registered nurses or any of the others are not allowed to practice anything on patients unless it's in the written plan, unless an emergency comes up. and the written plan was that sent me a tablet from gynecology which in the daytime a nurse gave me, had nothing to do with 5:30 in the morning. in her mind she made a connection that it came from gynecology there must be information, i'm going to begin the pelvic examination. so i wake up with this woman suddenly pulls off my clothes didn't take time to turn on the light or put on gloves even, sticks her hands in my pubic area and rubs back and forth. of course there was nothing to observe. she didn't even acknowledge my existence as a person. they are all required to tell you what they are planning to do. i could have been a mannequin. but she talked to herself. she said, i don't see anything. because that's what

she was there for she came for this examination. she couldn't see why she didn't see this thing she made up in her mind and when i suddenly shouted at her, what are you doing, she said medication. so that was the thing that set her off. and we all know what happens when there are nurses who engage in their own practices. there was one who was caught after 300 deaths many are never caught. there must be many people who become ill or die because of people like this running around. and until that nurse and the administrate administerrer at the jewish home are out of the field i will never give up on this subject. >> is this something is department is aware of? i would invite you to speak with a representative from sfpd. >> we'll follow up. i'm not aware of that case, but we will follow up.

>> thank you. >> have a good evening ma'am. >> good evening commissioners. my name is brian with the public defender's office. dpa published its 2018 annual report last week. 275 days late. the data report was confusing. since i have a few minutes to speak i'm going to highlight three points. first they report that 59 percent of sustained cases nine month internal completion goal but 293 percent improvement over the previous year. i did the math. the math suggests that just 15 percent of cases met that goal. i realize the goal was just a benchmark. both the percentages receive a failing grade in any school. an increase sounds impressive but sounds absurd under scrutiny.

they said the public filed one misconduct allegation. of those officers 85 percent had more than one allegation. actual numbers instead of percentages which are the more vivid story. that story is this. nearly 600 had more than one allegation in a single year, over 200 had one nearly every other month and 55 had one almost every month. the way they present the data matters and here they present data in a way that obscures what's happening and that's imbalance. finally, dpa claims in appendix a the chief lowered the punishment in nine cases. i went through the cases and identified how often the chief lowered the discipline from a written reprimand to no punishment. i found at least 60 instances when it happened. i don't know how this represents the number of nine. that undermining

the credibility of the report. so mathematical mistakes are one thing misrepresenting the truth is another. so i'm looking forward to next week's presentation. we can dive into statistics a bit more. thank you. >> thank you. >> any other public comment? general public comment? >> good evening ms. brown. >> yes, good evening everyone. i would like to use the overhead. i'm a little tired today. as usual i always come here to talk about my son who was murdered august 14, 2006 and to this day his case is a cold case and is unsolved. and i bring these with me all the time.

thomas hannibal, paris moffet, jason thompson, anthony hunger and marcus hunger. these are the people that were there when my son was being shot. and these are the perpetrators. one of them is deceased. and i ask for the last 14 years, i've been bringing these names here. and i just didn't pull them out of a hat. they are down at 8:50 in the homicide detail on the fifth floor with these names there and my son's case. and i'm still asking why haven't any of these names and these people been arrested. i know people are saying we need someone to come forward. but how long and when? is there anything else you can do beside waiting for someone else to come forward? there's a $250,000 reward.

