ourselves. we did it before and we can do it again. it's going to take the whole community to make this work. >> are social gatherings the major reason for the surge. >> it's a major ko contributor. people should not be using testing to determine whether they should gather. if someone is infected, the virus is extremely contagious. they are contributing to this increase. if you go to a gathering and somebody has the virus and is

going to transmit it. we have to understand that with more virus in the community you saw how quickly we went from four thousand to five thousand tcases. please, please don't gather. >> we have a handful of questions about san francisco issuing fines on people who don't wear masks in public. >> we've been emphasizing the needs of these masks and the

social distancing as we continue to emif i if emphasize. we're schorrin exploring how wey increase enforcement particularly in situations where requirements that are very clear are not being followed. this would be enforced following up with businesses an other situations where people gather. we're working with communities for voluntary compliance.

we're looking at increasing enforcement. in regards to the press ci the . who is paying for it and who will staff it? >> the city is funding the site. it will be staff by health departments and u c sf providers. we'll take care of 93 patients. m>> what has it historically ben

used for and is it prepared to accept patients. >> it will depend on the capacity of our hospitalization across the city. if there's a need to move people out of the hospital quickly and make room for covid 19 patients. i can't speculate on the past use of the site. >> thank you for your time today that conclawed concludes the prs

conference. for additional questions please e-mail.1-888-273-3658 >> i'd like to call the order of the public utilities commission. it's tuesday july 28, 2020. roll call, please. [roll call]

we have a quorum. >> commissioner: very good. announcements, madame secretary? during the coronavirus disease (covid-19) emergency, the san francisco public utilities commission's (sfpuc) regular meeting room, city hall, room 400, is closed. commissioners and sfpuc staff will convene commission meetings remotely by teleconference. commissioners for those the live stream there be a delay. i would like to extend our thanks to sfgtv staff.

if you'd like to make a comment dial 1-888-273-3658 access code and dial access code 3107452. you'll hear a speaking tone when it's expired. madame president, your first order of business is item 3, aportfolio of the minutes of -- approval of the minutes july 14, 2020. >> commissioner: commissioners, before you, you have the minutes of july 14, 2020. are there any additions or corrections to the minutes?

hearing none i'd like to ask the secretary to open it up to the public comment. >> clerk: for those who would mike make comments on the minutes of july from july 14, dial 1-888-273-3658 and 3107452. if you wish to speak on any other item wait until that item is called to provide public comment. do you have any callers?

>> there are no callers. >> clerk: item three public comment is closed. >> commissioner: may i have a motion and second on the approval of the minutes? >> move to approve. >> second. madame secretary, please do a roll call. [roll call] thank you. you have five ayes. >> commissioner: the motion carries. next item, please. >> clerk: next item is item 4 general public comment. members of the public may

comment on matters within the commission's jurisdiction not on the agenda by dialing 1-888-273-3658 access code 3107452 and pound followed by pound again. 1 then 0 to be added to the speaker line. this is for general public comment. do we have callers? >> there are seven callers in the queue. >> caller: i'm speaking for the comments made at the capitol

planning meeting and the description for the emergency fire fighting water system states potable water option. this is inconsistent with the board of supervisors directive and puc's options as well. the capital budget does not include funds for the phase two also known as phase b. phase two extends from sunset and terravill and it includes water and sewer line replacement and dedication of awas consistent with the policy. it's supported by the sfn, the park side merchants also known as props and the greater west porto neighborhood association.

the environmental would take 18 months and the statement lacks credibility. the puc also stated it is pursuing a potable water option because it's a more moderate solution. that's one perspective. another perspective is the p.u.c. is pursuing a potable water option because it aging equipment and doesn't have the bonds and using funds to replace water mains is inconsistent with prop 218. >> clerk: thank you. >> caller: i'm bill maher and

i'm speaking as an informed citizen. i have two related topics to bring to you today. first a group of fisheries and environmental organizations in a lawsuit with the state water board. in the july 20, 21, 2020 edition of the cahill news under the agreed settlement in considering future modifications the water board will have to conduct enhanced analysis on the potential impact of the public comment in addition the fish and will have to explain its decision in writing and commits to following a similar process for evaluating process to the dealt ta plan and the regulatory commission responded to the proposal for managing the

tuolumne river and a quote is the final environmental impact statement still needs review by federal fishery agencies and the state water board. the state board voted in december 2018 for much higher releases end quote. the state water board just settled a lawsuit committing to enhanced analysis regarding the health of fish below dams and ferc agreed to a proposal that will impact the same fish. the same fish for which you are stewards. i suggest you should be consulting with the water board and reporting back to the public. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. >> it's good to be back with you. very important work we're doing.

