will be looking at. and then the calaveras reservoir expansion, we could just about triple the size of that reservoir. in doing so that would give us an opportunity to store water from those large amounts of water that flow in really, really big years. we have talked about 2017 when san francisco had 3 million acre-feet of water available but didn't have any place to put any piece of it. so that was actually, it would not even have helped to alleviate funding on top of everything else. we would have to be looking at conveyance of water periodically from the tuolumne system on the calaveras reservoir to make up for the supply. >> is there any other way of doing things other than the reservoir? >> are people looking at alternatives? >> yeah.

>> also said if we could expand the reservoir. i'm just thinking are there any ways to hold water other than building dams, or reservoirs. i mean, are there more progressive ways are there anybody anywhere on the face of the earth doing something different. maybe beavers have they changed their plans yet? >> to make a system work particularly our system given our water rights. ours is a storage bay system. the storage has to occur in a storage reservoir or in a ground-level basin. >> you said ours is a storage based system. that means there is what are the other systems besides storage based? >> those are the folks that divert from the river based on their water rights. either you have to have storage or you have to have a steady supply of water. one of the other is necessary to

make a water system work. that is why groundwater is starting to factor into these like the daly city project. like the union sanitary district, how they use the groundwater and we can extend our supply. >> like a reservoir but just -- >> , basically. that is the same issue with storm water. when we look at storm water supplies. you really don't have much use for it, because it is coming in a big shot all at once. if you can store it in metered out in different ways that is where we get the big benefit from it. a storage is key. >> couldn't you also do some sophisticated system that is a closed loop concept theoretically? so the water comes in and we might not be there yet technologically but as a city there is a big storm. rather than having to store it,

we then can reuse it within our -- >> you are leading right into my next slide. >> before you get onto the next one. we had a couple of storage projects in here where it says yield of storage. storage produces yield, depending on how it is operated. i just don't want to lose sight of that. you don't build storage just to have storage you build it because there is a water supply benefit that is attached to that. >> i assume you haven't put it in here because we don't know how it's operated? >> exactly. >> perhaps a better summary of that would be not that the yield is not a storage it is undetermined. twenty correct. >> the next slide i'm going to talk about a some of the local projects including east purified water, a san francisco satellite recycled water facility. innovations program including

slides. the innovations program is really to try to look at, you know, a grant program or something to get frankly wild ideas. different things that can be done. the ordinance is what people have done, in some cases where they have actually said to new developers, you have to find the water and bring it with you. that would be another thing there. the first one, you said purified water. i think this is a conceptual diagram that shows the southeast water control program is the black dot with a blue dash line going to a storage facility for water that is coming from the wastewater treatment plant. this would be purified water, where we would be treating wastewater in san francisco and converting it directly to drinking water and bringing it into the drinking water system. it would lead to a tank not to a local reservoir or an

underground basin. this is what we call direct portable reuse or purified water. there's always going to be some residual, that you have to dispose of some way. you capture as much water as possible this way. i had not included this on the list originally when we started talking about this. but the commission said, why not? regulations are being developed now they should be in place in about 2023-2024. where you can actually do this. san diego is working their way in this direction, and other places. we want to be out there, certainly looking at it and saying, you know, can this work for us? then the east side satellite recycle facility. we have a number of dual plum buildings there for which the ordinance has swept up a lot of the demand. a small facility located someplace to help meet the dual

plumbing demands within part of san francisco. the challenge on this is finding a location. i hear about empty lots that have stormwater charges. finding an empty lot to build a treatment plant on is a little harder. a little bit about our organization. >> have some questions about that, too. i've heard a lot about distributed systems, if you will. it's combine some of the stuff you're talking it might -- you're talking about. it might serve an eco- district, or that type of concept, or eventually in a single large building development potentially. have you done any projections are planning on what the possibility or opportunity for that might be. >> the ordinance requires those with development size be included for thousand square feet need to develop their own

plans. we are working with a number of developers on most plans for again largely on the east side. these are the leading candidates for the salesforce tower. they weren't obligated to come they just felt like it was the right thing to do. >> i think that could be interesting and concept even to hold up what salesforce has done and say look, you too can be a leading star and sustainability by reusing your wastewater, or whatever it is. i know technology still has a ways to go, but it just feels like throwing everything in the mix at this.would be worth considering. i don't know? >> we have a grant program to help people do that. >> we upgraded. >> we have been working on that to make sure. were doing a research project right now on a machine in our building, it is a water research project to test it directly

