[ gavel ]. >> good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. welcome to the san francisco public utilities commission. it is december 11, 1:30 in the afternoon. madam secretary, will you please read the roll.

[roll call] >> clerk: we have a quorum. >> with respect to public comment today, it's not really something i like to do, limit public comment. normally, folks come from the public, they expect to have three minutes. some people come with prepared remarks, so i'm not just reluctant, but i'm unwilling to shorten that time. however, please be warned that it will be a hard stop at three minutes. kindly refrain from repeating things that the commission has already heard but will go forward with normal public comment. the microphone will be shut off at exactly three minutes. fair? okay. thank you. approval of the meeting minutes of november 13, 2018. commissioners. >> so moved. >> second. >> so moved and seconded. is there any discussion? public comment on minutes? hearing none, public comment is

closed. all those in favor? [voting] >> opposed. the ayes have it. madam secretary, next item. [agenda item read] >> i have two speaker cards already. i'll start with peter dreckmeyer, and after that, francisco acosta. >> i just wanted to bring up an issue that i hope doesn't get lost, and this is the adaptive plan for o'shaugnessy dam. there was a stipulation in 1987 between the city and department of interior that requires the city or fish and wildlife service federal to undertake a

study to determine what effect if any the kirkwood power house or addition would have had and have it on the resident population fish species. and that study was required to be completed by december 1992. u.s. fish and wildlife service did issue a draft study in 1992, and among other things, it recommended higher flows in the hetch hetchy reach between o'shaugnessy dam and the out reach, of 30%. in 2006, my predecessor at the tuolomne river trust found this paper trail and asked the sfpuc about this obligation and where it stood. and p.u.c. acknowledged they had not met the conditions of the stipulation and committed to a collaborative process to resolve these implementation issues by december 2009. and in 2006, a bar on the upper

tuolomne e co system project, which has been a very good project and staff has done a great job, but it's evolved into a program and expanded -- kind of moved away from favoring game fish, which include brown trout, which are nonnative, to native species, to rainbow trout, foothill legged frog. and riparian bats and species. in 2014, april, sfpuc released a stakeholder draft and nothing has happened in over four years, so we're going to be following up with staff on this. i think one thing i want to give everyone a heads up that it's really going to be important to have peer review of the studies behind that management plan and especially pertaining to discussions that we've had recently on the bay delta plan, so we will be requesting that. i will cede my last 28 seconds

to the chair. >> thank you, peter. francisco. >> so commissioners, i want to talk on two topics. i want to talk about the bayview and ask you, commissioners, to go back to our community benefits and see how the distribution of that community benefits is done. so what was agreed by the task force was 5% of $1 billion, which is 50 million. first, it was 6 million. first, it was 300 million, and then, reading your reports, it's $1 billion, so you all go read the reports and figure out your distribution. you all need to figure it out, please, because i'm the last of the mohicans. the others are just rubber stamping. we call them sellouts. so commissioners, step back, look at this, and do the right

thing. others are in bed, and in listening to the last commission meeting, and i think each of the speakers that spoke on the tuolomne river should be getting a commendation because they spoke truth to power. and so i was doing my research, and i said, let me go to the source of the tuolomne river, and i believe they are t glaciers. and once, i believe that whole area was covered with snow. and i was told that maybe in five or ten years, there will be no snow. so why are we building skyscrapers in san francisco, in the land of the ohlone, the land that i represent? i have one minute and ten

seconds, and i give it back to you. >> thank you, francisco. see how that works? all right. you guys can have it back later, right? is there any other general public comment on items that we do not have on the agenda today? going once -- i don't have any -- there was a card up there, donna, are we good? >> clerk: did you want to speak? on items -- [inaudible] >> clerk: this is for item four, general public comment. >> going three times, public comment is now closed. madam secretary, next item, please. >> clerk: item five is communications. >> commissioners. >> i have one request. on item 5g, the annual water report, that was done without increased fishery obligations

that we will be taking on. my request is the january meeting, we have an update that reflects both the state boards proposal as well as the proposal that is developing through the volunteer development process. >> if there's knox, that'll be the order. hearing knox, that'll be the order. commissioners, anything else else? is there any public comment on item number five? seeing none, public comment is closed. next item, please. >> clerk: item six is future calendars. >> okay. i'm asking for a report in connection with any proposed legislation in connection with anything, by works. i think we need to have a little more transparency about the conversations that are