again, continue the conversation about a municipal direct for utility to lower rates for all san francisco. certification is essential and i see you'll talk about pumps later. it's important to talk about the electrification of cooking facilities to improve indoor air quality in temperature in both homes and businesses. it's possible to make great cuisine in an all electric kitchen the world trade center had one and the statal bonny of new york had one in the dutch quad doerm -- dormitory

produced many meals a day. i do it at home too and it's important to develop a neglect work where people can pay they're ideally using aut may and we want to minimize any in person interaction and there's a coin shortage so people should be able to take the coins and transfer them in the hopper and use them to pay the p.u.c. bill better than handling cash in person. i look forward to the items to be discussed today. thank you. >> caller: hello. i am the chair of the san francisco public utilities commission citizens advisory committee and first and foremost i want to thank every one of you

commissioners to do something congress doesn't seem to know how to do that is act quickly on behalf of the citizens of san francisco. specifically here to commend you on the interim emergency rate assistance program. recently the c.a.c. put forward a resolution and [background noise] and we want to commend you on the more tore -- moratorium extending the program under the interim rate assistance program to a larger number of people. what we hope to do next is if we really want to work with you as we see the program had 26,000 people qualify and only 1200 people enrolled, clearly since

you made changes a larger number of people have been able to take advantage of this and a personally appreciate it because we not only looked at the rate program and said, yes, all people affected and looking at higher income thresholds in order to ensure all san franciscans can take advantage of the program and recently you also added small business and non-profits to that list. we all know how badly our businesses and nonprofits need the additional help so any way we can get it is great. at the c.a.c. we want to commend you and show our support by putting forward a resolution. one thing we do want know and want to work with you on -- >> clerk: speaker, i'm sorry, your time has ended.

>> commissioner: he can continue with his thought. >> clerk: i'm not sure he's on the line any longer. >> caller: hi, my name is jackie yan. i'm a resident of san mateo county and i'm new to the process here but i'm an advocate for the crystal springs regional trail update. unfortunately, i wasn't able to hear what happened but i just want to highlight that there's so many people frankly now with the pandemic but more travel between the road which is a safe place to ride and sawyer camp if

they were made accessible. in 1993 there was a plan in place to provide the trail easement. i'm not sure why it's never been realized but there's a document in last week's meeting of the crystal trail plan and it hugs the reservoir. the trail's already insistence so it would be really to open up the gate. i feel it's a life safety issue as well because there's a lot of cyclist and it's a dangerous intersection and there's no safe crossing at 92 so we need to provide a safe crossing as well as trail access and it's so important for safety and public health and this was an agreement. it was supposed to be done back in 2004 we're quite a bit late and i hope you consider this as

a nice easy low hanging fruit that would provide wonderful opportunities for all who live in the peninsula and san francisco. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. >> caller: hi, i'm a biking advocate and i appreciate you had the item on the agenda last week and wasn'tible to make that meeting. -- able to make that meeting. i wanted to specifically request you do whatever you can to get the easement to be granted to allow a bike trail a safe bike trail between canada road and

the trail and there was an alternative plan to possibly put a two-way bike path crossing 92 with a designated bicycle light and staying on the west side of halfmoon bay and over to canada so bikerers -- bikers only have to interact with traffic one time. the reason it's so important right now is with the covid-19 issues it's an increase issue that covid-19 is related to air pollution levels. we need to make sure our community supports the safety of biking, try not to drive and people don't have to get in

their cars to go exercise. that's a major problem. be exposed to air pollution and covid at the same time seems to have severe consequences. it's timely. thank you for taking my call. >> clerk: thank you, speaker. go ahead. >> caller: thank you for allowing me to speak today. my name is elaine salinger and i'm a member of the san mateo biking pedestrian advisory council however, the opinion i'm expressing today are of my own. i'd like to also speak to you about the dangerous situation created by having cyclists ride

on highways between lower skyline and canada in the unincorporated area of san mateo county. open up fire access roads which previous callers have said this was part of the plan established many years ago, and the fire roads would provide a beautiful safe passage for cyclists. however, i also recognize time is of the essence as more people get sick. the number of police reports are the tip of the iceberg. for every report that makes it to a police file, there are easily close calls and my husband and i are one of those and i know other people. as the exceptionally dangerous.

the solution we are talking about today is a relatively inexpensive and easy solution. we have given pictures of the route as it is now and an inexpensive solution which also provides safe passage and it's just giving up land along the easement of lower skyline and along 92 so there would be enough land available for a protected two-way bike path and while [chime] >> clerk: thank you, speaker. i'm sorry, your time is up. >> caller: hi, i'm from the

sfpuc once more. i want to finish what i was saying and thank you the commissions for the work they've done around the interim program and personally number one and the p.u.c. advisory council i want to personally work with you on these issues of efficacy and affordability and encourage changes to the cap program and work to extend it to outreach. and we don't want to make us wait for the program. you have like-minded people on the commission so i really do appreciate it. again, we want to work with you. i personally want to work with you and we want to extend the