monitoring. what we have is a small treatment unit that produces portable water off that. i still keep nagging staff, i want a picture on my desk. i have not gotten it yet. i will be getting that. >> i'm not drinking that. you drink it. [laughter] >> i will have seconds. a little bit on the organizational structure. this is a water effort but it does affect a lot of the division. this will be managed through our water resources division. we are adding some stuff there, project level staff, to work directly on these projects. it does connect to a lot of parts of the organizations trade you cannot just do a water project. a lot of these have complex institutional rates that need to be put together. and then the capital project timelines. most of these are in the early

planning stage. were going to be moving forward on them. they will take quite some time in. >> just to wrap it up, we are pursuing various projects. we are adding temporary positions to support it. the ultimate goal is still in doubt because we are not sure about the delta water quality plan. most of the projects include one or more partners. they are in the early stage. we will be reporting to you on a regular basis coming back on our progress on these. >> have a question. thank you very much for your presentation. i mean, we talk so much about water supply, but we seem to be still set on our 265 modern demand number. i guess my question is, when are we going to revisit that. since it seems like we have been pretty significantly under that amount now for a. of time every sense voluntary or

otherwise. i would also welcome his thoughts on that as well. you know, i am wondering when an opportunity to have a deeper conversation in addition to the water supply conversation would be around demand projections? >> we will be talking about demand projections. one thing we have, and that is a contractual obligation to deliver 184 million gallons per day, if the demand is there. that is supply supply assurance. i am sure talking with them about that would be fine. it's obligation we have and if they have, you know, demands that come to that level, san francisco has an operation -- obligation to meet those demands currently. >> it is a complex conversation. since the demand has not been that, does it mean we revisit the demand? i know there is some discomfort

around that. and there is some assurances that are built in. we have talked about it. i am wondering -- as we talk about supply, it is hard to make some decisions. maybe that is the number were going to stick with forever for the foreseeable future. i know we have contractual obligations. if indeed our demand is less that is applications for our demand around supply. >> have to look at long-term. you can't just look at today. were going to supply water for very long long time. i think you have to put that in the equation as well. >> i would like to weigh in on this also. in my short time here, it is pretty clear to me with the incredible, you know, system we have right now and the amount of both demand, contractual obligations and other issues that people come up with that

this department is looked very deeply into the future. just to target one particular number, seems to me, you know, a little bit short sighted. i saw, you know, a letter that was written today that says some of the projections and the ideas are irresponsible. i take offense to that as a commissioner. i believe, you know, singling out one particular number, you know, and set up an entire conference about that is not the perspective that this commission should have. there are a lot of issues, a lot of things that are moving forward. i don't want to get sidetracked by, you know, one particular number, or one particular issue. i like the idea that this department is looking into the future longer than short term. thank you.

>> consistent with that, one thing that would help, the next to last slide you had up there was a chart of basically the construction forecast for the various projects. it would be really useful to have in some either a graphic, table or something, a projection both needs and sources. some of those are easier to forecast than others. the big elephant in the room is the water quality control plan. whether that happens, what forum and when, that is a big function that messes everything up. it would still be helpful to have, the various obligations that we see into the future, the various options we have for meeting those obligations and see how they line up. where we have a big unknown like

water quality control plan we can put something in, you know, as one scenario. put it someplace else in another scenario. what that exercise does is it rationalizes the difference between demands and obligation. the contractual obligations. the contractual obligations are very long-term. the demand is current. sooner or later they meet, probably, or might not. you can try to lay that out. i think that is the way you rationalize those discussions that sometimes sounded very much at odds. if you put it on a timescale, i think that will make more sense. >> i know that you have a public comment. would you like to weigh in on this first?

