basically in their final license application and aquatic weed control and one other i can bring to mind those aren't been approved by anybody yet or designed or implemented and one question that's not yet been answered which we'll have to answer at some point which is how much is san francisco's share of the funds with the district because we're in a partnership on this. >> what about with the flow measures? >> we'll provide that at the

next meeting. it is a series of proposed flow measures with different purposes. one of our challenges is trying to take large complex stuff and boil it down to a relatively understandable way. the flow measures tend to be large, complex tables. we're going to do our best to make that intelligible for everybody to understand and i'm confident we can. it will take some work. >> commissioner: that would great. i think it's not net gain question commissioner moran was trying to act partly. >> commissioner: also as we hear comments being made about the v.s.a., it's hard sometimes to separate what is the generic concern about the v.s.a. is it a

wathershed and how much is the tuolumne river and those are quite different. i think there has been concern the baseline may not be adequately or correctly described within the v.s.a. it sounds like the baseline on the tuolumne is being correctly described. so there may be one comment doesn't apply to all watersheds. >> i think that's definitely a true statement. >> commissioner: great, we know you have your work cut out so in advance thank you. we appreciate your efforts here. >> thank you. >> commissioner: thank you ritchie. i have four speaker cards here for public comment. you'll have three minutes for your comment. i'd like you to state your name and the community in which you live. so first speaker henrich

alberts. >> interview: hi, i'm henrich albert speaking for the sierra club for the san francisco bay chapter of the sierra club. i'd like to speak about the volunta voluntary settlement agreement we've been talk about. and thank you very much. the commissioners raised good questions about that. i was in the water board's meeting on december 12th when the voluntary agreement was announced publicly. we event -- haven't seen details before and we weren't categorically opposed to voluntary settlement agreement, if there's a good one, we're for

it. i was encouraged to see there was something concrete. as i say, we hadn't really seen anything. now that we've had a chance to analyze this, i'm disappointed to say this is basically a sham. i have here an analysis that possibly some of you folks have already seen. this was done by barry nelson on behalf of the golden gate salmon association. i have copies for all of you folks here. i'd like to go over it just briefly. the whole analysis is brief. but basically it points out four key defects. the first is science. this agreement really is note based on any science and i think that's been generally true that while you folks and some of the

irrigation districts have talked about specific analysis of what these to be done to save these river environments and the wildlife that depends on them, they haven't been peer reviewed and are in conflict with the specific analysis that's been done by the state water board researchers, the consultants they hired and independent scientists. since you folks have an interest in this, your science is suspect. another thing is -- >> commissioner: have you 30 seconds. >> we think there's funny numbers on both the additional water to be provided and on the habitat restoration. i think the point was raised there may be some new habitat restoration here but there's a

lot of stuff being counted that is already committed. the last thing is that we and the other n.g.o.s have been excluded from this -- [comments off-mic] [chime] >> commissioner: mr. albert, in what community do you live? >> i live in alameda. >> commissioner: thank you for your comments. the next speaker is dave warner. >> interview: >> i'm dave warner i live in palo alto. and in the december 11th meeting with the proal

proposal you gave cause for optimism. and i understand at your next meeting there are plans to turn the proposed resolution into a written form that incorporates commissioner moran's comments which i think they already do such that the commission can vote to approve it and thank you for taking steps that reflect the comments from the [laughter] meeting. consider taking progress by making it a regular agenda item. [stand by]

. >> we are really disappointed in you as a commission right now. you're throwing a wrench in the years-long careful process in coming to a compromise on managing this vital resource that we call water. it's vital to all life, not just people. you have heard in no uncertain terms that the bay ecosystem is dieing because we people have

continued to overdraft the tuolomne river in this case, but all the rivers in general. and you know this. you've heard this many times. so clearly, this looks like a very short-sighted and political stand that you have taken, and so i have to say shame on you. your constituents deserve a real explanation by you going against what the majority supports, saving this irplaceable bay ecosystem and are under your jurisdiction. so the hard fought amendment as now written and backed by the state water board, it reaches this fair compromise, at least within reason. so i urge you now to drop out of this lawsuit, give the citizens the opportunity to continue conservation efforts in combination with this water