taking place. if there is draft legislation, we need to see it because it's being done on our behalf, and i don't believe we've had any conversations in connection there with. additionally, i'd like to request specifically from the agency that i be notified and any commissioner be notified in conversation taking place concerning workforce development and bayview and anything concerning this commission so that we have an opportunity to put in some input. is that anticipacceptable? >> bay works is an organization that we're a part of. so we can give you the information as it relates to their plan. >> yeah. i think it's important -- thank you, general manager kelly. i think it's important to make sure that when we're talking about workforce development, that we -- you know, nobody's getting blindsided, and that may be a little harsh, but nobody's getting blindsided learning from outside these

rooms that conversations with advancing. certainly, with the mayor's office, in particular, the mayor's office of economic and workforce development. i think we are obligationed to make sure that government works as well as it can, and so that's really my motivation. but i think conversations that are taking place across the haul with the mayor's office so we have at least an opportunity to weigh in and make sure we have a chance to frame those outcomes. so i know i've spoke to donna about commissioner calendars, and i think that she's prepared, as long as she gets notice, that there are workforce meetings taking place at the agency, that i be kept abreast of those, so that when i get phone calls, at least i'm able to keep up on items. is that okay, commissioners? is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is

closed. madam secretary, next item, please. >> clerk: item seven is the report of the general manager. >> good afternoon, commissioners. first item is report on presentship resources, san francisco. >> good afternoon, miss reed. >> good afternoon. margaret reed from the apprenticeship division of workforce development. i am proud to say that p.u.c. is one of our strongest partners. and if i can have that slide.

awesome. so apprenticeship sf started about four years ago as an -- in response to the fact that we had several apprenticeship programs within the city and county of san francisco that were running independently and often in often -- well, let's just say it was incongruent with the current charter and some of the rules in the m.o.u. and some other things. so we decided hey, let's do something about it. and mickey callahan led the charge to centralize how we run prese apprenticeships in the city, and that involves the work of several unions. one of the things that we have to do is we have to identify who is truly responsible for

the city's apprenticeship programs. and one of the things that we found out was that each individual department found that they were, and the city attorney reminded us that the charter says that no individual department can actually encumber the city and make agreements with the state on behalf of the city, that it needs to come through the centralized agency, so that's why we moved. apprenticeship is, first and foremost, an employment opportunity for the city. that's the first thing it is. more importantly, apprenticeship allows for a successtion plan that actually makes sense, and with p.u.c., that includes our stationary engineers, both the power side as well as the wastewater side of the house. it also includes maintenance,

and automotive machinists, and what we discovered thanks to p.u.c. is we also needed a lot of work with our high voltage. because not only do we have any new people ner in san francisco, we don't have any new people in california, we don't have any new people in the united states. so we have to work really hard to grow our own, create our own cadre of folk to backfill and to move forward on all the various projects. in order for an apprenticeship program to be recognized, fully recognized, it has to be recognized by the state of california. and that's one of the things that my office did. we take an (ship, an idea and make sure that it follows all of the vision apprenticeship standards rules. we also make sure that in the case of the u.s. program, which is a department of labor program, as well -- u.a.

program, which is a department of labor program, that we make sure they follow the federal rules, as well. they all have to measure up to the m.o.u., so each individual union that has an m.o.u. with the city, we also have to make sure that our apprenticeship programs, the hiring, all of the processes involved in that, the selection processes, etc., all meet the same standards so that we have one central voice to move these things forward. the nondiscriminatory section of the apprenticeship standards is probably the thing that i am the most proud of because what we took was some very antiquated ways in which folks were hired -- in one case -- we can say it now, out loud, there used to be one union that had a