>> certainly. i will be pleased to answer your questions. on the issue have demands, and i think i mentioned we are in the midst of updated regional demand process for all 26 agencies. that process started in july. we will complete it this fiscal year. my expectation is i will come to you beginning february is probably a good time when i will start to have, you know, the projected demands. what is that picture look like? when we start to do this, getting to your question of how we go about these projections. you have to look at, you know, what is the adopted land use and practice within jurisdictions. what is supposed to be your projected growth, how are you dealing with growth, population and employment. that is on your demand side. and then looking what will be

due on the demand reduction side? i will tell you, the agencies, as steve mentioned, are highly interested in reducing their use as much as possible. there is multiple reasons for that. first, you know, there are the current, new legislative requirements making water conservation in california way of life. my staff members are going to the state board talking to them about how we are implementing that on a regional basis. she gave a whole day primer to them about the efforts we are taking to really challenge our agencies to really reduce their use and figure out what that means moving forward. i would be pleased to give you an update on that as that report gets closer to being done. that information is going to roll into this demand study. all of the actions of what further conservation can be do done. we have a big focus on outdoor use certainly.

also implement things like recycled water. our agencies are very proud of the fact that they implement recycled water. many parts of the service area. particularly in the south bay. that said. they also do not want to pay for projects that they don't need. they also are concerned about the bottom line to the fact that they can reduce investments that you make. they pay two thirds of every dollar. they are very interested i don't think there is a competition here for this idea of trying to invest in something they don't need. it's trying to find the right investment. it balances what is also their need for making sure they have respect for the environment, but respect for the fact that they i would be pleased to give your presentation on that sometime around february and see if that is helpful to you. and then continue to work with

sd. these will go out to 2045. that is our that said. there is a very good chance for my agencies, that number will not reach that by 2045. i don't know the answer right now. our last process did. that doesn't mean that you don't have a potential obligation. that is an important thing to remember because that is a critical component of our relationship with you, contractual or otherwise. they will need to hold you to that. but we can have that conversation after we have the numbers and figure out what that means. that would be my preference. >> that is very helpful. that is exactly where i was heading. i would hope, and i think this is what commissioner moran was getting out as well as we are looking at these supply opportunities both from a cost, as well as need to be able to meet our demand. at the same time we are having

the conversation of, you know, but actually are those demands. we do know that they are known at the state level. we are getting these development requests, and a lot of them. all of a sudden it is like whoa, there is another demand we were not anticipating, or projecting, or what have you. by desire, also, is to have an understanding. number sometimes can be useful, to be able to say we are less than that number because it is xyz. or it looks like way into the future we are going to be way over. i would hope, in san francisco, we can be doing that demand projection work while we talk about supplies needed to meet demand. >> one of the things i think i'm partially why i was pushing, and i appreciate the presentation on this trade i have been in front of you pushing this issue of getting the supplies in front of

you in starting this conversation more aggressively. this timeline is very long there is no decision you're going to make one way or another in the next two years that you won't have those numbers by the time you have to make some decisions. that is just the nature of these water supply projects and how long it takes for them to get developed. the numbers are very helpful. it is important and a helpful place to start. i go through the process with each of the agencies, where you going to meet this demand? you have san francisco supply but you also have your own supply. are you going to used recycled water? let's balance that picture out so it actually makes sense. i think that helps everybody in the decision-making. >> i think you have public comment on this item. before we go there i want to make sure the commissioners

don't have anything else to say on this at the moment? if there is nothing else from the commissions i will open it to public comment and welcome yours. >> thank you. i just wanted to remark on a couple of things. i appreciate the depth and breath of steve's presentation. he started it with the level of service goals and i think that was very, very helpful i think that is where all of this flows from. the priority is keeping on in front, as you go through that, will be very important. and on the project list, and the project a single pages. the description of the project we are going to be dealing with these projects for a very long time. it has taught me a few things. one of the things is that coming up for these projects document them, so we are. that is not the problem is very, very helpful. i appreciate the effort. and then, the timeline thing is

important. i am going to push you a lot on this, but respect the fact that this stuff is going to take a long time. it is critically important, you know, from your wholesale customers perspective. they are sitting back and having to respond to you. my presence here is the ability to say look, this is affecting us. hopefully that will be clear as we go through this. and then lastly, just an appreciation for bringing this forward. i know i have been very persistent on this. the example with having a group within the staff that is focused on delivering this is one of the other key examples that i could take about trying to bring

success to this. these water supply projects are very hard. they have multiple agreements. not everybody is going to agree about them. to get them to be completed is going to be very difficult. that is a key component of success, i think. that completes my comments. >> we very much appreciate your persistence and keeping us on track. thank you. >> i have a question. probably from counsel. what was the difference between the mosca ceo comments that we heard, when she hit the microphone, and then when the chair actually let her stay and deal with public comment? what just happen there in terms of agenda/public comment? i was confused by that switchi switching.

