much time to district six. it is incredibly appreciated. can you please call the seventh item? >> item seven is adjournment. >> item seven is adjournment. meeting is adjourned. [♪]

sc . >> welcome to the meeting of the commission on the environment, and thank you, all of you, for being here on this rainy evening. anthony, will you call the roll.

>>clerk: good evening. this is a meeting of the san francisco commission on the environment. the date is tuesday, november 27, 2018, and the time is 5:02 p.m. a reminder that the ringing and use of cell phones, pager's and other electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting. please remember the chair may remove persons from the room of the use of any cell phone, pager or any sound producing device. please note there is public comment on every item on the agenda as well as public comment for general items that aren't on the agenda. you also have a right to speak anonymously. the chair will call folks in the order of the speaker cards that we receive them, and then we'll give folks an opportunity to speak anonymously if they like. after that, we ask that you please fill out a speaker card and hand it to me, and i will hand it to the chair. so with that, we'll move to item

one, call to order. [roll call] >>clerk: there is a quorum. the next item is item 2, the president's report. this item is discussion. >> good evening. welcome to the commission on the environment. tonight, we have two presentations, followed by the closed session performance evaluation of director debbie rafael. special welcome to our guests from the san francisco planning department, the economic world forum, and the silicon valley blockchain society. i want to thank commissioner stevenson for sponsoring the presentation on blockchain society, and its future environmental programs and policies. one of the commission's mandates in the city charter is for us to

hold meeting to help educate the department and the public on new trends that may impact the environment in san francisco. blockchain is a very interesting innovation, and many of us, especially me, are interested about learning about this. so let's get started. is there any public comment on the president's report? hearing none, next item, anthony. >>clerk: the next item is item three, approval. meeting minutes. this item is for discussion and action. >> great. so this is for the september 25 meeting. do i have a motion? >> i move. >> commissioner wan. >> second. >> commissioner stephenson second. is there any discussion or any changes, commissioners, on the

minutes? okay. do we have any public comment on the minutes of the 25th of september, the commission meeting? okay. hearing none, all in favor? [voting] >> any opposed? okay. motion carries. and the next item is -- >>clerk: the next item is item four, approval of the october 18, 2018 joint meeting with the commission on the environment status of women. this item is discussion and action. >> and this was a very, i think, historic meeting on the commission on the status of women and the commission on the environment. i think it's the first time that both commissions have met to discuss the environmental

impacts and how those environmental impacts impact women and families. it was really very thoughtful. lots of lively conversation, as well. do i have a motion to accept the minutes of october 24 the join meeting on the commission of the environment and the joint meeting on the council on the status of women. commissioner stevenson has made the motion. commissioner wan has seconded it. is there any comments, commissioners? any public comment? hearing none, all those in favor of approving the minutes of the 24 of october, signify by saying aye. vogue vogue. >> any opposed?

thank you. next next item. [agenda item read] >> hi. anastasia gliksten, and i wasted a little bit of my time to come here to say shame on you. why do you continuously allow pesticides to be used on parks? they're not good for us, and particularly bad for children. agriculture uses more, that we need it for biodiversity, it's ridiculous. how can you follow that when each of them are linked -- maybe not to the satisfaction of chemical company, but

sufficiently linked with whole array of diseases -- childhood diseases. and just to tell you that davidson was poisoned on 15 of november . this time, they probably didn't do glyphosate. i went to the -- i forgot -- i meant to get some amount of poison from monsanto for all of you. before this, the mount davidson

that i lived to -- now, it's so persistent and basically doesn't go anywhere. i went to presentation and i heard something very interesting. -- [inaudible] >> -- but once you start, he had road egress, and really long training which probably cost the district tons of money. and before this, he was small businessperson who was doing his without any herbicides and it was just fine. another item, i think i have time to say, what they were going to do when they were removing manually cape ivy.