take that money and investigate this case. i know you hired a new investigator for me. but nothing has happened. i'm still in the dark. i come all the time, i bring all these other faces with me. and i stand with some of these mothers for unsolved homicides. and that's my quest is unsolved homicides. because my son's case is not solved. and i do ask where was everybody when my son and these other victims were murdered. i bring these pictures with me all the time because i want people to see what i have to deal with for the rest of my life and what i have to remember of my son for the rest of

my life. and it hurts. and it still hurts. i continue to go to every form that i think i can go to where officials are there so that my son's face and memory wouldn't be forgotten. and people that are trying to be reelected into office and they are talking about public safety and people being murdered every day need to stop solve these cases so that i can heal. >> thank you. there is a $250,000 reward out there for information, i think leading to the arrest and conviction. 415-57-5444 is the tip line. any other public comment? . >> good evening everyone. my name is danielle harris. i'm the director of public policy for

san francisco public defender's office. i'm here again to ask this commission to take a formal and hard look at dpa's ability and commitment to fulfill their mission, which which as far as i can tell, is laid out in the charter. and it has been affirmed by the electorate over 80 percent to hold police accountable. as i told you at the last commission meeting the current rate of records released by dpa at that rate, it will take a quarter century for all the records to be released on just the current sworn sfpd. that in itself is unacceptable. then we have strategic plans presented tonight which nowhere acknowledged that holding police accountable is the reason

dpa exists. i heard discussion about refining our mission and defining our mission. it is not up to dpa to define their mission. their mission is defined very clearly in the city charter. and it can't be in name only. the only place that i see the words police accountability appear in those strategic plans are in the name of the agency. that is a problem. and then we heard from him that the annual report is inaccurate, misleading, unreliable and gives itself even a failing grade. the idea that these two reports, the strategic plans leave out these essential legally required tasks like two-year audits and 1421 while they are refining and defining their mission says it

all. they need to refocus. they need to reorganize. if these things weren't concerning enough, let me tell you something, what happened yesterday. as you may know, we have an open request to dpa for all 1421 records. and as individual cases arise we make specific requests. i would like to -- i have copies of these two letters we got yesterday for everybody. we first got a letter yesterday in a specific case stating that sergeant daniel silver from the dpa has no records under 1421. much to our surprise, the same afternoon. >> all right i'm sorry your time is

up. we will take the letters. just let us have the documents and we will have them distributed. >> [off mic]. >> i don't actually, but we'll get them. okay. thank you. next speaker. >> good evening commissioners. my name is rebecca young. i'm a deputy public defender for the last 17 years in the city and county of san francisco. i co-chair the racial justice committee. this is the first time i'm appearing in front of this newly-formed police commission, and i'm very happy to see all the new faces. because i work very closely with danielle harris i would like to finish her comments which is that on the same day that we received a letter from dpa saying no record on officer silver, we also received a letter from dpa saying that officer silver has reportable records under sb1421. and the records

involved an officer-involved shooting. and so it becomes something that cries out for explanation. how is it that on the very same day dpa can send out two completely different letters on the same officer one saying absolutely no record, and the other one saying records of an officer-involved shooting. so the first letter says there are no records that qualify under penal code section 832.7. this requires an explanation. and i am hopeful because the commission has oversight over dpa that the commission is as concerned about this 180 response on the same officer on the same issue as the public defender's office is. having said that, i listen very

carefully tonight to ms. hawkins presentation, which was excellent, i agree with commissioner mazzucco on that. and i listened carefully to commissioner henderson's report. and i heard a couple of things which would give me some pause. and one is there is new program and not all the cases have been run through the program. and the old data has not been integrated with the new data and there's brand new attorneys there and brand new investigators. and basically we are in a huge learning curve with dpa. that's fine. that should be understood by everybody including the public defender's office. however, i want, and i would expect the commission to set a deadline and its own expectations for how the dpa responds to records under sb1421. sb1421 is essentially an accountability by the state of california.

all departments must comply. and we've met with nothing but resistance. thank you for listening. >> can i give public comment on the bicycle reign issue? >> you have eight seconds. >> as a resident of the bayview i am really, and as a person that needs a lot more exercise. >> your time is up. all right. thank you. any other public comment? okay. public comment is closed. next item please. >> line item 3 adjournment action item. >> is there a motion? we have no closed session i take it? is there a motion to adjourn? >> so moved. >> is there public comment on the motion to adjourn? no public comment. all in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? all right. motion carries. we had four votes in

favor. [end of meeting] >> good afternoon. i would like to call to order the regular meeting of the san francisco public utility's commission. today is tuesday october 8th 2019. roll call, please.

