[gavel] >> chair fewer: good morning everyone. the meet willing come to order. this is may 1, 2019 regular meeting of the budget and finance committee. i'm sandra lee fewer. i'm joined by supervisor walton and raphael mandelman. clerk, do you have any announcements. [announcements] >> chair fewer: thank you very much. colleagues may i have a motion

to excuse supervisor stefani from this meeting? without objection, thank you very much. please call item number one. [agenda item read] >> chair fewer: thank you very much. we have the director of d.p.h. business office. >> we're here for this contract. this is a check-writing contract for the purpose of purchasing items that fall into categories which aren't feasible. set up contracts or issue timely reimbursements for items that are client need. approximately around 12 to

15 million payments annualing and over the past five years about 50,000 of that total is for the cost of the check fees. hr360 vendor received $22 per check. it's quite a small portion of the amount we're paying for. of the funding category bucket, the main bucket is for residential care facilities it's about $11 million annually. what that pays for is a patch woman who live in the residential board and care hom homes. we pay about 500 patches per month to about 58 separate operators. that average patch or the base patch we thought specialty is

$22 per day. i like to come in main type -- it wouldn't work for licensed operators to enter intoth contract. the monitoring for this contract is of the vendor. what we monitor annually have vendor do with timely payment, correct reporting, charges the correct accounts. the items that are in here aren't programmed. they are not monitored separately. they are part of wherever they fall. like the residential care facilities is part of our unit, which is called transitions which goes out and checks on the well being of the clients that are living there. that's how that's monitored. then those are licensed facilities. we're getting ready to start the

solicitation for this. we finished all our other behavioral health solicitation. we hope to get it in place no later than next july. we have 18-month extension request just in case. just in case hr360 isn't the selected vendor. it's very insurance if there's no gap. otherwise, we're in agreement with the budget legislative analyst report. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. colleagues any questions or comments? seeing none. could we please have report from the b.l.a.? >> good morning. yes, the board asked to approve the fourth amendment for check writing services by health right 360s. original contract was entered in 2009 with

asian-american recovery services which merged into health right 360. this could extend the contract 18 months. the board did approved it through june 2019. our understanding is to allow for solicitation of a new vendor for the services. the contract amount over the 18-month extension period including a contingency is approximately $27 million. we consider that to be reasonable. there was just a difference between what the legislation says in terms of the contract increase and the actual increase that's needed under this legislation. >> chair fewer: are there any members of the public that like to comment.

seeing none, public comment is closed. i like to make a motion to accept the amendment from the b.l.a. and if we can take that without objection. thank you. i move this with a positive recommendation amended to the full board. thank you very much. please call item 2. [agenda item read] >> chair fewer: thank you very much. >> good morning. i'm with the san francisco international airport. the item before you seeks your approval to award a new contract to bombardier transportation for the operation and maintenance of the airtrain system. the contract has original term

of 10 years beginning july 1, 2019. the airport agrees with the budget analyst recommendation before you to amend the legislation to return to the board of supervisors if the airport exercises the option to extend the contract term for an additional five years. the contract has not exceed amount $219,541,698. the contract includes several capital asset replacement program tasks but will include customer satisfaction and airtrain reliability. it will replace vital components on each airtrain vehicle which will extend the operating life of the system. bombardier installed the current airtrain system and has provided the services to operate and maintain the airtrain since its opening in march of 2003. bombardier has met all obligations and maintained system availability rating above

99.6%. airtrain is a proprietary system operated by bombardier equipment. the office of contract administration waived the solicitation requirement for this contract under the administrative code. the original contract was the result of a competitive request for proposal process. in order to ensure that the airport was negotiated competitive and fair price for this new contract, a staff engaged a third party to review comparative costs for the annual operation of similar systems throughout the united states including systems operating at atlanta airport as well as denver and dallas fort worth. the review indicated that compared to these other contracts at similar airports, the current contract will have an annual saving of around $1.2 million. the pricing for this contract has been negotiated through the