you do have to -- what happens if you do it with herbicides, you have to come back and spray again. this i.p.m. meeting in san francisco. thank you. >> thank you. any other public comment -- public comment? hearing none, next item? >>clerk: the next item is item six, discussion of the american planning association award for excellence in sustainability for the san francisco better roofs ordinance. this item is for discussion. >> yes, and director rafael will present that. so in lieu of our environmental service award, today, we'll be hearing about the award that the city received for an innovative environmental policy. >> thank you, president bermejo. this award was given to us a while back, but due to scheduling, we're coming tonight, and in lieu of the

award given to the provide sector, we're talking about an award that we got ourselves. and what is so exciting and interesting for me on this particular award is that there were past commissioners, ruth gravanis, who was such a passionate champion about biodiversity and about the need for green roofs that every time we talked about a green roof as being a roof that had solar panels on it, she would say it needs to be considered both. and the planning department was thrilled at that, as well because it had been something near and dear to their heart, as well. so this is something that the commission on the environment, the planning commission, and then, the two departments worked hand-in-hand to form a first in the nation policy that has become a model nationally, and so it's time to celebrate and acknowledge the power of what we

can do, all of us together. so with that, why don't you come up. >> good evening. i'm jeff jazzlene. i'm with the san francisco planning department. i'm here to provide an update on the san francisco better roofs ordinance which requires solar panels or gardens on certain roofs since october 2017. i'm joined by barry hooper, primary orchestraitor of a

number of the key ordinances, as well as advancement of the ordinance itself. san francisco as we know as a history of being both remarkably cool and impressively green. under the leadership of director rafael and the commission, the city has been widely emulated and a thought in best practices leader nationally and internationally. until relatively recently, there was an exception to this environmental leadership legacy. the same could not be said of greener living roofs. while we had outstanding examples about the city and a remarkable one in process and transbay, we had no will policies or programs in place specific to their implementation. to begin to address that deficiency, the planning department conspired with the p.u.c. and s.f.c.-s.f.e. to lure the preeminent international green roofs conference to the city. we hosted the cities alive conference in 2013 which

catalyzed our bringing together the trades, agencies and other green experts and fanatics. well, actually, we're all fanatics. in anticipation of the conference, spur conveyed a green roof task force which resulted in a specific long range strategy known as a greener and better road map for san francisco. the road map was announced at the ensuing conference in october 2013. this brought us closer to catching up with other cities such as washington, portland, philadelphia, and toronto. following the conference, a group consisting of representatives from the department of the environment x the planning department, and p.u.c. began to work in earnest to further assess living roof

technical and economical efficacy as well as to map out a specific perspective policy. we coined the nomenclature as we were in a drought at the time, and we were concerned that green might equate to excessive irrigation. a cornerstone of our effort was the commissioning of a cost-benefit study that tested various generic buildings and scales. for each building type, the results were impressively positive. they demonstrated that living roofs were net positive for all projects with substantial environmental and economic profits for the city as a whole. in the process of transparency we ensured that this could be used by other municipalities in other climates, both economic

and climateological. this result was pioneering and largely the result of barry's effort. working large wee with our partners, we crafted an agreement in support of senator wiener, with the green roofs project. the second phase established that solar living roofs are a combination to be deployed. these requirements which took effect on january 31, 2017 constituted the first such mandate in the country. the time between the previously mentioned 2013 conference and the moment the ordinance took effect in 2017 was used to develop a complete geography set of i ever willmentation tools. when the ordinance took effect we were fully implementation ready. and these are among the accrued

benefits anticipated to accrue over 15 years. 15 to $100 million in additional tax revenues, between 60,000 and 385,000 tons of carbon he mission avoided or is he questered. since that time we recently assisted in developing an economic analysis similar to denver to support a citizen driven ballot initiative to garner votes. san francisco was invoked as denver and portland advanced their policy case and made their requirements. we also provided information recently in support to new york and vancouver, both of which are in the process of advancing