plan going forward. this just isn't time left to recover from mistakes like this one that you're making, so don't set yourself up for a certain future of regret. thank you for listening to me. >> thank you. the last speaker's nicole sendula. >> i did want to speak today, and pleased to receive the report from mr. ritchie. bosca continued to support the work. we are looking forward to the march 1 date in the hope that we'll have all the details that are needed, but at the same time, i appreciate the next steps that everybody has to take to protect the interests

of the water customer. that's certainly an expectation. we did get a presentation from mr. ritchie to the board -- my board, and they asked similar questions to yourself, commissioner viator, what is the analysis behind it, the benefits from it, the impacts of it? the costs associated with it, wanting to know more about it, and i'm sure we'll have that by our next meeting in march and i'm looking if ard to giving that to them because they want to have a thorough discussion with this and understand it and know whether they stand behind it or not. the other thing is i support and appreciate the conversations that you're having about what if, what kind of road are we headed on? i appreciate the time and energy that you're going to put

into it. we're committed to it, because we see that's going to be necessary in some form or fashion. thank you very much. >> thank you. are there any other comments from the public? seeing none, what is the next item, please. >> clerk: item ten is the bay area water conservation plan update. >> like i just mentioned, the bosca board did meet last week, and there was a couple of

developments. this will do -- prepare new demand projections for the entire service area. each of the individual areas, and the region combined using the methodology that actually was first developed in conjunction with you on the water system improvement, peir, and both san francisco and our agencies have continued to use since then. very data intensive, technical but documented and well supported demand projection process, so we're excited to do that. it is a two-year study, and the goal is to have the work done and completed by may 2020, that report, so the agencies have that report for their urban water management plans. one of the new things that we have in the work this time is the specific outreach to stakeholder task.

so this is not something that we' we've engaged in before, this model. this time, we're going to engage a full stakeholder group for this area, get reports on the measures that we're analyzing, the recommended results, and what are the conservation measures. we think this is going to be successful in making this a more robust process and making this as inclusive as possible. in the end, this is going to support all the things that we've been talking about, but more importantly, really, in my mind, are bawsca's water supply. the questions of how are you going to meet your obligations in the future. one of the first things is what is the demand and are we comfortable with that? have we taken into account how

the service area responded to the last draught? abag, planned area, the new developments, all that thing. so this information will be available for that purpose, and i'm very excited with that. next, the bawsca board also authorized bawsca's porpgs in the next-level studies -- participation in the next-level studies. los vaqueros is an existing reservoir in contra costa. the current m.o.u. has expired for the work, and that work was to secure the bond moneys, and so this is the next m.o.u. for basically the final piece of the planning work to be able to

make a decision by the winter of 2019 about whether we're going to form a j.p.a. and be a participant in this process. this is another significant development that feeds into the question of where are we going to get our next supply of long-term water supply projects. this is november 2013 to november 2018, and our use, while still lower, november 2013, that delta is smaller than it's been. so it's 8% less. i don't have a great answer for you why yet. it's something we're continuing to look at, but again, it's -- as we continue to track and watch these things, these are the important questions we're asking and try to figure out in our demand study to figure out

what is going on in the future and what we think is really happening. and lastly, it's hard for me to believe, bawsca just completed its 15th year, and we're pretty proud of that. so we did just a short video about the agency. if you can imagine, 1.8 million, 286 wholesale customers. we think it's important to get the message out. it's 11 minutes. it's available on our website, bawsca.org. i do want to thank general manager kelly and members of your staff who got us access to the watershed and also for pictures and other things to kind of add the flavor and specialty of the regional water system. so if you get a chance, take a look at it. we're pretty excited with it.

that concludes my comments. >> well, happy anniversary. >> thank you very much. >> and congratulations on the continued conservation. >> it is very exciting. thank you. >> are there any public comments? seeing none, what is the next item, please. >> clerk: item 11 is the consent calendar. all matters under this calendar are considered routine by the san francisco public utilities commission. they will be voted on by a single vote. >> are you reading the -- >> i read the summary. >> okay. are there any items you'd like removed from calendar? the public, any items you would like removed from the calendar? may i have a motion?