original 10-year term as well as the 5-year extension if that is exercised. the budget analyst has reviewed and approved made the recommendation that we return to you if we exercised the additional 5-year option which we agree to. i would be happen to answer questions. >> chair fewer: any questions. let's hear from the budget analyst please. >> the board of supervisors ask to approve new contract with bombardier for airtrain operation and maintenance. this is a soul source contract because of the proprietary nature of the airtrain. there was a third party assessment by the engineering reasonableness of the cost of the contract. we showed the contract budget for the first 10 years on page 9 fable 1 of our report. it's $200 million for the base contract. there are annual increases in each year of about 3%. there's also a capital project

component on page 10, table 2 which is about $18 million in capital improvements to the contract. we recommend an amend to clarify that the 5-year extension will be subject to board of supervisors approval. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. are there members of the public it like to comment on item number 2? seeing none, public comment is closed. i like to approve the amendment from the b.l.a. if we can take that without objection. move to full board as amended. thank you very much. item 3 please. [agenda item read]

>> chair fewer: thank you very much. >> thank you chair and. i'm with the airport. the item before you seeks your approval for an amendment to an existing special city store lease with air sun joint venture in terminal three. the proposed amendment will extend the term approximately one year and eight months through december of 2020 to accommodate construction projects. the airport can terminate the lease early with the 6-months notice if in is necessary. the original lease was result of a 2009 competitive request for proposal process and was approved by the board of supervisors. the current rent associated with the lease is either the greater of a current $194,000 minimum annual guarantee or percentage

rent formula with the mag adjusted annually based on the c.p.i. the tent nantes is paying on the mag rent. the b.l.a. recommended approval of the modification. >> chair fewer: any comments or questions? seeing none. let's hear from the b.l.a. >> this is a concession lease in terminal three at the airport. board is asked to approve for extend it for 18 months which would put it beyond the 10 years of the original agreement in the r.f.p. understanding is the extension is because of construction in the terminal. there will be new solicitation process prior to the terminate nation of the lease. -- termination of the lease.

we showed the minimum guaranteed rent to be paid under this lease in table 1 of the report and we recommend approval. >> supervisor safai: any members of the public like to comment on item number three? public comment is closed. you like to make a motion to move to the full board with positive recommendation. thank you very much. please call item 4 and 5 together. [agenda item read] >> chair fewer: thank you very

much. we have the director of real estate here. >> good morning chair fewer, supervisor walton, supervisor mandelman. i'm the director of real estate. i have with me jamie from the office of public finance who will speak to you as part of this presentation going to the details of the c.o.p. financing. i'm seeking your recommendation for the two resolutions before you. it would authorize the purchase of real property located at 814 through 820 bryant street and 476th street. gained lots are approximately 24,000 square feet with a single use mcdonald's building consisting approximately 2000 square feet. do we have the slides? thank you.

the purchase price is $11,520,000 or $480 per square foot. with transaction cost and site preparation, the acquisition cost is not to exceed $12 million. in january 2016 the board of supervisors gave oral direction to the real estate division to negotiate the acquisition of some of the parcels on this block which is adjacent to the h.o.j. and anticipation of a future rebuilding of the hall of justice. you can see in this slide here, the acquisition that is currently before you is outlined in red. in june 2016, the board of supervisors approved the acquisition of 456 street of

$2.4 million. with the acquisition of this current site combined with the prior acquisition we would now have a development site. long-term use of the site is replacement of administrative building to consolidate criminal justice functions currently decamped from the hall of justice in lease space or those that have been relocated to the east wing of the hall of justice. i would like to thank mayor breed, along with the cot sponsors, supervisor haney and supervisor peskin and support in this legislation. i like to thank the b.l.a. for their hard work and recommendation. with the review appraisal and approval of the c.o.p.s that the b.l.a. will support this tumitem item.