>> the commission is allowed to ask any member of the public, or invite a speaker up to the podium to answer commissioner initiated questions. >> is what happened? she came in answered your question? >> yeah, i asked her to come up and answer my question. and then we went to public comment and it happened she had a public comment. >> for the record, i asked that question. >> i would like to know to a was received from peter at tuolumne river trust regarding this item. copies were forwarded to the commission yesterday and you also have copies placed in front of you. i just wanted to note that for the record. it will be placed in file. >> thank you. noted. any other public comments on this item? hearing none. next item, please. >> that completes my report.

>> great. thank you. now, we are going to go to the next item. >> item seven is the bay area water supply and conservation agency update. >> good afternoon again. if i could have the slides please. i wanted to take my time today to walk through a recent study that we completed. i have provided a copy to each of you, i believe, at your spaces. this report is actually available on our website, as well, including all of the appendices which i will reference to what i am saying. we are calling it a cip comparison study. what we did with this as we surveyed nine water agencies, we interviewed them come on the

west coast. what the summary report does is it presents a summary of their capital planning processes and recommendations for the p.u.c. the appendices include all of those. it's like a giant questionnaire that we sat through an interview process with each of the representatives from these organizations to really understand what they do in there cip? what makes their cip special? what works with our cip? and comparison. one of the questions you might ask is why would we do this? [please stand by] [please stand by]

>> -- seattle, las vegas, metropolitan. tried to pick a manageable number of agencies, some cities, some water districts, different sizes, basically, to get a range to say it's not all just water districts, it's not all small cities or big cities. one of the things, we found some common elements in c.i.p.s. really, the big question is what is your c.i.p.? it's a document that's guiding your agency about capital planning, and how those capital projects are delivered? and then, it also becomes part of basically your financing

mechanism, your rate-setting process. how do you intend to pay for these? and c.i.p.s often answer a lot of key questions. what are the benefits of the plan, what are the long-term costs, and how are they going to be funded? basically, everything your rted payers would want to know why you're doing these projects. for you as a governing body, this needs to be something sufficient for you to make a decision because you're asked to say yes, the c.i.p. is sound, included in our rate base, included in what our costs are, let's move forward in implementing it. it needs to provide information

to your engineer, specific information for what they're going to do. and then, for your rate payers, it has to provide the information to make them feel comfortable that they're doing the right then, you've got the right suite of projects, and you're paying for them in the right way. so what we did is like i said, we sat down with these different agencies, and we did, like, paper interview and one more interview and essentially did a side-by-side comparison and how they were different. did everybody do a project description? did everybody do a map? some things where you would go oh, that's intuitive, but interestingly, there were some differences between them. big pieces. how do different agencies develop their c.i.p.s? how do they document their

c.i.p.s, and then how much detail is in each of these c.i.p.s, and what is provided to the governing board, the rate payers, etc.? so all this is presented in the report. there's summary tables for each of these, and then, the details is also in the appendix. but the end result -- >> can i ask a question? >> yeah. >> so you said that our agency does record keep different than others. what do you mean by that? can you provide an elaboration? >> well, you do your report differently, and if you go back to the slides, please, it's the first recommendation. your c.i.p. is not presented as a stand-alone document, so it is -- you get your budget packets, so when you do your budget workshops, it's incorporated into the city budget, if you call up and say

i would like a copy of your c.i.p., there is no document that says this is san francisco c.i.p., and that is different than other entities. >> is that a good thing or a bad thing? >> from my perspective, i think it's a bad thing. it makes it difficult for transparency. several years ago, i tried to figure out where are all the pieces of the c.i.p. that i was concerned about. >> this is for bosca. >> this is for me, and i think it might be for your rate payers, as well. so that's why i think it's the key recommendation. i think that it would increase transparency for you. >> just because it isn't all in one place? >> because it isn't all in one place, so it's hard to say what is the entirety of the sfccip?