(roll call). commission paulson must be running late and we have a quorum. >> next item, please. >> item 3 is the annual election of officers, discussion and possible action to discuss a president and vice president each to serve a one-area term. >> i would like to nominate president cane for an additional term and make a motion along with that nomination. >> i'll second it. all those in favour? opposed? motion carries. congratcongratulations, madam chair.

>> thank you. >> what was the motion? the motion was to elect and i i was unclear i nominated made a motion to elect. are there any comments on that? and i'm sorry if i was unclear? >> very good. >> thank you for clarifying, commissioner moran. >> and for the position of views president, you would like to nominate the current views president francesca vador and what is confusing is who is acting as clear at this moment? >> i'm chair but not doing the

nom nations. >> who is, the vice chair? as acting chair we have a nomination of vice president? any public comment? all those in favour say aye and opposed? congratcongratulations, vice president. >> thank you. i will hand this back to our president. >> can i just say something so that we're clear. i wanted to say for my understanding and fulfilled vince courtney's presidency and so she didn't fill a full term and that's why you know, because the bylaws said you can't fulfill two full terms.

so she was vice president when vince resigned so she assumed his position and i think we want to try to make that clear in the bylaws. and i think something that we're working on and hopefully we'll get that to you guys soon so that can be clear. >> i would like to speak to that as well, because i believe our bylaws do not actually clearly state what happens when there is a vacancy on the commission, whether through a resignation or some other reason that a commissioner leaves their post. so i've requested by the next meeting and i know this will take advanced notice, that we do have a bylaw amendment before us that clarifies that in the event of a vacancy the next person in line would then assume the role via an election and

that that person would then be allowed to serve another term because it will have been a short term just completing the vacancy term. and i'm hoping it will be more clear than i stated but we will work to clarify the bylaws in the situation since it does not specifically address what happens when a vacancy occurs. >> part of the confusion comes from, we have a term that is date to date as opposed to a length of time. one of the changes that we could make is to say that a term of office will be one year from the date that that office is assumed. so if somebody leaves made-term and somebody else takes out they have it a year. i don't know what issues that will create. but i thought that's one way to

deal with it. >> the reasons was that the terms for commissioners are in august for the bylaws and i believe per legislation. so that then gives a month for there could be the person to assume the position and get settled before there's an immediate election of officers and that's why the october date is are pretty important to stick with. and we can speak a bit to that and i wonder if our council wouldn't mind at the next meeting with the new bylaw amendment introduced, could explain the reasoning and i would be happy to take it through, as well, but my understanding is because our terms as commissioners begin and end in august per -- whether that's bylaw or legislation and therefore, sometimes the seat

does not get filled because of the process until september. so once the new commissioners on are board next september there's an election of officer. if we start playing with dates based on vacancy rather than appointment by the board of supervisors, it might make it more complicated because everyone might have different lengths of serving as an officer. >> i appreciate that and i think that's one of the things we thought to think through. the other part of that is that if somebody is serving as an officer and then they don't get repointed,repointreappointed, you have the same problem. so i don't know october is the solution. but we have time to talk about it as we go forward. >> thank you. >> i would just like to add that in the past we've had many different months. we've had spring, january. and we've been all over the map

and this does not occur very often. >> moving along minutes of september 10th any additions to corrections? >> i'll move approval. >> second. >> any public comment? any discussion from the commissioners? all those in favour? >> aye. >> opposed? the motion carries. next item, please. >> item 5 is general public comment. members of the public may address the commissioner on matters in the commission's jurisdiction and not on today's agenda. >> mr. decasta?