234 negro list, an asian list, and a filipino list. when we saw that, we said no, no, no. that's not how we do business in san francisco. we convinced the state and we convinced the union to make some changes so that stuff does not now exist, and so now, we have a very open and truly competitive process in order to get employment in our apprenticeship programs. we have charter requirements. as i mentioned earlier, one of the charter requirements is that if someone is hired, they have to be hired under some version, and what we use is a permanent exempt. the reason we went permanent exempt is because it allows for an apprenticeship to come on board fully benefited -- that's medical, dental, vacation, etc. -- for the duration of

their apprenticeship. in exchange -- and this is the biggie -- they have no property rights to that position. in other words, you're an apprentice. you learn your apprenticeship, and at the end, our relationship is finished. they are now allowed to compete for any permanent position, and we made changes in our job codes and job specs to allow that to happen, which is a huge step forward. we have a strongly a son wi li the division of apprenticeship standards. we have one person that's dedicated to working with us so that we can always reach someone to help us to make sure that the city of san francisco is in compliance with all of

the rules so that all of the city departments know and can be confident about when they're hiring, when they're moving someone through the process, when they're meeting the standards, that everything that they're doing is above board and proper. training and mentorship is a huge piece of it. these are your journey men. these are the folks that are doing the work for point u.c. we have instituted -- p.u.c. we have instituted train the trainer, so we get journey men and women how to train. we work with the selection committees on how to move past some of the barriers that have been barriers to employment so that the selection committees are truly open. and i am proud to say we had some of the strongest candidates for some of the

p.u.c. positions for the apprenticeship program. as soon as that gets off the ground, we will have one of the most diverse populations of apprentices in that particular field. these are some of the positions that we currently have. we have the transit power line worker, transportation distribution line, that's what i mentioned earlier. that's your high voltage. the automotive mechanic, which is a new one. the ougauto body and fender worker, track maintenance, utility plumber and general plumber, so that's both the street plumbers as well as the house plumbers, and that is both with local 38. the preapprentice labor

maintenance program, again, that's with local 261. the car and auto body painters, station engineer, the painter apainter -- cement mason. we have a premechanic which is the one we spear headed here first with the admin division and m.t.a. that is because we are woefully short of women in the world of mechanics. we just finished testing for our preapprentice group, and i am happy to say we met our 30% female going towards the interview process, which is huge. we have no mechanics that are female right now in the city and county of san francisco.

so we are really working towards making that happen. and then finally, we are working now with the cyber security, and hopefully, p.u.c. will be joining san francisco airport on that. and yes -- >> that was nice. nice touch. so i am open for questions. >> thank you, margot. >> commissioners, questions? okay. i don't want my -- i promised we would keep these pretty short, so we're just lining up the dominos. i want to thank director kelly for lining up this report. i want to talk about a couple knowledge things. i think it's good that you mentioned that this isn't just a local 261 thing, this is -- every single employee that we have here at the agency,

there's about 2300, i think -- i'll stand corrected. at the end of the day, this is about adding that cliff in a responsible way, and i'm glad that you talked about centralizing it because these departments have a tendency to do all their own different things, and then, you don't have any alignment all, and then, it's the worker that loses out. what ea union is is a more centralized workforce, gets folks to just qualify for a city job, can enroll in these apprenticeship and preapprenticeship programs, everybody. it's wide open. i think that's a big progressive step in the right direction. it's a lot of work. that's what it comes down to. if i have any success, this

commission has any success, it will be our own agency making this report to us in the future, telling us about it instead of having the department of human resources tell us about it, but i think it's a really, really positive step in the right direction, and i want to thank you for all of your work. and again, to general manager kelly for permitting us to have this conversation. commissioners? any public comment on the report? >> yeah. >> thank you, francisco. >> so commissioners, not long ago, it was a hearing at city hall. and on the line was san francisco human resources. the topic was how people of color and especially blacks were treated.

despicable, to say the least. i don't want to say more. watch that videotape for yourself. now, i worked at the presidio of san francisco, and i've had talks with some of you all how we did things over there, having standard operating procedures. now, way back in 2012, i created a model, a concept for your contracting center. we did the hard work. we did the heavy lifting, and it was meant exactly for our apprentices so that those programs could start way back in 2012 and '13 and '14 and '15 and '16 and '17 and not in 2018. now one of you commissioners mentioned about institutional experience and learning and

knowledge. look at the florez treatment plan. where is tomi florez? where is karen kubic? do you want me to cite some more names? in the bayview, way back in 2012, we should have had young men and women filling all of these positions controlled by somebody from san francisco public utilities commission and working in sync with the city and county of san francisco. you should hear -- you should have heard that hearing. the people were crying, how they're treated like animals. and this is even in the sfpuc, more in the out lying areas.