with chapter 23 there was an appraisal and review appraisal and both confirmed that the purchase prices at or below market value. like to turn it over to jamie who will walk you through the c.o.p.s. >> thank you. good morning supervisors. as mentioned in addition to authorization to acquire the bryant street and sixth street properties. it authorizes the execution and certificates of participation and commercial paper notes to finance the cost of the acquisition as well as costs demolition and site preparation work. also before you today item 5 to you a compan-- appropriating ths the certificates and commercial paper note in order to finance the acquisition and site work as just described by the director of real estate. the certificates will finance

the 11.5 million in acquisition costs and approximately 19,000 in closing fees. director of real estate estimates $642,000 will be used for demolition. the total approximate budget is $12 million which will makes up the entire not to exceed project budget. the certificates and commercial paper notes are expected to be executed and delivered in the not to exceed $16 million which is sufficient to fully pay the costs the $12 million project but also include additional $3.5 million for delivery costs associateassociated with the isf the certificates and commercial paper notes. the not to exceed authorization and appropriation amount also includes 465 thousand dollars contingency for such issuance costs to allow for market fluctuations in the market conditions during the final sale

of the certificates. the current plan of finance using the city's commercial paper program which was established in 2010, to finance the initial project cost. the office of public finance uses commercial paper as an interim financing tool which will be paid for by the issuance of the certificates of participation. in order to use commercial paper as an interim financing tool, the board of supervisors must first authorize a long-term repayment source. based on an approximate 5% of all interest costs on a $16 million certificate of participation, office of public finance estimates maximum annual debt service will be approximately $1.23 million per year for a term of 20 years. the incremental debt service associated with the certificates are assumed in recently adopted 10-year capital plan and complies with the city's policy of limiting the general fund debt service payments at or

below 3.25% of the general fundiefunddiscretionary revenue. in order it use the city's commercial paper program, the office of public finance will return to board of supervisors prior to the final sale of the certificates of participation to seek the board's approval of all related financing documents. including lease agreements, trust agreements, notices of sale, continuing disclosure certificates and preliminary official statement which closes the city financial information to investors. at that time, our office will present on the current interest rate market anticipate the structure and discussed proposed city-owned asset. i'm available to answer any questions related to the

financing. >> chair fewer: any comments or questions? supervisor walton. >> supervisor walton: quick question. if this approve, will we be able to purchase by the may time line? >> thank you supervisor. the answer is yes. we have negotiated with the sellers to give us little bit of flexibility. we're prepared to deposit $1 million into escrow in may. that along with the approval of the board of supervisors will buy us some time to finalize the transaction. if we need to go past may date, we have flexibility. >> chair fewer: i wanted to know whether or not -- i see on this map that we are purchasing the surrounding area of current hall of justice. i'm sorry, there's no page

number on here. >> i think that's page 3. >> chair fewer: that's correct. we're hoping to consolidate the functions of the hall of justice and the personnel into one site together that is the plan. this is the acquisition part of that. is that correct? >> thank-- that's correct. this acquisition gives us more flexibility than we had before. instead of having to relocate and rebuild on the existing hall of justice site, we're growing the pie little bit. that give us swing space to build a larger and better hall of justice facility. it give us flexibility to shuffle personnel around during the construction period. >> chair fewer: i see there are other sites also that round out this whole block. are those other parcels that are

adjacent to what you are requesting funding for? are any of those other lots available? >> can we pull up the slide? yes as i stated previously, outlined in green is a site currently owned by the city outlined-ioutlined in red is tht acquisition. if you look to the right of the red, you see two parcels. one is the credit union and the other is an s.r.o. those are not site sites that ae contemplated part of the h.o.j. rebuild. you will see one parcel that is represented by a long building that is just above the green box. that is a site that we have had often with discussions with the property owner.

if we can resolve our negotiations successfully, we might acquire that site. however, with this acquisition, acquiring that last site is not required. we have a developable site. we can move forward with this site with or without that last building. >> chair fewer: i'm thinking it might be prudent to see how much property we can actually buy in that area. if it's for sale. i get there's an s.r.o. there. i believe it's not the sheriff's credit union but it's the police credit union there. i'm a member there. >> i mess smoke. >> chair fewer: that's fine. s.r.o. site is not for sale either? >> to acquire the s.r.o. who require significant amount of relocation expenses because of

the residents there. also the politics of displacing low income units made that site less desirable. >> chair fewer: that parcel on the side adjacent to the green what it used for? >> we have been in communications with the owner. i don't want to go into details on public television. they have been reluctant in the past, we hope that renewed efforts will bear fruit. >> chair fewer: all the properties being actually in central soma and western soma is the last place we were able to purchase land.