good afternoon. >> good afternoon. the question first, i would like to offer my condolences. one of the commissioners francesca vetra she lost her brother and she's served this commission as best as she can. and in doing so, she serves us and so i think it's fitting that we offer our condolences to you and be strong. also i want to congratulate the women on this commission the president and the vice president and i want to now going to the nitty-gritty. so we have had some letters between the administrateor from

the epa and the governor's office and the sipuc and as an environmentalist politics is one thing and being an environmentalist is quite another. so this both can be done by anyone. any attorney. i know that just from reading the letter that he must have delegated some attorney to read the letter and then reviewed it. the others who may have reviewed it but you know when we focus on the facts we environment oceanside treatment plan and one

at the bayside and then one in the treatment plant. that's mentioned in the letter. secondly if you know how the system works most of the wheels, the blue eirs are not working. who's fought is that? it our fault. thirdly, there are incidents that may be discussed today i don't know.

>> thank you. the next speaker is mr. dreckmyer. >> i would like to wish you a happy water year on october 1st. if i could get the overhead on.

you see the water bank is 1.28 water feet. and last year, which was above average, is about 150% precipitation and the puc had entitlements to 107-acre feet, so more than the full storage. and system demand pretty much leveled out. it was 196 last year and it looks like this year maybe 197. so we have a lot of water demand is down and i hope we take that into consideration

when it comes to the fish and the salmon-based ecosystem. sorry, this is a little faded. this is a graph put together by brian brown required economist and member of the overview bond committee. the red line is the cost of water and as it goes up, demand goes down. there's a price signal. the blue line until you get -- there's a grey line and blue line together hard to see but where that ends, on the left of that is actual demand and then the blue line to the right which is only blue is projected demand. and the gr earthquakes is what brian brown's model suggested to be on priced prices. you see he was incredibly accurate and predicting demand

will continue to go down. we will get serious about water entitlements will be and provide more water for the ecosystem that desperately needs it. thank you very much. but. >> thankthank.thank you. >> the next speaker is mr. rosecrantz. >> thank you. i represent restore heteche and california trout have sent three different letters encouraging increased access and recreation in the area in the national park. one to the mayor and secretary and one to the general manager and one to the superintendent of

yosemite national park and all have the same contention that the recreation access today is not consistent with what was promised when san francisco committed to with what san francisco -- with what san francisco committed to when it asked congress to pass the act in 1913. most recently, we suggested that the best way to provide that access is through an electric paramedicelectric powered ferry service drop people off at the falls and people can fish the grand canyon and things that are not available today. i know that on behalf of san francisco, the general manager expressed grave concerns and in our recent letter to the superintendent, we wrote, it will be essential, of course, to

com bluecomply with the raker act while ensuring there's any associated costs. we note that water supply reservoirs in california and beyond routinely allow boating indeed in most cases gasoline paramedic boats are allowed and confident the utility's commission staff is capable of ensuring that all customers continue to receive clean and safe water supplies. and there's been some press on this and more press on this and we've had discussions with the park service and interior and i'm just getsing you guessing you have had as well. i would like to open the dialogue with the general manager, with board members mr. carlin but we're available to talk to work through some of these issues.

thank you. >> thank you any more public comment? seeing none, next item. >> item 6 is communications. >> commissioners any comment on communications? you have two things that i would like to discuss. when we talk about the bay area, ridge trail. i see that the timeline on that is -- i don't see that right now. i believe it's in 2022 or '21, '21. so will that come before us again? because i see although it will be docent oriented, we're going to have bikes and horses and i

was wondering how that controls all those different vehicles. >> i'm with land management. i think you're referring to 6e, the recreation improvements on the watershed and we wanted to provide an update on the other programmes on the peninsula. trail is in there and this is a project that's been before the commission in the past. it's been awhile and we've put the city planning that released the document almost three years ago and so that document has yet to be purplished published for comment and review and this will come back before i goes anywhere. we're running our ongoing programme with the docents. that's the same and then other alternatives including cayhill as well, and that will come back