i remember this man once rent, and they wouldn't allow him to go up in the elevator. they had to make a call to another person. they say oh, that's general manager kelly. you allow him to go up on the elevator. another woman who worked really hard was treated sexual abuse, had to go to another agency where she got her fair trial. so what i'm asking? where is our presentation on the digesters, a real good one. why are you having the opportunity with the -- and i'm sorry i took a little more time. >> i am, too. >> so those points, thank you, francisco, and people get fired up about it. i certainly do. it's about protecting the labor standard for brown and black folks. that's just the reality.

at the end of the day, when you delegate this workforce to other entities, they prioritize their own staffing, and they diminish the labor standards that we have here in san francisco. so if you look at that list that margot put together, it's mostly in semi skilled positions that are working with their hands. that's what the community is looking for. that's what they want us to watch out for and guard against folks riding on the backs of those workers turning what could be a really good career into a lousy job. so again, thank you for your comments. if there's no other comments, i'll move it to the next item. >> all right. the next item is the engagement survey results, and we'll have

justi justine leiter come up and talk about it. this is something we talked about to really have the agency understand the employees -- how we can get them engaged in what we do, and so this is a process that we went through, and we gave a presentation on how it works, but we want to kind of give you what the results were and how we're going to move forward to better engage the employees and the mission of the p.u.c. >> good afternoon, justine. >> good afternoon. hi. for those of you that don't know me. >> workforce hero. >> part of my job. as general manager kelly mentioned, i'm here to talk about employee engagement. so last we updated this body, it was prelaunch, and so i

think it was april or may. and we talked about kind of the system that we were going to use, which is called quantum workplace. so i'm here today to talk about high-level results, our focus areas, and next steps. so just as a refresher, when it comes to engagement, there's lots of different schools of thought, and how we decided to measure engagement was to really focus on the drivers of engagement because that's where you're going to see and be able to be actionable. and so it's different than looking at something from an outcome perspective because an outcome is a little more like a diagnostic tool. you can see where the problems may be but you're not necessarily sure what steps to take to do something about it, so that's why we're focusing on drivers. for results, we have -- we had

a really big push to get participation? the last time we did an engagement survey or an employee survey of any sort was back in 2012 or '13, and we had something like a 30% rate, and we were shoot -- participation rate, and we were shooting for much higher. we got that, so we were really happy about that. we have an overall 60% favorable rating, which is an awesome thing, but there's obviously room for improvement. and we have a six-point scale, so aniy whicquestion we asked, you agree, do you highly agree

shall in , that's the six-point system. we'll be analyzing it from a qualitative perspective to see what some good things would be to do. so this is our overall engagement profile in the p.u.c. it kind of speaks for itself, but as you can imagine, disengaged, you know, folks are fairly negative towards their work, barely engaged is maybe sort of an indifferent attitude, moderately engaged is somewhat favorable and highly engaged are just -- you know, they're super into their job, they intend to say, and they're -- stay, and they're putting forth that effort. we want to know what's the

discretionary output that you're providing to this job. what are the things that you're doing to go above and beyond in your job because that is really the hallmark of an engaged employee because that's what we want to identify, encourage, and harness to the extent that we can. so just to see, p.u.c. is on the top bar, and these are various agencies that we measured against. quantum workforce has thousands of clients, and so that's where these benchmarks come from. so you know, the reason why we do something like this is so we understand where we can improve. and so already, we have some good things to look at with our high-level highlights here. the top three where we rated

highly favorable, you can read for yourself. where there is room for improvement are in the below -- the red marks there. and so because of these top, i guess most lowest rated drivers, we came up with, as an agency, basically two focus areas that we're moving the needle on in the next two years. focus area one is communication, and that's basically just overall improve it. let's talk about what we do as an organization, as an agency across the agency so that everyone can understand what their colleagues do, what the different work groups do on a more regular and tangible basis. some of the things that we've moved forward already with is sharing weekly updates, and we're also going to be strattizing on ways we can