>> if i wanted to know something about a rate or if i wanted to know how much water we had, you know, in some reservoir or something like that, that would be probably be the reason as a rate payer i would question that. so i just wanted to know what your judgment was on that particular piece. thank you. >> you're welcome. >> at this point, so that we won't like it like we don't have anything, we do have a ten-year capital plan. we have them broken up in water, wastewater, and power. you're talking about in a financial plan and everything -- all the stuff that goes with it, you're talking about just breaking it up into water and just having a water c.i.p.? >> no. you have a c.i.p., but the document that you prepare for it that's available as a single piece is really, at least from -- is more of a -- a document that's presented to

the commission as part of a presentation package. and then associated spread sheets that have the numbers. but together, that's not something that's put together for someone to say hey, here's what the c.i.p. is. and -- and -- in a readable fashion. >> so i would probably have to see what you're talking about. because, you know, the city is trying to coordinate the whole city c.i.p., and we've been cooperating with them to present our c.i.p. consistent with the rest of the city. so i'm just interested in what -- you know, how others would produce the c.i.p. because we're trying to be consistent with the rest of the city because, you know, the mayor wants to say what's the whole scity c.i.p. >> absolutely. again, these were just recommendations of things to consider because people -- different agencies do do it differently.

one of the recommendations was active engagement with us early, and i put a check mark back on to it because that's being done this year, and it's great. we think there's some benefit to providing a remore fat of the project data sheets to provide a narrative of the current project status, to again, in the c.i.p. document not just where the project is going, with the eventual expectation of this project, but these projects are multiple years, and helpful to understand what's the current project description? also, some idea of prioritization -- quality thaitive prioritization. and i know -- qualitative prioritization. why do you rank this project

first? why did this project rise to the top or not is something worth considering. lastly, you have a lot of knowledge now about what it takes to do capital projects in this region and throughout the state, and i think it would be helpful to reflect what you've learned as far as costs and difficulties and all those types of things into what is your projections for your capital projects and if they're in there, it's helpful to reference them, and if not, then understand why not. because for better or for worse, you now have become an agency that does a lot of capital work, and you have quite a bit of experience with that. and i think it's important for that to be reflected in the c.i.p., so we have relayed this study to steve ritchie and kathy howe -- or to dan wade, actually. and i know my staff has been

talking to them on this. i'm happy to answer any questions you have. it's also been conveyed to the bosca board. >> great. thank you. commissioners, questions? comments? any public comment on this? thank you so much. >> thanks. >> appreciate it. next item, please. >> item eight is other commission business. >> commissioners? public comment on -- no commission business? next item, please. >> clerk: item nine, all -- or it's the consend calendar. all matters here under constitute the consent calendar are considered to be routine by the san francisco public utilities commission and will be acted on by a single vote of the commission. there will be no discussion of

the requests unless the item is requested to be removed and it will be considered as a separate item. >> is there a request to move any of the items from the commission? hearing none, is there a motion to approve the consent calendar? >> move to approve? >> second. >> any public comment on the consent calendar? all those in favor? opposed? motion maycarries, please. next item, please. [agenda item read]. >> is there a -- is there a motion to approve this item? >> i move to approve it. >> any -- [inaudible] >> yes, comments? [inaudible] >> excuse me. commissioner, can you please speak into the microphone?

>> i said, could i have a -- a reexamination of what this actually does to the constitution in terms of the presidency. >> with i'll let our counsel address this. >> this amends the commission's rules of order to set forth new clear procedures about what happens when there is an unexpected vacancy in the presidency or the vice presidency before the term is up, which is a scenario the commission was presented with earlier this year, and this now sets a procedure whereby making clear that the existing vice president automatically assumes the seat of the presidency and can sit out the remainder of that term. and since that is, by definition less than one year in that seat, they then are not precluded from serving next -- serving a full year following

having filled the remainder of the previous term. >> and this is a vote? and we vote on the next item if it works that way? >> that is not a vote. so the way it's written -- well, so the vice president would automatically become president, but when the term expires, you would have a process electing your president and vice president, but the person who stepped in would not be precluded from the presidency. >> great. just wanted to be clear on that. >> so there's a motion and a second. are there any public comments on this item? all those in favor? opposed? motion carries. next item, please. >> clerk: item 1 # 1 is approve the selection of a pool of qualified respondents to the cleanpowersf request for offers of renewable energy supply.