in 2020. >> i want an update on that. and let's see, how *r do do i have anything else? no that's all i have on communications. >> i'll add one comment on that that one of the precipitating events was the people concerned about access to the montero mountain and the approach is take, commonsense cal and commonsensiccal. >> if i'm not mistaken, the permit idea, you think is a good one giving them access and we know who's there. and i think that makes a lot of sense. you >> it will come back to the commission, the ideas that we have and anything we could will

come back for your consideration. >> thank you. >> thank you. next item, please. >> for public comment? >> i'm sorry public comment. >> before we get into that one would like iwould like to note this will be forwarded to the commission and entered in as public comment. >> thank you. >> i'm matthew blaine speaking on the same issue. i was at the last meeting and i was not available go to meeting. i hear it was productive and i would like to thank staff and commissioners for being supportive and i want to mention the timeline issue. i'm hearing a scarry timeline, taking no time to remove public access which is present.

so hopefully all of these be projects can move forward for public access. thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioners if you see on the ed declaration of emergency update repair treatment plant final off affluent force main. there's more than just a simple

sentence. there's a history of that being compromised to stability. who would ever dig through conduits under a force main without doing any assessment around 2004, compromising the force main? now we are in 2019, and there's this sentence coming before the commission and i know maybe it's in that book over there but that's not the way to do business. this is exactly linked to what i said in my comments. this force main millions of gallons go through this force main into the bay.

talking about treated sewage it's more than what some of us think and the own way you know this is when it smells really bad. the commission decided to dump the waste water -- this is a proposition where the people went dealt with the clean water and entitled it the water system improvement project. so we need to have a hearing on

the force main. and we need to have a hearing which is connected with this force main about a digest. we already have heard in some of the presentations it's delayed two years. how much will this cost 10 billion or maybe 20 billion. thank you very much. thank you very much. you just would like go back to the ridge trail and make a request that if you don't know now but by the next meeting if you can give us a timeline on when you anticipate the issue to be closer to resolution and before this commission. and anyone else would appreciate you having reached out to the stakeholders and engaging them

because i know that was a question and concern we had. >> thank you. i'm with natural resources and i would happily do that as soon as we have one. part of the dilemma is that we're waiting fort work to be for the work to be completed. it might be done as part of the projects. the radar will go in and we might be delayed because of the weather and it's hard to say ba the access will look like. it might take three months, six months i don't though, but as soon as we get a sense of that being finished and we can then map out what the rest looks like we'll bring it back making sure the commission is aware of it and keep the people in the loop on that. that's what we talked about on friday that we couldn't put a date to it and they appreciated that things got done first is we would follow behind with the next iteration. we have to be specific with city planning what the project looks like.

>> if you could keep us in the loop, either via communications or an update, we would appreciate that. >> absolutely. >> thank you. >> any other public comment? >> item 7 is a report of the general manager. >> good afternoon. the first item on my report is the bay delta water control update. >> good afternoon, i'm steve ritchie, assistant manager for water. the update will cover the bay delta quality control as well as the board hearing the stakeholder process which is a subject of the mayor's office letter to you and the upcoming planning commission hearing on water supply and analysis for new projects. first, on the bay delta quality

control, the voluntary agreement process is continuing and unfortunately, not as much progress has been made as hoped by people. but last official correspondence from the state was july 1, where they anticipated anticipated having a decision in mid-october. october 15th was the date included by which we would have included and determined the voluntary agreement package was ready for formal analysis. that parse to not be the case and we're expecting a report from state and that will require a new schedule which might extend that deadline for some time maybe to the end of the year. people are still talking and people are still approaching it with a positive attitude but it is just not moving nearly as fast as people had hoped.