>> i'll move approval. >> second. >> all those in favor? [voting] >> opposed? the motion carries. next item, please. >> clerk: item 12, retroactively approve and ratify original amount not to exceed contract of 3,342,840 in agreement number cs-318, retroactively approve and ratify amendment number one, and eating 578,582 for a total not to exceed contract amount of 3,921,422, and extending the term of the contract by two years. >> i'd like to move the item. >> i'll second. >> any public comment on this item? i'll call for the motion. all those in favor? [voting] >> opposed? the motion carries. next item, please. >> clerk: item 13, approve

amendment number three to cs 991, authorize the manager to extend this agreement by five months and retroactively approve and ratify the actual contract duration of three years, seven months. >> i'll move the item. >> second. >> any public comment on this item? all those in favor? [voting] >> opposed? motion carries. next item. >> clerk: item 14, approve plans and specifications and award contract number wawd 4402 to the lowest qualified responsible and responsive bidder, anvil builders. >> i'll move the item. >> second. >> any public comment on this item? all those in favor? [voting] >> opposed? the motion carries. next item, please. >> clerk: item 15, approve the plans and specifications and award credits number wawd 2829

r in the amount of 38,272,200, to the lowest responsible and responsive bidder and arrange for pipelines. >> move for approval. >> second. >> any public comment on this item? all those in favor? [voting] >> opposed? the motion carries. [agenda item read] >> and this was the item we were promised additional information on this project, is that right? >> that's correct. >> and i would like to hear the

presentation. >> all right. >> 71 million. that's a lot of money. >> good afternoon. i'm shelby campbell, the project manager for 1550 evans. you've heard a great deal about the engagement process for the community center at 1550 evans. now let me tell you what we've accomplished to ready the project for construction. here's a timeline for what we've accomplished over the last two years, and what's next. i'll go through this in greater detail during the presentation, but to summarize, in 2017, we began the planning process, and by year end, we had the

building program, site plans and floor plans completed and approved. we celebrated with the unvailing of the site plan at the sccs's annual holiday event. in 2018, we proceeded with design of the building architecture and site landscaping. we completed civic design review phase one and two, and zoning for the site to allow for the project's proposed uses of the site, and we issued an rfqp for a cmgc in august.

we worked with the community and secf staff throughout the planning process. the priorities established for the new community center included to create a place of destination, job training, and career development, affordable space for community-based organizations, green open spaces for events, a hub to connect and network, a child care center and playground, and a building of high air quality and energy efficiency. from there, we established the programatic components of the project, including providing space for future education component at the site. the community center is designed to have a public realm on the ground fair, community

space and classrooms on the second floor, and affordable cooffice space for our workforce development partners on the third floor. the public realm includes a child care center for over 70 children, a public cafe, and the alex pitcher pavilion. the multipurpose space on the second level is available for workforce training, community meetings, and affordable event space. activated open space was also a very high priority for the community in a neighborhood where there's disproportionately less green space than other areas of the city. the desired open place included play areas, garden space, picnic gardens, and demonstration wetlands. with the key components of the project determined, studies were completed to evaluate the best layout for the site. with this layout, the campus floor cart garden will be a destination on third street,

with open space for special evented and weekend picnicking. the layout provides street-lined views for high visibility of all components of the project. the placement of the buildings frame the open space and separate activities from the parking in the rear of the site. several architectural concept studies were evaluated with sccf committee and civic design commission. key components of the project included carports and entry canopy which span the buildings and will portray a sense of welcome to the community and provide a place of respite from the sun while providing a place to gather outdoors. other key concepts included a cafe in the lobby with outdoor seating and a central plaza on coron -- anchored by public art.