>> i concur. >> chair fewer: any comments or questions? can we hear from the b.l.a. please? >> yes, supervisors. item number 5 actually approves the acquisition of the two parcels adjacent to the hall of justice. item 4 approves appropriations of the funds. if you look at page 18 table 2, it shows the acquisition cost up to $12 million and the total cost for the certificates of participation up to $16 million. she explained the process. she explained the board would need to approve subsequent legislation associated with selling the certificates of participation. the city does have a debt policy. there's a limit of 3.25% of discretionary general fund

revenue for outstanding debt. that does not include general obligation bond debt. it would be within that policy. when we wrote the report, we have not received the appraisal review. we did receive the appraisal review last night. it does confirm the purchase praise of this property at $11.5 million. i believe the board approved the capital plan yesterday. we recommend approval. >> chair fewer: thank you very much any members of the public like to comment on item 4 or 5? good morning mr. wright. >> i don't have any objections, i want to highlight that this is the person that you want to talk to as far as property owned about the city in order to build affordable housing pertaining to my demonstrations where apartment buildings is being built for $56 million which is

the lowest rate out of all buildings of the developers that's building businesses in san francisco. supervisor walton and we did a comparison and contrast on the projects that he's working on and we came up with a total of $66 million saving by using the idea of a developer on a project that's being built in mountain view and same type of result took place when we looked at another apartment building complex that was being built in san mateo. i would like to point that out, any land available you can consult with the director here to take care of the homeless problem and housing people in low income and very low income brackets. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. any other public comment. public comment is now closed.

i like to make a motion to prove items 4 and 5 to the board with a positive recommendation. can we take that without objection? yes, thank you very much. please call item 6. [agenda item read] >> chair fewer: we have pat mulligan. director of office of labor centre enforcement. >> thank you supervisor fewer mandelman and walton. this is the annual submittal before the board of supervisors for approval of prevailing page provisions. this includes the approximately 63 classifications identified with about 200

subclassifications. it includes the 10 classifications that are unique to the city and county of san francisco. some changes in this year's submittal you may have noticed, it's thinner. we consolidated some of the information to make it more consistent with both the california department of industrial relations and united states department of labor. also with that, we were able to in the same manner that the state and fed does it, we're able -- we were able to post rates that may come available in the future. say if they come online next year or year after, based on what collective bargaining agreements we have available to us. >> chair fewer: thank you mr. mulligan. colleagues no questions? could we have a b.l.a. report please? >> this is the annual approval by the board of supervisors of the prevailing wage rates. the board has discretion to

approve these rates or other rates they may be necessary. page 22 of our report shows the classifications and contract services that would be covered by the prevailing wage rate as we always say in our report. the actual fiscal impact is a unknown because we don't know the impact any of these rate increases would have on specific contracts. they only have impact on the contracts come up to bid. attempt attachment 2 gives genel summary how the wage and benefits will be revised under the prevailing wage rates. we consider approval to be policy matter for the board. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. any comments? any public comment. any members like to speak on this item? hello mr. wright. >> this flows with my previous

demonstration pertaining to the exempt employees who work for the city and county of san francisco from 5 up to 25 years that's doing the same type of work as the coworkers but yet know don't get medical benefits, annuity and retirement plan. as far as this prevailing wages is concerned, it's the same type of situation. you doing the same type of work as other people that's employed by the city but not making the same amount of money. you want to point out that, that's a violation of federal law pertaining to employment discrimination law title 7 of the united states of america's code service. the u.s. attorney general's and the lawyers edition. that's federal law pertaining to the 2000e-series, unequal pay act violation. will be in violation of constitutional law too pertaining to the 14th amendment pertaining to due

process and equal protection under the law. that's not equal protection by having a set of employees do the same work and have one set get paid more money than the other set when they doing same type of work and same amount of hours per week. it flows with my early demonstrations and derivative. i move to have you incorporate it and have prevailing wages granted. >> chair fewer: thank you very much mr. wright. mr. mark gleeson, you like to give public comment? >> good morning supervisors. mark gleason with teamsters joint coun counsel 7. great appreciation for everybody who worked on this projects.