similar ordinances. since adoption, in addition to the anticipated beneficial results locally, the better roofs ordinance has become an flunl force in advancing the development of this highly effective means for the city in terms of the project and municipal scale to positively and meaningfully respond to climate change. took us four years to move from that first conversation to implementation, the result and influence has not gone unnoticed. the ordinance received an award from the california chapter of the american planning association for innovation and green community planning about 1.5 years ago, and more recently, the planning department and the department of the environment were bestowed an award because of fully carbon

offset and f.c.c. certified award looks like this. that concludes my presentation. i'd be happy to answer any questions, but first, with your permission, i'd like to present this to director rafael, barry hooper, and the planning department on behalf of the san francisco sustainability association. [applause] >> any comments or questions? >> in the interest of the commission's time, i did not have prepared remarks, but appreciate the great and thorough presentation, jeff, and appreciate the partnership with the planning department and support we've gotten from the p.u.c., particularly water enterprise and the department of building inspection, as well, so it's been a broad every day, spur. a number of community stakeholders, you know, were

great contributors, and contributed the momentum that led to the adoption of the ordinance, so really appreciate the out come and it has been an -- outcome and it has been an inspiration elsewhere. thank you. >> thank you. >> yes, sir? [inaudible] >> -- green roofs initiative. now that we're requiring green roofs, if someone's got a project and it involves a green roof, i guess especially if it's solar, do neighbors have an ability to complain or object based on aesthetics, like in some cities? >> well, it is san francisco. we haven't had that experience, particularly since these are passive facilities. frankly, there have been lots of discussions about rooftop facilities and their impacts,

but those impacts have been social because in this case we're talking about nonsocial spaces, other solar or green roofs which are specifically managed as a landscape, not as a park or other type of space. we haven't had that experience. it doesn't mean we won't, but that's our experience so far. >> right. thank you. >> any other questions. >> do we still not have a shade ordinance? >> shade for -- >> well, i guess it's an antishade ordinance, really, that people can't shade your -- your green roof for your solar? >> we do not. we have allowable building heights. they're -- they're established by the -- by the zoning code, the planning code.

part of the opportunity in the flexibility with both the solar and green components as an and-or would be if shading was a potential issue for a solar component that living roofs would still succeed in that environment and could be used in that. >> that's good. yeah. thank you. >> thank you. >> any other questions, commissioners? is there any public comment? hearing none, maybe we should have a photo. do we need a photo opportunity? yes. let's do a photo -- a quick photo. anthony, do you have your camera

or -- >> up here or down there? >> down there. >> okay. some people are -- >> thank you for indulging us with the photo. next item -- >>clerk: just want to make sure -- >> oh, sure want to make arthur there's no public comment. i asked before, but i didn't see

anybody jump up. last chance. okay. moving onto the next item. >> okay. item seven, discussion of blockchain technology and the future of environmental programs and policies. this item is for heather stevenson, commissioners, and there's two presentation. one is the uses and technologies of blockchain technology. the speaker is ashley lindquist, and the second is the change of the future of blockchain technologies. >> okay. thank you, anthony. and before we get started, we just want to remind to hold our questions until the end of all the presentations out of respect for the time of our visiting presenters. feel free to ask clarifying questions during the presentations, but we'll save the longer ones for after the second presentation. also a note to the public that we will take public comment at the end of this item, after the second presentation.