secondly i wanted to report on september 19th the bored of directors held their regular meeting and that meeting they did have presentations in a structured fashion where there was a presentation by peter dreckmire, followed one by me and comments by the bosca director nicole sancula. presentations were 10 to 15 minutes in length and peter was focused on water slight issue water supply planning and i was broader than that, talking about the bay delta plan and where we are as well as how we approached the planning. nicole wrapped it up with the state of the voluntary agreement process and that litigation was still always a potential activity that we had already initiated as a back-stop and that is the situation now. they kept it in a controlled

fashion so not a lot of debate and discussion, but they did want to make sure the issues got on the table in front of them. and then, secondly, the stakeholder process yesterday there was the memo from the mayor's office directed to the commission and that identified there would be a series of meetings and workshops upcoming that the metro mayor's office is sponsoring. they'll be working with a variety of stakeholders on the agendas for those and basically reporting to this commissioner at the end of this process as to what progress had been made relative to coming together on issues or whether there were differences still that occurred but the mayor's offices has taken a different role to try to make that happen. and then lastly the planning commission had been scheduled at least tentatively scheduled for their regular hearing commission for october 24th.

it's being structured with pregnants by chris kern, the environment review officer about the planning commissioner's role for new development projects. i'll be making a presentation covering the puc and water supply agency's role in that sequa process. so that should be a fairly comprehensive presentation on both issues that the planning commission has the best possible understanding of the overall process that is engaged in under law by both the planning department and the puc as well.

i'm working with staff now on what we may bring forward to deal with that issue and we may be able to make that on the 22nd. >> that would be good. the commission secretary would be a party to that. she's smiling at me. >> we may have to bend the rules. >> i would second that. i would like to see something on the 22nd please, and ask the commission secretary to work with staff to make that happen. >> any other comment? i guess i'm a little unclear and i haven't looked at the resolution in some time, and also in listening to peter's report a little water update and i know we'll be getting one soon but it still feels like

the vsa may have stalled the conversations are shorter than we like. there should be things moving forward to help fish, let's put it that way. i would like to try to understand if there's any measures that can we can do, understanding sequa understanding these things take time to be able to work towards our goal of pain maintaining supply but making sure the fish are healthy and thriving. >> one thing to bring fort as forth is an update on the water supply planning effort so that you can see the things were moving forward to cover the whole range of needs to fulfill and that's been one of the commission's priorities as part of this is

dealing with the water issues, as well as physical habitat. so that would be at the next meeting. the other issue in terms of physical improvements that does require sequa review and very frankly, we are challenged there in dealing with the state the state likes to speak with one voice and so in terms of the voluntary agreement we thought we had positive feedback on the things we were proposing but in separate venues, representatives of the state have not supported some of the things that we're proposing. and so i think working with irrigation districts we're trying to find common ground with the state as a whole and that has been a difficult challenge to accomplish. so we're working on things with the director of department official wildlife and

secretaries to get clear on what path we're moving forward on so we can start to move forward but if we get mixed signals from the state that makes it harder. >> my concern is if we wait for a fully comprehensive agreement we'll continue to lose habitat and fish. so i need a better understanding on what we do in the interim on what to do towards the goal you expressed of bringing together the state win one voice because we keep coming up against this and i'm eager for there to be some thankingable movement on what we know is a crisis situation for our fish. >> i fully understand and i agree with that. maybe if we scheduled a separate briefing to actually delve into the nitty-gritty details that might be useful. >> i would appreciate that. i would like to be a part of that as well.

i missed something i wanted to bring up in communications and that was the declaration of emergency updates repair of the treatment plant. i would like a little bit more understanding of that. as it's gone from 2 million to 5 million to 6 million and it seems as if we are again trying to do this in soil that is even worse than what we thought it was going to be. and i just have a concern about that and i would like to hear something. >> en >> can i suggest that we finish

item 7 and then return to item 6? that's a different item. >> thank you. >> and we're on item 7. >> thank you. >> we can do it at the next meeting. >> no, i think we should finish item 7 and before we go forward if we can have somebody speak to that i would appreciate that. >> ok, that's fine. >> mr. kelly? >> how about as part of the sewer programmesewer program we can respond. the next item is the quarterly budget status update, charles pearl. >> good afternoon. commissioners charles pearl, definite cfo this is your quarterly budget update for the fourth quarter which end the june 30th of this area. normally we bring these reports to you within in couple of