we want to extend our appreciation, thank you so much. >> chair fewer: thank you very much mr. gleason. mr. mulligan, i have one question for you. pertaining to 21c, is this legislatiowill apply to parking attendants? >> it will apply to parking attendants and workers on parking structures both in the city and county of san francisco proper and s.f.o. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. seeing no comments or questions. i move this with a positive -- oh. public comment is closed. i like to move to the board with a positive recommendation. thaethank you very much. do we have any other items

before us today? >> there are no other items. >> chair fewer: this meeting is adjourned.

adjourned. >> shop & dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do their shop & dine in the 49 with within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services within the neighborhood we help san francisco remain unique successful and vibrant so where will you shop & dine in the 49 my name is jim woods i'm the founder of woods beer company and the proprietor of woods copy k open 2 henry adams what makes

us unique is that we're reintegrated brooeg the beer and serving that cross the table people are sitting next to the xurpz drinking alongside we're having a lot of ingredient that get there's a lot to do the district of retail shop having that really close connection with the consumer allows us to do exciting things we decided to come to treasure island because we saw it as an amazing opportunity can't be beat the views and real estate that great county starting to develop on treasure island like minded business owners with last week products and want to get on the ground floor a no-brainer for us when you you, you buying local goods made locally our supporting small business those are not created an, an sprinkle scale with all the machines and

one person procreating them people are making them by hand as a result more interesting and can't get that of minor or anywhere else and san francisco a hot bed for local manufacturing in support that is what keeps your city vibrant we'll make a compelling place to live and visit i think that local business is the lifeblood of san francisco and a vibrant of san francisco and a vibrant community - working for the city and county of san francisco will immerse you in a vibrant and dynamic city that's on the forefront of economic growth, the arts, and social change. our city has always been on the edge of progress and innovation. after all, we're at the meeting of land and sea. - our city is famous for its iconic scenery, historic designs, and world-class style.

it's the birthplace of blue jeans, and where "the rock" holds court over the largest natural harbor on the west coast. - our 28,000 city and county employees play an important role in making san francisco what it is today. - we provide residents and visitors with a wide array of services, such as improving city streets and parks, keeping communities safe, and driving buses and cable cars. - our employees enjoy competitive salaries, as well as generous benefits programs. but most importantly, working for the city and county of san francisco gives employees an opportunity to contribute their ideas, energy, and commitment to shape the city's future. - thank you for considering a career with the city and county of san francisco.

>> hi. i am cory with san francisco and we're doing stay safe and we're going to talk about what shelter in place or safe enough to stay in your home means. we're here at the urban center on mission street in san francisco and joined by carla, the deputy director of spur and one of the persons who pushed this shelter in place and safe enough to stay concept and we want to talk about what it means and why it's important to san francisco. >> as you know the bay area as 63% chance of having a major

earthquake and it's serious and going to impact a lot of people and particularly people in san francisco because we live on a major fault so what does this mean for us? part of what it means is that potentially 25% of san francisco's building stock will be uninhibit tabl and people can't stay in their homes after an earthquake. they may have to go to shelters or leave entirely and we don't want that to happen. >> we want a building stock to encourage them to stay in the homes and encourage them to stay and not relocate to other locations and shelters. >> that's right so that means the housing needs to be safe enough to stay and we have been focused in trying to define what that means and you as a former

building official knows better than anybody the code says if an earthquake happens it won't kill you but doesn't necessarily say that can you stay in your home and we set out to define what that might mean and you know because you built this house we're in now and this shows what it's like to be in a place safe enough to stay. it's not going to be perfect. there maybe cracks in the walls and not have gas or electricity within a while but can you essentially camp out within your unit. what's it going to take to get the housing stock up to this standard? we spent time talking about this and one of the building types we talk about was soft story buildings and the ground floor is vulnerable because

there are openings for garages or windows and during the earthquake we saw in the marina they went right over and those are -- >> very vulnerable buildings. >> very and there are a lot of apartment buildings in san that that are like that. >> and time to. >> >> retrofit the buildings so people can stay in them after the earthquake. >> what do they need? do they need information? do they need incentives? mandates? >> that's a good question. i think it starts with information. people think that new buildings are earthquake proof and don't understand the performance the building will have so we want a transparent of letting people know is my building going to be safe in it