>> is there a motion for this item? >> i move to approve. >> move to approve. >> i'll second that. i do have a question. did we -- is the recommendation basically approve all of the entities who were deemed qualified? >> barbara hale, assistant general manager for power. yes. >> i didn't see anything from a short list. >> yes. just to clarify that, we received 40 unique bids from 13 different companies offering energy from 15 distinct projects and what you have before you is a short list of ten projects. >> okay. thank you. >> i think that's amazing, and congratulations. what a difference? >> yes, thank you. >> when we had our one contender years ago. is there any public comments? there's a motion and a second.

public comments on this item? all those in favor? opposed? the motion carries. next item, please. >> clerk: item 12, authorize the general manager to execute a joint funding agreement with the u.s. geological survey for an amount not to exceed $2,182,525, and with a duration of five years. >> i'll move approval. >> is there a second? >> second. >> any public comment on this item? all those in favor? the motion carries. next item, please. >> clerk: item 13, award grant -- sorry. award grant agreement number pro-0151 demonstrations garden and programming to the san francisco parka lines for a term of five years in an amount not to exceed 800,000 and authorize the general manager to authorize a no fee revokable

license with the san francisco park alliance. >> is there a second? >> second. >> any public comment on this item? all those in favor? motion passes. next item, please. >> clerk: item 14, approve direction to staff regarding development of policy for rationing for residential water customers during severe drought. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. do you want to speak briefly to this? >> yeah, briefly. as we went through the water supply assessment process for the last several months and for different projects, questions came up about how -- how much would projects have to ration in the future, particularly if they were very high performing projects where people were using less water.

and so we prepared this as a way to get direction to analyze in detail that if people are using, you know, less water than others, you know, how would that be treated in terms of overall rationing levels we might get to in the future. because of the bay-delta plan, water assessments look at us in terms of one level of us having to go to extreme rationing levels, how that would play out. so what we've suggested here is we go through analyzing -- what we did in the modified assessments is we focused on individual projects, but this would be asking the question more broadly, should there be whole customer classes that we should treat that way when they're using, for example, whatever's just necessary for maintenance of public health and safety, you know, a very low amount or they have the most efficient home that they possibly can have? are those levels, if they would

then maybe say, you know, wouldn't have to have any additional restrictions, but if we still needed to reduce the levels of demand throughout our service area, you know, who would be picking up the -- theoretically the something like that on that because they've already done as much a good job. it's already trying to find out, tested, and see where that follow decision could lead as we go through this whole process. as we go into the urban water management planning process next year when we're going to have it revisit the water management plan, which is our basic demand document and what we call here the retail water shortage allocation plan, which is the rules by which the commission would look at shortage in the future and we have that water management plan. so we're just looking for some concurrence that we should dig into that issue in depth and you know come back to this commission with an answer of what that looks like.

>> so this resolution is giving you direction to research this and come back with a proposed policy that we would then consider? >> yes. >> correct? okay. just to be clear on that. >> and are there elements in this guidance that are new or is this pretty much what we do every time? >> well, we've tried to do things like this, but they've been done different ways. there was no, say, statement of 50 people were at the health and safety level and we're not going to ask them to do more, or if they've got the most efficient home possible, that we're going to ask them to do more. we're going to try to tease that out, how that can play out, as oppose to doing it on the fly as we might do at some point. >> and i'm not sure exactly what the best way to ask the question, but we just got through a bunch of water supply assessments, and those were the

result of, as you said, individual project analysis as opposed to applying a general policy. >> right. >> if -- and this may not be answerable, but i'll ask it any way. if -- if there was a policy that had the elements that we're directing you to look at, is there any conflict between that and what we just got through doing on the water supplies? >> i don't think there's any conflict in that because those projects were ones that were particularly folks that were going to have all new water use -- water efficient fixtures and they're going to have nonpotable water recycled there, so their use is going to belower than the most efficient -- be lower than the most efficient uses because you're taking that off the table, so i don't see a conflict with that. >> okay. and when do you anticipate this coming back to us?