months after the quarter but because this is the fort forth quarter, it involves a lot of details related to the audit and close-out of funds which takes longer. this is a first look at the year-end numbers and just a quick update, financial audits are underway for the three enterprises. the auditors are on site and the financial statements are scheduled to be presented in december. so just a heads-up and our quarterly update fashion. >> if if i can have the slides. so a few high-level observations are here. this is generally all three the waste water clean power and sf enterprises had a positive net result. water was almost a positive and i'll share that with you in a moment. lower revenues were experience

related to volumes for water and sewer and power sales and revenues. however we were able to off-set those with cost savings so the financial results came in positive but year-end and that we are able to meet the coverage and reserve policies and targets targets. for water and i'll share a brief overview. for water enterprise some high-level comments are noted here. we had lower water sales revenues and most volumes were due to lower sales resulting from a cool and wetter spring and you'll see our sources came in at 11.1 million lower both retail and water sales were down as compared to the budget. we did have higher nonoperating revenues mainly due to higher

interest income. interest rates were up last year and that was above our plan and helped to partially off-set the lower operating revenues. on the use's side, you'll see a 10.$5 million of savings and most of the savings as you can see, are in the salaries and benefit's category, just under 2 million related to vacancies and then we closed out a number of unspent funds carried over and we knew we didn't need to use those. so that savings helped off-set the majority of the lower revenues. for our waste water enterprise, again we had lower waste water revenue, mainly as a result of waste water sales tied to water sales as a function of water sales and that's how we bill waste water revenues. and so you'll see that was a net sources shortfall of $9 million. so sewer revenues were just

under 6 million lower 2% as compared to budget but we did again, have higher miscellaneous revenue and most related to interests, again higher interest rates. the lower uses provided cost savings again off-setting the operating shortfalls. most of that were from vacancies. waste water has a number of vacancies we're trying to fill and closing out of unneeded spending and budget. for the power enterprise we did have a reduced power sales revenues coming from a number of areas and we had -- we retrofitted our streetlights which is a good thing and that resulted in lower energy use which actually hits us in a negative way so a slightly revenue and we'll adjust that in

the upcoming budget but just so you know, when we set our budget the led lates hadn't been installed yet. we had also, some lower sales out at sfo due to a number of terminal renovation activities going on and then lower wholesale power prices resulted in lower revenues and those were the main contributors towards the lower sources and power revenue. on the use's side, again you'll see that we were able to offset those lower operating revenues by the 20.$6 million of.$6 million of savings. it was from a project close-out and we saw lower revenues about mid-year and we wanted to bring the enterprise in a positive

revenues and 15 of 20 million was related to that. the other savings as i mentioned in the other enterprises we had again a close-out of unspent monies and we did have slight uptick in distribution costs but net-net -- a net savings was provided for the enterprise to come in at a net positive for the year. clean power is always of interest because we've been expanding that program. as you recall during the last quarter of the year, we enrolled a final enrollment and revenues were up slightly and we had savings due to vacancies and all were working hard at filling. so hopefully when you see the variances, we'll work to bring those lower. the last slide i'll leave you with here is a standard slide that shows the metrics.

these are policy measures for the fund-balance reserve policy which said we need a fund balance between 25% and 68% and you'll see all enterprises come within the threshold and debt service coverage, you will see we met policy minimums, as well. lastly clean power reserve on target to be met. that's an expanding program and we set a multiyear target to get our reserves up to a certain level and made good progress adding to reserves last year. all details are included in the pant. packet. if you have any questions, please let me know and i'm happy to take your questions. >> questions?

seeing no questions. >> next item is capital financing plan. this is the fourth year we're presenting the plan to you. capital financing plan providing a snapshot of issuances you'll be asked to consider for approval during the upcoming fiscal year and provides a commission with visibility and