improve p.u.c.'s goals as they're defined in our strategic plan. the next one is recognition, so that's employee recognition. so how do our employees feel value here? do they feel like they are being recognized by their peers, by their supervisors, by the agency as an entity, and if not, what can we do to improve that? so there's a couple different things we are doing to address that. one i want infoto focus on is january , we're going to be launching -- a social recognition platform that's also within the same system as the engagement platform so people won't have to learn, like, something new, for the most part. and this basically hits two birds with one stone of the because of the social aspect, it's very social media-esque.

very facebook-esque. anyone that's interacting can see what's going on in that platform, so it's one way that people can recognize each other for great work. we also see this as a way to communicate more effectively and just to have a diverse set of communication tools. this is just one of them? but being able to communicate more effectively about what's going on in the organization, what, you know, great work is happening in power and water and in all of our support bureaus. so people can go to one place and see these in real-time, and it's exciting and modern and things that people are already using in their daily lives. the last thing that i'd like to point out for this recognition platform is that we've also tailored it so when they're being recognized, people are

being recognized for things that are their values. so for example, if i wanted to recognize general manager kelly for his excellence, then we have a badge, so to speak, for excellence, and that's also one of our values. so there's a lot of synergy going on in this one tool, so it's pretty exciting. and i'm going to skip back just real quick. also within the quantum workplace system, our supervisors and managers are ablg to make commitments. and so the whole point -- or one of the main points of an engagement survey is you're doing something about the results. and within the system, you're able to basically have action that is trackable, and so, for example, i'm a manager. i see from my results that my folks are more interested in professional development and career growth opportunities,

and so i developed my commitments to at least touch on those things in a significant way throughout the year. and so for example, i held an all-hands meeting for my folks, and it was focused on professional development. we had all sorts of exercises and speakers, but it was one thing that i committed to do in the system and to my people, and now, i'm able to talk about that in the system and from a higher level, we can see as an agency how we're moving the needing. and so we have, i think, so far, a little over 400 commitments in the system and a little over 200 completed commitments. these are some more highlights that we shared recently at a senior staff meeting, some of the things that people are doing throughout the agency to improve the engagement experience. and there was a great discussion, there was a lot of great ideas, and so these are just some of the ideas that

rose to the top during the discussion. this is the recognition platform. so coming up, besides launching that platform, we're really increasing the dialogue on this from a management perspective, understanding what people are doing, and i think that it's also a really great team building experience at that level. we're going to be, as i mentioned earlier, performing a quali qualitative analysis in that system, and we're going to be increasing program opportunities to increase engagement throughout our time here at the agency. so more to come on what's next in upcoming reports. do you have any questions? >> yes, i have a question. i think it's really great. are you tieing this at all into

individual performance management for people with director reports? >> so right now, i think we aren't. i think that is an overall goal of something that's long-term, and a program and a system that is applicable throughout the agency. i think right now, we're still -- because this is, a, a new platform, and b a reinr reinvigorated response. [inaudible] basis, but

how we can effectively tie engagement in promotive opportunities, i think we need to look at that more specifically. >> yeah. i appreciate your comments. certainly, the civil service system was developed in order to make sure that people are promoted on a merit basis and not just political influence or, you know, some good guys network or something like that. and i think that most of that was developed a very long time ago. and i would be interested at some point if we can get a read as to how that system is serving us in terms of the perceptions of the employees and if -- is it, in fact, giving the sense of fairness that the system is intended to do? >> well, i can maybe -- we actually had a lot of comments on hiring, promotions, and most

of them were not good, or really talked about areas where they felt what was problematic, you know, the tests are unfair, and, you know, a whole bunch of other things. so one of the things that we are doing is one, we want to make sure that people know about employment opportunities. the second is using consultants instead of city staff, so it's a lot of areas that we want to have more dialogue in and have folks understand when do we hire consultants instead of city staff and try to use that to get a better understanding of what the intent is. but it gave us a lot of information, so we are using the high points, but we're planning to address some of the specific issues that was throughout the organization. and one was, like, you know, hiring, you know, why certain