thank you. commissioner stevenson. >> hi, everybody. as many of you know, i work in tech startup, so i'm working in technology, mostly the communication since 1996, so i'm dating myself a little bit there, and i mostly focus on communication and marketing. throughout my workday, i interact with a lot of different startups, and i am constantly thinking about ways that the environment maybe the climate could intersect with technology. unfortunately, a lot of that focused on zero waste because i work in an office where a lot of people are not sorting their trash correctly. we're constantly focusing on our communications plans, all the ways that we use communication across the city to get our message out. but lately, i've been thinking more broadly about technology

innovations and how that could impact climate on a broader scale. i had the great opportunity over the last year to have some meetings with some of the folks from c-40 and with debbie, and their women for climate program has a technology challenge that's going on right now, if you know a great women working in tech, if they have some great ideas, the deadline for that is november 30. i've been thinking a lot about how we can take technology and the environment and apply it in a broadway. specifically this all coincided with me getting really intrigued in blockchain. i'm just one of those people that likes the new stuff coming down the line, and wanting to stay up on it, so i started attending different meeting and hearing different companies presenting about blockchain. there are implications to this tech that could be applied to

climate or civic life that we haven't thought about. i talked to debbie and we thought this was an opportunity for us to kind of look toward the future and see what the future has to bring to us or maybe start some conversations that apply to us as time goes on. because as president bermejo mentioned, we have an obligation here at the commission to educate ourselves and the city on some of these things. i want to thank debbie and the whole energy team who met with me starting about six months ago to talk about this presentation and we -- to start to kind of frame what the issue could look like and we could have these conversations. we decided to break it into three parts specifically. first we're going to hear a blockchain 101-style presentation. it's hard to think about. we all think it's bitcoin and cryptocurrency, but it's more

than that. we thought we'd bring in some people to talk to you about that. secondly, there's going to be a discussion about potential pit falls. you may have read some things in the news about energy usage surrounding blockchains, so we're going to have a conversation around things like that. some of things like privacy also come up during that discussion, and finally there's going to be a discussion on potential opportunities to use blockchain for developing future environmental programs and policies. we're very excited about that. we're very fortunate to have with us today to very remarkable and distinguished experts, ashley landquist of the world economic forum is going to be giving our first presentation, and aman ban is the president of the world blockchain foundation.

thank you. >> hi, everyone. [please stand by]

between multiple parties in a verifiable and permanent way. in the system, generally

speaking, the technology offers a distributed and synchronized mechanism which is aimed, or would be comparing against a centralized system. basically centralized data bases. we are talking about decentralized data bases no one has. assets, whatever the transaction may be. transparency. traceability of the transactions. irreversible records and automatic execution. automated smart contract. so first, the ledgers or distributed ledgers is the term for this. we distributed.

there are thousands of computers around the world. second with the network. and they all continuously downloading and syncing to the shared record list. on the bottom, you see an image of the screen shot i took a month ago of the bitcoin, we can explore and look at transactions and the bitcoin. so i choose from a website. you can see all the transactions happening. you don't see who is sending them. you just see numeric addresses and a specific amount of money

was sent to this number at a specific time. this allows for a common shared view of the transaction history. this is very important because this is how these computers know what transactions are valid or not. it gets a bit technical. if they all have a shared view of the history. they know whether money has -- digital money has been sent already. this is called the double spend problem. in distributed ledger we search the problem. we search undistributed competing research for decades. it was difficult to see what digital money was already spent. here everyone can see it. and everyone can convene around the system and agree and city what transactions have happened. this is just the bitcoin chain. this can take different forms for specific needs and purposes.

we can have different networks and different ledgers. as i mentioned, there is a decentralized functionality. no one owns this. a and there is transaction transparency. you can see what transactions have been noted. we have more sophisticated protocals and data bases that can over lay privacy features. if there is a need for privacy, for instance, the amount of money sent could be masked, the sender and receiver, you may not see a specific number. you don't see anything. you just see that something was set at a specific time. we can close the networks, that is called the provision networks, access is granted to

certain people. i started off by saying this is public, it is reviewable. we can see the transactions. on top of that, we can have privacy or we can close the door. depending on the design interests. we can see the movement of funds and goods. a lot of people are interested in a block chain application related to supply chain tracking and traceability. of any kind, minerals, and try to put a kind of tamper resistant seal on them. they can scanned when it moves through a supply chain. and because the participants in this supply chain which could be