a this slide illustrates how the features of pattern, views, and sun shieds were incorporated into the -- shades were incorporated into the architecture. the facade of the lead design shade the southwest facing glass while maintaining views to the surrounding open space and campus. the use of natural warm tones and durable exterior materials complements the green surroundings and further reinforces this is a place for community. the tall, trans -- two-story transparent entry lobby linked by the protective canopy expresses a grand entry, and the use of masonry creates a

base to another transparent facade. each of the daycare classrooms are expressed with a punch room opening and canopy. the back facade continues the use of warm stone and wood veneer materials and will have views looking towards downtown. key features for the activated open space include open cafe seating, an am if i theater adjacent to the alex pitcher paflian, a family plaza, natural play areas for children, a play area for the child care center, and gardens with you can with aing paths. the project includes 150 new trees for the site, for a net of 70 trees that currently

exist. here are additional renderings of some of the landscaping features that show the character of the space. the first view is image of the wood, showing meandering paths, and natural gistic planting. this image is of the embarkment slide, using the topography to create a natural play area. the final area is a boulder hill, using boulders for exploration and play. here is a picture of the corner of third and evans. we're a ready for a big year. we'll complete design and start construction this summer. we hope to award the cmgc contract today and hope to have them on board for preconstruction by march. we will also advertise for

construction management services by the end of this month. we received three proposals in response to the cmcgrfqp. all three are significant general contractors in san francisco, and as a result, the final scores were very close. we request your approval to award the contract value to pankow for a contract not to exceed 72 million, of which approximately 600,000 is for preconstruction services. the contract work requires a strategy to maximize local workforce and participation. pankow is partnering with l.p.c. and j.b.r. to partner on the local hiring requirements. now i'd like to share with you just a real brief video that gives you more of a 3-d perspective of the building?

>> you know, i think if it's similar to what the presentation you just gave us, i think we should move on. whi we have a very big agenda today. i think we want to talk about -- well, one thing i want to ask about, is why did it have to be readvertised? >> the cmgc -- >> mm-hmm. >> rfqp? the reason it had to be readvertised is all three responders were not able to respond to the local participation patient requirements, and we realized we had to readvertise to meet all requirements. >> what's really unique about this is we're using cmgc, construction management general contracting in a way that the contractor is responsible for

identifying businesses in the community and getting them ready to actually work in the building and plugging them in and deciding how break packages up so they can give opportunities to them. so as a part of this whole solicitation is what -- we wanted to know what is their plan to actually accomplish this versus us identifying folks and trying to force them to hire. they need to identify people in the community, see what the capacity is, where -- you know, what type of trades they're in, and then break up the work to try to bring them on board. so that was something we wanted to make sure was clear, what our expectations was. >> i have a question, yeah. thank you so much. it looks like a beautiful building, so i really appreciate the work that's going into it, but i would also be remiss if i didn't dig a

little deeper, no pun intended, on some of the sustainability questions. i saw that you lifted up the solar piece, some of the energy efficient sun shieding. i would hope like 525, like our headquarters, that this would also be a model that people will really go to and look to as a model for sustainability, especially around water energy and wastewater, since we're the p.u.c. but also around materials and toxicity and keeping down chemical content and all that. i know that lead gold is pretty good, but it's not lead platinum. so i don't know if you've gotten that far, but i would urge and encourage you to make sure that you're tracking that, and that those components and elements can get integrated now before the building is built. >> yeah. we're very close to platinum. we're pushing it, but we're not there yet. >> yeah.

just to give you a tidbit of stuff that shelby's bringing to my attention. she's saying, you know the building has a kitchen. and you know you like gas ranges. if you do induction, then, you get more points. i'm like induction? every time you see top she hch it's, like, gas. i'm, like, what is induction? so she convinced me we're going platinum to the highest level that we can achieve. >> you know, especially if there issy a component around water-wastewater, i think if we can do something else with the community center, that's fantastic. if harlan tries to give you a hard time about it, i've got your back. >> yeah.

we're -- the rain water from the roof visibly draining to the wetlands, so we'll have a run off from the roof. >> any black water? >> the building doesn't support it. i mean, it's not a large enough building for that. >> mm-hmm. >> great. well, i'd like to move the item. >> i'll second. >> any public comment? all those in favor? [voting] >> opposed? motion carries. it does sound very exciting. next item. krerk clerk item 17, approve the terms and conditions of and authorize the general manager to seek approval by the board of supervisors and mayor to execute a termination of lease between the city and county of san francisco and orchard supply company at a ground rental rate of approximately 1,304,915 per year over the remaining five-year term of the

lease. >> i'll move the item. >> second. >> any public comment? all those in favor? [voting] >> opposed? motion carries. i have a little side story on this. i heard it the other day on the radio. there's a very famous sign that the orchard supply company, and so it was going to go where all famous signs go. there must be some graveyard for famous signs, and it was going to be displayed, it was going to be very wonderful. and then, the sign was stolen, so they had to go out and find the sign, which they did, and it turned out somebody stole it because they wanted to preserve it. so they stole it and put it in their garage, so that's the story of the sign. >> so where is the sign going to end up? >> well, we don't know. >> but not in this garage.