people were hired versus others, so we're going to address that, and using consultants is another example. so we're going to do a lot of that. in fact i'm trying to read all 3,000 comments, and they're pretty interesting. some are hurtful, but you've got to take the good with the bad. what i tell all the managers is i can't take it personal. what really matters with it is what we do with it and how we can move forward because this is just a snapshot. what we can do to change people's perception and address it. >> thank you. >> it's not always something people want to talk about, but there's always hiring and promotionals, but also releasing people. there's nothing worse for morale than five guys or gals working together as a team, and one not doing anything and

making the same pay. and i think it's not always getting down from the manager to the supervisor to make those calls, to be that bad cop, that's something that i would want to hear more about because it doesn't really happen in the private sector. and i think that civil service cuts two different ways. former city attorney louise renne was on the police commission at some point. she said it's easy to do as long as you have the will. you have to have the will to uplift the group and make sure that nobody's bringing them down and acknowledge that because that's a big part of our obligation to the workforce. >> and we receive those comments as well. >> from me? >> no, from some of the colleagues, as well. >> now we know. >> anything else? >> well, thank you, and thank you for bringing this to us. a lot of times, we get presentations that are about how good we're doing, and i

love those, but also, where we have areas where we need to improve, it's important we hear that, too. thank you. >> well, and i thought your interpretation of the results, you know, were excellent. >> thank you. and thanks to my team, too. not just a one-woman show. >> justine, you get it. always great report. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> so i have a public comment card. are we done with 7-b for now? can i couple public comment now, madam secretary? >> clerk: yes. >> okay. i have a public comment card from mr. peter alexander and if there's any other public comments, please fill out a card. it's item 7-b. hello, mr. alexander. >> good afternoon. i am peter.

i am here speaking truth to power, free of all fear, and i came to talk about the salmon, but this was so interesting, i had to put something in on this. talk about marketing, wow. and i don't know, more so propaganda because they kept talking how well the public was being served. the public's been disregarded. you were completely disregarded with smart meters, completely disregarded on numerous things. and i like pg&e workers, but they're being abused, and it seems like many in california are engaged in trump's raking the forest project, because otherwise, they wouldn't be involved in suing pg&e. that's going to hurt the workers. they had nothing to do with the fires. we saw the iron rod of god come

down three days after they were commanded, and they haven't stopped since. and so you talk about power, we've had electric cars in this county since 1904. we're woefully behind on wind and solar, and you know, there's a -- i mean, what are we talking about? the smart meters have been implemented without people's wishes. they've caused problems, they've been proven to explode. they were part of the fire sequence, and there's enough information out there that's, you know, only if you choose to be willfully blind would you not know this to be a fact. and the fact that people are charged so much money, and so i'm in favor of the worker's unions, which have always been undermined by lawyers, and now they're being undermined by the p.u.c. and the people that are on the board members of pg&e

which includes one very rich guy named rothschild who had a lot to do with this. if you're interested in reading up on this, you can read up on it at stopthecrime.net. so right now, we have a teacher's strike, we have a kaiser strike, we have people concerned about water, about salmon, so i am that i am, speaking truth to power, and to all those whose hearst are true, i command all those to may no pg&e bills, pay nothing to the system. the strike is on, and it's time to shutdown the corruption with this beautiful royal interruption. the authority is mine to say as i do, and the authority -- [inaudible] >> thank you, mr. alexander.

francisco, comment, 7-b? >> mr. president, if i might. >> yes, commissioner moran. >> i appreciate the comments that were just made. i think there was some commission. this is the san francisco public utilities commission. we have no jurisdiction over pg&e. pg&e's actions and liability is the fires is under the california p.u.c. [inaudible] >> well, i'm not going to allow that, but thank you for your comment, and thank you, mr. alexander for coming. francisco? >> so i was lucky that this commuter was right in front of me so i could use my military training to look at the screens to know what the hell is happening. so the general manager said