after an earthquake? is my building so dangers i should be afraid of being injured? so developing a ranking system for buildings would be very important and i think for some of the larger apartment buildings that are soft story we need a mandatory program to fix the buildings, not over night and not without financial help or incentive, but a phased program over time that is reasonable so we can fix those buildings, and for the smaller soft story buildings and especially in san francisco and the houses over garages we need information and incentives and coaxing the people along and each of the owners want their house to be safe enough. >> we want the system and not just mandate everybody. >> that's right. >> i hear about people talking about this concept of resiliency. as you're fixing

your knowledge you're adding to the city wide resiliency. >> >> what does that mean? >> that's a great question. what spur has done is look at that in terms of recovery and in new orleans with katrina and lost many of the people, hasn't recovered the building stock. it's not a good situation. i think we can agree and in san we want to rebuild well and quickly after a major disaster so we have defined what that means for our life lines. how do we need the gasolines to perform and water perform after an earthquake and the building stock as well, so we have the goal of 95% of our homes to be ready for shelter in place after a major earthquake, and that way people can stay within the city. we don't lose our work force.

we don't lose the people that make san francisco so special. we keep everybody here and that allow us to recover our economy, and everything because it's so interdependent. >> so that is a difficult goal but i think we can achieve it over the long time so thank you very much for hosting us and hosting this great exhibit, and thank you very much for joining >> a way of life in san francisco. when the next major quake hits, the city hopes a new law requiring seismic upgrades to five story buildings will help keep more residents safe and sound. tell me a little about the soft story program. what is it? >> it's a program the mayor signed into law about a year and a half ago and the whole idea behind it was to help

homeowners strengthen buildings so that they would not collapse. >> did you the soft story program apply to all buildings or building that were built in a certain time frame? >> it only applies to buildings built in the time frame of 1978 and earlier. it's aimed at wood framed buildings that are three or more stories and five or more units. but the openings at the garage level and the street level aren't supported in many buildings. and without the support during a major earthquake, they are expected to pancake and flatten ~. many of the buildings in this program are under rent control so it's to everybody's advantage to do the work and make sure they protect their investment and their tenant. >> notices have gone out to more than 6,000 owners of

potentially at-risk properties but fewer than one-third have responded and thousands might miss an important deadline in september to tell the city what they plan to do. let's talk worst case scenario. what happens in a collapse? >> buildings have the tendency of rolling over. the first soft story walls lean over and the building collapse. in an earthquake the building is a total loss. >> can you describe what kind of strengthening is involved in the retrofit? >> one of the basic concepts, you want to think of this building kind of like rubber band and the upper three floor are very rigid box and the garage is a very flexible element. in an earthquake the garage will have a tendency to rollover. you have to rubber band analogy that the first floor is a very tough but flexible rubber band such that you never drive force he to the upper floors. where all your damage goes into controlled element like plywood or steel frame. >> so, here we are actually

inside of a soft story building. can we talk a little about what kinds of repairs property owners might expect? >> it's a very simple process. we deliberately tried to keep it that way. so, what's involved is plywood, which when you install it and make a wall as we have done here already, then you cover it with this gypsum material. this adds some flexibility so that during the earthquake you'll get movement but not collapse. and that gets strengthened even more when we go over to the steel frame to support the upper floor. >> so, potentially the wood and the steel -- it sounds like a fairly straightforward process takes your odds of collapse from one in 4 to one in 30? >> that's exactly right. that's why we're hoping that

people will move quickly and make this happen. >> great. let's take a look. so, let's talk steel frames. tell me what we have going on here. >> well, we have a steel frame here. there are two of these and they go up to the lower floor and there is a beam that go across, basically a box that is much stiffer and stronger. ~ goes so that during the earthquake the upper floor will not collapse down on this story. it can be done in about two weeks' time. voila, you're done. easy. >> for more information on how to get your building earthquake ready, >> good afternoon.

call to order the regular meeting of the san francisco public utilities commission. tuesday, april 23, 2019. roll call, please. we have a quorum. >> president caen: commissioners, before you you have the meeting, the minutes of march 26. are there any corrections or additions? >> no, i would like to move the item. >> second. >> president caen: any public comment? all those in favor? opposed? the motion carries. next item, please. >> clerk: item 4, general public comment. members of the public may address the commission on matters in the commission's jurisdiction and not on today's agenda. >> president caen: i do have a speaker card from mr. rosecrans.