>> that's right. okay. next item. >> clerk: item 17, approve the san francisco public utilities commission wildfire mitigation plan dated december 2018. >> i'll move the item. >> i think that's 18. >> clerk: oh. >> item 18. >> clerk: we just did 17, which was the orchard supply. >> we just -- so this is 18. >> clerk: 18. sorry. >> i'd like to move item 18. >> i'll second. i do have a comment. it looks very thorough and that there's a process in place to take care of the business. i just want to make sure staff knows there is a sense of urgency, the flash over of the

sites, and i'd like to make sure the -- we move aggressively on those. and the other is that in the litigation with pg&e -- or i guess it's probation compliance issues on -- on the criminal trial, the judge seems to be making up new obligations and new procedures for them to follow, like inspecting lines and -- for all of them as they stack up against wind risks and that kind of thing. i just want to make sure that this does seem to be a very fast moving area in terms of law and regulation, and we are having to face a degree of environmental threat that we're not used to. and i want to make sure that we listen not only to the regul

regulator, but a sense of where that is going, and the judge will give us views as far as what's best practice, in that we have a sense of urgency and listening to that and responding ahead of regulation where that's appropriate. >> yeah. steve ritchie, assistant general manage he of water. >> we are very cognizant of the issues here, and it has been very fast moving. this is one area where we're not letting grass grow under our feet with our staff and frankly, the attorneys, as well, looking

public utilities commission and the aquatics science center in an amount not to exceed 1,184,389. >> i'll move it. >> second. >> i have a question. does this involve any open

trails? >> first on the follow up on the wildfire mitigation. the question again? i'm sorry. >> the first question, number 20, does that involve any public open trails? >> well, the bay area ridge trail is one of the trails we have there, so it would not add any trails. this is just technical support for us on management interpretation of what's out there, so these are really a group that provides understanding of the watershed lands and how they're managed

so that we can help create better interpretive facilities among other things, but there are no additional trails anticipated by this. >> nothing it being opened up. >> no. >> thank you. any other public comment? all those in favor? [voting] >> opposed? the motion carries. next item, please. [agenda item read] >> i'll move it. >> second. >> i do have a speaker card on this. susan ryan. wou would you like to come forward? [inaudible] >> thank you, commissioners. i'm susan ryan, the principal

of john rope aye an school. i'm pleased to be able to speak on this proposal. we have at our school a partnership with the public utilities commission that's been in progress for 2.5 years, and we have students from 9 through 12 grade that are working with p.u.c. experts and teachers that are going out for sternships at the p.u.c. to build curriculum that has the academic skills but also the career readiness to be able to enter into skilled trades pathways that were preefg mentioned by kathleen curtis. so the p.u.c. and wastewater, we have 55 families that resides in the bayview. really excited to hear about the community center and how there'll be this aalignment between sfusd and the public utilities commission and city college. and that is what we've been doing at o'connell. we're really hopeful if you

have any questions of me. it's really exciting to see our students working right now with green infrastructure. we have 8th and 9th graders designing homes, anticipating what would happen with earthquakes, and we have students working on -- in our environmental technology pathway working with green power and thinking about wind power and solar power as these applies to careers and academics, so thank you. >> well, it's so nice for you to take your time to come to us and tell us about all of those wonderful things. >> thank you. [inaudible] >> -- continue in scale and replicate this program, so