these are just snippets. okay. let's deal with snippets. so one of the snippets says, and they're giving all these agencies, and all of the agencies have their scores in 78, 60, whatever. but when it comes to sfpuc, it's 38. so we've got -- we have to find out that. the second snippet, i'll divide it into two parts. so one part talks about general things. oh, in your environment, you like your environment, do you like your workers, do they help you in doing your work. everybody said yes, yes, yes, so they all score in their 70's. but when cit comes to thinking outside the box, when it comes to knowing what is your mission objective, when it comes to the resources that are not yours that belong to some native

transcri tribes, and i have my sister here -- she's done a lot for the community. and i used to bring the native tribes over here. they need to be consulted, they need to be part of this survey so that the employees, the san francisco public utilities employees can talk to those who save the resources for thousands of years, only for someone to come and contaminate it and pollute it. this is 2018, and we are using hetch hetchy water to flush out toilets. that should be part of the survey. so how are you, san francisco public utilities commission, going to use your talents more for gray water? why don't we charge salesforce and all taxes on them, instead of, like, giving them a break

and depriving our city of millions of dollars? and you commissioners know what i'm talking about, so another guy that's making statements here, he's cahoots with those don't have their hearts in the right place. it's time for you to look deep into your hearts and bring the employees and understand the water act and hetch hetchy and the rake act and so forth. >> thank you, francisco. is there any other public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is now closed. general manager kelly? >> the next item is water quality control plan update. steve richy.

>> good afternoon, mr. ritchie. >> good afternoon, commissioners. steve ritchie, general manager for water. if i could have the slides, please. i'm here to give another update on the bay area water quality delta update phase one. a few points to talk about. in the very beginning of this process, we've been committed to improving the fischery wh--

fish- [inaudible] >> -- what it actually means, but regardless, our proposed commitments are to a tuolomne flow schedule. we will begin the implementation process as soon as possible. we're committed to adaptive management to make the fishery improvements a success. the initial actions aren't successful, we will take additional steps. we're accelerating our efforts to expand and diversefy or

water supply to meet our water supply obligations. the state water board will consider the water quality control plan update tomorrow. we hope the state board's action will be to accept the proposed framework settlement for consideration, but the impact nature of the state war -- water board's action is not clear. we will accelerate our water supply expansion and divertfication efforts. we have been working extensively with the state on this, specifically on water supplies, we need alternative supplies for a variety of reasons. existing impending instream

flow requirements for alameda creek, san mateo creek, and the tuolomne river, and making san jose and santa clara permanent customers. we expect to convene workshops in 2019. and expect the activities and projects to move forward are shown here with potential project timelines. i won't go through the details of these. i did review these at the last meeting. the data -- the water recycle expansion project, work with alameda county water district, desalination, storage of the los vaqueros. one thing that was not on the list was in communications.

we do know these projects will take roughly ten to 30 years to implement, so this is something we have to be in for the long haul, and we put our shoulder to the grind stones to make these projects work. so in conclusion, we're committed to early implementation of actions on the tuolomne river. our commitment is to a healthy fishery, including robust adaptive management, which is a very clear process. at the same time, we need to proceed with additional substantial water supplies to make sure we can meet our

instream flow obligations as well as our obligations to our customers, and i'd be happy to answer any questions. >> commissioners? commissioner viator? >> thank you for your presentation. i just have a few remarks i would like to make through the chair. so we understand as commission that the -- as far as this commission knows and from your presentation, the state and the p.u.c. have not yet agree odd what the flow regime for the fish will be, but we're pleased to see the agencies have been working hard these past couple months to find an agreement, and it would appear tomorrow before the state board that we do not have an agreement, that is correct? >> that's correct. >> so we have not seen what the voluntary settlement agreement would look like, and we would hope we would see that,

understand it and at least make some comments to that before tomorrow's vote, but unfortunately, we are able to do that. in the absence, as you've addressed -- in the absence of the v.s.a. or a final order or possible litigation, it is important that we as the sfpuc do the right thing authorize the fish while maintaining water reliability for our customers. i understand that the east bay mud has seen great consults with close to 20,000 salmon returning last year, the highest number since 1940 because of their successful flow regime. i also understand that the sfpuc believes that their flow regime will provide the better out comes for the fish than the 40% that the state is currently proposing. so regardless of what action is taken, we should begin to implement our regime to indeed show that it will work with all due haste and for the sake of the fish. i would like to