welcome. >> thank you, chair caen and commissioners, and nice to see with mr. carlin in the chair on the horseshoe. some of you may have seen the article in the chronicle how hard it was to have a unique experience in yosemite, and 4, 5 million people a year go there, and most go to the yosemite valley and very few go to hetch hetchy, and the rain reason -- well, a reservoir there. but there's more. it's not just as a reservoir there. the gate is locked every day. there's no camping, there are few trails. so it's kind of hard to go there and get that yosemite experience. even though as many people say it's very beautiful still with

the reservoir. it's not what you guys said in 1912, and maybe you don't think you bear the responsibility for what happened in 1912 but you promised congress in 1912 and 1913 that it was utter absurdity there be any claim that tourists or campers would be excluded or the pleasure to be found would be lessened. you said there would be greater opportunity for tourists with the reservoir in place. so, i'm wondering if that's a commitment that the commission still believes in. or whether a deal cut decades ago with steven mather would get you out of it or how you feel. and i know you don't typically respond, so -- we'll have to get back to you guys on that one.

thank you. >> president caen: thank you. are there any other comments? seeing none, next item, please. >> communications. item 5. >> president caen: commissioners, any comments? i have a question on the streetlight program. so, i know that, i don't know this for sure but i think that pg&e also will be changing over their lights to l.e.d. >> that's correct, commissioner. >> and do we know the timing on that? >> they have begun, and we get reports from them on how they are progressing. i would be -- i do believe i include some information about that in the report itself. but i would be happy to provide more to you if you are interested. >> right, no, that was a very

thorough report. i appreciated it. >> thank you. >> now, we have all the wires, the power for the lights, correct? >> so, we have the wires for our lights where they connect to the pg&e system. so, pg&e has a responsibility for distribution of the electricity up to a box in the sidewalk. and then from that box we distribute it to the lights that we own and operate. >> so, who is -- who has jurisdiction over the wires either above the street or buried in the street? >> generally speaking, pg&e does. certainly for wires that are above the street and not just serving streetlights. so to clarify that point, there are a couple construction areas

where what was underground streetlight distribution wires have been put above ground temporarily while construction is underway. and in those situations, typically we own, we own those wires. >> ok. i have been getting some comments from people that wonder why their wires aren't buried like others. >> uh-huh. uh-huh. >> so that would be under the jurisdiction of pg&e? >> yes, and san francisco has an undergrounding program, that's a companion to the state's undergrounding program, where in the utilities like pg&e, collect funds from rate payers, and allocate those funds out for undergrounding. most of -- much of san francisco, not all, but much of san francisco was undergrounded

back in the 1990s, and that's when san francisco's allocation of those funds was spent. in the 1990s and early 2000s. >> so back at the bottom of the line. other cities are using allocations now ahead of us. >> i see. ok. and because in many areas, most of the area undergrounded and then a block or two is above ground, and many of those circumstances there was some reason why just that block wasn't undergrounded at that time. typically that's because when undergrounding occurs, the residents and businesses, the property owners also have to make an investment in undergrounding their, the drop that comes to their home. so that additional expenditure

is not always in the budget of households and businesses, and so that area would be passed over during the undergrounding. you'll see little spots like that throughout san francisco where it's otherwise undergrounded. >> very clear, thank you. >> you are welcome. >> president caen: public comments. on the communications. next item, please. >> item 6, other commission business, recognition of gerard murphy, on 36 and a half years of the distinguished service to san francisco public utilities commission. >> jerry, come on down. [applause] >> so, you don't get to speak

yet, jerry. kind of personal. jerry and i grew up together in the same neighborhood. he's a little younger than me, i don't understand why he's retiring just yet, but -- he came to wastewater in 1982, i was working in the lab, he was, he's the laborer, worked up to being a chief and seeing the things such as health and safety for the wastewater enterprise. i was surprised when i was told he was retiring, oh, yeah, we went to the same elementary, st. james, and had our knuckles wrapped by the sisters, and happy for you and for wendy, and wish you the best of luck in your retirement and i'm sorry to see you go. >> thank you very much. i don't know what i get to say