thank you for your work. >> we also don't get an opportunity to thank the public school principals very often for the work that they do, so thank you for your time. >> yeah, thank you for coming. [applause] >> all those in favor? [voting] >> opposed? motion carries. of course it would. next item, please. >> clerk: item 22, authorize the general manager to negotiate and execute a purchase and sales agreement and any relates documents with the state of california department of transportation for the purchase of approximately 1.7 acres of unimproved real property located at 2 rankin street in san francisco, for 8,991,000. >> i'll move the item. >> second. >> public comment on this item? all those in favor? [voting] >> opposed? the motion carries. next item, please. >> clerk: item 23, approve the terms and conditions of and

authorize the general manager to execute a five-year lease with a single three-year option to extend the term, for an annual rent of 118,332 for the first three years and annual rent of 121,882 for the fourth and fifth years of the term. >> i'll move it. >> second. >> public comment on this item? all those in favor? opposed? the motion carries. next item, please. >> clerk: item 24. approve and authorize the general manager to execute amendment number one to the september 28 memorandum of agreement for the bay area regional reliability drug contingency plan extending the plan by 36 months for a total duration of 75 months. >> i have a question.

the parties to the agreement include bawsca, but it doesn't include hayward and alameda, which are two alameda -- alameda, and the city of hayward. those are two entities that are going to be pretty important to any kind of regional cooperation that it talks about. the question, i'm not sure how to ask it and i'm not sure how the answer -- >> one correction. it does include the alameda county water district. >> it does? >> yeah. >> and hayward. >> well, it depends on how the tie is interconnected. they are very interested in any discussion. i'm -- i don't think that any future thing would actually go necessarily through that same kind of plumbing on that intertie. that's their biggest concern. they're an interested party here, but they're not putting

resources into it. >> well, i guess that's my concern. i mean, as we've looked at various ways, if we deal with desal, regional desal, water has to get to that area, and hayward is in that line. >> it's an option, but it's not a particularly attractive option compared to los vaqueros expansion and the aqueduct, coming all the way around. it has some challenges, as well, but certainly, hayward will be a part of any discussion on actual use of that project. this is particularly built around a grant that we obtained from the bureau of reclamation for looking at a regional water marketing program and trying to find opportunities there that work. >> okay. that's probably good enough.

my concern is that they are key players in all of this, and i would like it better if they were more explicitly involved in this process. that may not be possible at this point, but i will hold out hope for that and hope that anything that can be done to include them productively. >> and i would recommend we have some offline discussion about hayward and all of this. >> okay. thank you. i'll move it. >> i'll second it. i can do that. any public comment? all those in favor? [voting] >> opposed? motion carries. >> next item. >> i want to go on record saying i, too, do have some similar concerns just because of the timing of it all, but -- but, you know, here we go. >> about hayward? >> and about this item, and you know, since we're in the middle

of our v.s.a. negotiations and whatnot -- about desal. >> all right. well, if we can do that at another time. that's all right? >> yes. >> next item, please. >> clerk: item 25, adopt a conditional finding of sur plas for sfpuc sewer and streetlight easeme easements in the s.f. project site. >> move approval. >> second. >> any public comment? all those in favor? [voting] >> opposed? motion carries. i would like to make an

announcement before we go into closed session. we're going to read the closed session item and go to public comment, and then, we're going to take a ten-minute break. madam secretary? >> clerk: item 28 is an unlitigated claim antera investment and trading l.l.c. versus city and county of san francisco. [agenda item read] [agenda item read] [agenda item read] [agenda item read] [agenda item read] [agenda item read] [agenda item read]. >> is there any public comment on the items to be addressed in

closed session? seeing none, may i have a motion whether to disclose? >> motion to assert. >> assert. >> second. >> all those in favor? [voting] >> opposed? the motion carrie >> the commission has reconvened into open session. the renouncement following closed session is item 28, settle items 29 through 36, no action. may i have a motion whether to disclose. >> move not to disclose. >> second. >> all those in favor? [voting] >> opposed? the motion carries. other new business? seeing none, meeting is adjourned at 5:15

the commission does not colter rate disruption or outbursts plea silence your mobile devices. please state your name. i would like to take roll at this time. (roll call) we expect the commissioners to be absent today. we expect commissioner fong to arrive shortly. without president and vice president. first order of business to elect a chair for this hearing. >> i ask commissioner hillis to step in. he has recently done it and knows how to do it.