>> well, we're going to be looking at the schedule for the whole urban water management plan, so -- >> where it fits into that -- >> yeah, where it fits into that. >> being on. great. is there a motion to approve this direction? >> motion to approve. >> second. >> any public comments? all those in favor? opposed? thank you very much. the motion carries. next item, please. >> clerk: i will read the closed session items prior to public comment. item 17 is existing litigation pacific gas and electric company. item 18, existing litigation, city and county of san francisco versus pacific gas and electric company. item 19, existing litigation, city and county of san francisco versus pacific gas and electric. >> any public comment on any of the closed session items? is there a motion on whether to

assert attorney-client privilege? >> move to assert. >> second. >> any public comment? all those in

>> it is a ranger. it has the same responsibilities as a ranger, security of the watershed, assisting the public. providing interpretation when necessarily and protecting water quality. i love to help people in many waves. path has that experience and training. his professionalism is there when there is danger. we hope there isn't. i know accidents can happen. when they do, it is important to

have someone like path -- like pat available. they were treating weeds using the utv. it is an off road vehicle seating two peak. they rolled the utv in a remote area. pat was first on the scene. >> i was 100% relieved that pat was there to calm the situation down, to know what to do for the injuries we had and to make sure the right people were on the way. i think that in that moment, pat shined as he would in that type of situation. >> it is important for us. we are a small staff with a large area to patrol. if we don't have the support of the public we will not have their eyes on our watershed. we work closely with the neighboring organizations,

whether they be east bay regional parks or the garden club. we try to involve them in protecting the watershed. >> there is a lot of ways pat engages the community and stakeholders in every case. i would say pat does it in a professional and uplifting way because of his personality. >> it is a team effort. that is what i like best is that we have successfully created a team to work well together, play well together and they do a good job on the watershed. >> pat the wore she of the -- worthy of the award. he cares about the community that engages the land and fellow employees. pat is about the team. always willing to lend a hand when somebody needs a hand. i have worked with him for three years and witnessed firsthand

the benefits of the professionalism, commitment and passion. he is wore these of the golden pride award inmize mind. >> i am pat jones the watershed keeper for san francisco water. >> right before the game ater. starts, if i'm still on the field, i look around, and i just take a deep breath because it is so exciting and magical, not knowing what the season holds holds is very, very exciting. it was fast-paced, stressful, but the good kind of stressful,

high energy. there was a crowd to entertain, it was overwhelming in a good way, and i really, really enjoyed it. i continued working for the grizzlies for the 2012-2013 season, and out of happenstance, the same job opened up for the san francisco giants. i applied, not knowing if i would get it, but i would kick myself if i didn't apply. i was so nervous, i never lived anywhere outside of fridays know, andfridays -- fresno, and i got an interview. and then, i got a second interview, and i got more nervous because know the thought of leaving fresno and my family and friends was scary, but this opportunity was on the other side. but i had to try, and lo and behold, i got the job, and my first day was january 14, 2014. every game day was a puzzle, and i have to figure out how to put the pieces together.

i have two features that are 30 seconds long or a minute and a 30 feature. it's fun to put that altogetl r together and then lay that out in a way that is entertaining for the fans. a lucky seat there and there, and then, some lucky games that include players. and then i'll talk to lucille, can you take the shirt gun to the bleachers. i just organize it from top to bottom, and it's just fun for me. something, we don't know how it's going to go, and it can be a huge hit, but you've got to try it. or if it fails, you just won't do it again. or you tweak it. when that all pans out, you go oh, we did that. we did that as a team. i have a great team. we all gel well together. it keeps the show going.

the fans are here to see the teams, but also to be entertained, and that's our job. i have wonderful female role models that i look up to here at the giants, and they've been great mentors for me, so i aspire to be like them one day. renelle is the best. she's all about women in the workforce, she's always in our corner. [applause] >> i enjoy how progressive the giants are. we have had the longer running until they secure day. we've been doing lgbt night longer than most teams. i enjoy that i work for an organization who supports that and is all inclusive. that means a lot to me, and i

wouldn't have it any other way. i wasn't sure i was going to get this job, but i went for it, and i got it, and my first season, we won a world series even if we hadn't have won or gone all the way, i still would have learned. i've grown more in the past four years professionally than i think i've grown in my entire adult life, so it's been eye opening and a wonderful learning