interim rate program past september 10. we lastly want to make changes to the cap program so you have more san franciscans can take part of it moving forward. i do appreciate you and your time and the hard work you're doing. i appreciate you. bye. >> caller: i'm a bicyclist and i have a keen interest in advocating for better and safer infrastructure for bicyclists for all. i'm here to further escalate the efforts to complete a safe bicycle access way between

carter camp trail and canada road. i recently read the staff report that summarizes the status. i'm disappointed to hear the efforts stalled for various reasons and the area continues to be quite dangerous even for experienced bicyclists and i ride it nearly daily and i can describe all the times i've been assaulted and harassed by people. my colleagues at the bicycle collision at san carlos bikes sent a proposal of a two-way bike trail that could be implemented on the lower shoulder of lower skyline and it could be implemented with modest cost and minimal impact in comparison to the previous proposal in the staff report.

we recognize it will require other approval and the p.u.c. will need to provide easement access to enable a trail to be completed. i urge the commission to enable the safe access able bicycle route between two already safe locations and provide a western corridor for bicycle commuters as well. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. >> caller: good afternoon, commissioner. i'm harry bernstein. i'd like to bring something to your attention the amendment for the balboa reservoir project. so the move from the north street in the project to align

it with to move it from where it next to reardon is the easement area i want to share something with you about that. i'd read the document at the sole discretion of the director of public utilities commission and the chancellor and vice chancellor each approve the college property easement area the agreement may be amended or recorded to adjust the college easement area without further approval or action. that's the key part. there is no requirement to participate from the city's public utilities commission, that's you, or the board of supervisors without further approval or action required by the college's board of trustees. another thing about this

alternative road is potentially puts the road across the campus to any area already flagged by the facility's master plan as a potential hazard area and a change was not studied in the e.i.r. i don't think that should go ahead. also, there was an anniversary on july 26 in the chronicle the balb balboa reservoir work shefld -- shelved and the work was delayed by the s.f. p.u.c. yesterday. the contributing factor of not only [chime] >> clerk: thank you, speaker your time has expired.

>> caller: s commissioners, this is pablo decosta. we're having problems with the renting. the environment meeting a pain in the [bleep] and we don't need the added problems. yesterday i was listening to the board of supervisors talking about the balboa reservoir and we have a developer who got that land for $11.4 million and you don't have seemed to have paid attention to it though it was deliberated before the commission. they're not paying attention

which pertains to the physically challenged, the professors, teachers. they're not paying attention to the workforce training at city college. and you commissions should have somebody give you orientation on this. this land is public land. you shouldn't be selling it to any private developer. the developers have had sufficient of the land which belongs to the native people. we don't want this private developers. and we don't want you folks not understanding what y'all are doing. y'all are commissioners. you represent the people. not to screw the people. every time you get -- we get screwed so much the fbi has to

come in [chime] >> clerk: thank you. your time has expired. mr. rod -- mr. moderator do we have any other callers. >> no other callers in the queue. >> clerk: public comment is closed. >> commissioner: next item. >> clerk: item 5, communications. >> commissioner: commissioners, any comments, questions on communication? hearing none, madame secretary please open public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to provide public comment on item 5, communication dial 1-888-273-3658 ac said code

3107452 and pound then pound again then 1 and 0 to be added to the speaker to the speaker line. do we have callers? >> no callers. >> clerk: item 6 is report of general manager.

[technical difficulties] >> -- as guidance evolved so do policies, practice to keep employees safe and healthy. this week we are holding our third virtual meet to update employees on everything we've done and will continue to do to keep them safe and healthy now and into the future.

we'll cover topics such as cleaning and disinfectant measures, new signage, markings, plexiglass barriers installed and update them on the on-site health screenings. we also continue to educate on important social distancing and face mask protocol. while much of our workforce is following guidelines we cannot let us. some may not be taking it as serious. first we want to recognize those doing the right thing and those who are not know there are consequences. we're happy to prode -- provide the commission with the registration to participate on

our all-hands meeting we plan to have. with your support, we have expanded our emergency financial assistance program now it includes small businesses and non-profit customers as well as all the residential customers of our water, sewer and program and we received closed to an additional 100 applications for small businesses and non-profit businesses. in the coming weeks we'll launch a comprehensive campaign to reach more eligible customers. later in this meeting you'll vote on a similar bill relief program that will provide a

one-time credit for residential, non-profit and customers and hear about water shut offs. by continuing to work with our customers, employees and city partners and others we will look to move forward on these tough times to have a strong, better and more responsive agency. finally, we're kicking off an innovative virtual tour series that allows us to continue engaging with customers during this time. it's called the p.u.c. source virtual exploration. it's a really good program. we're using existing resources

we're leveraging in-house experts on water, sewer and power programs to interact and answer questions and teach about the system. sign up at www.sfwater.org woe recommend those to tune in and the first was hosted by a.g.m. steve richie. we record the sessions and based on the participation we'll either make the recording available or schedule more live sessions in the future. i want to thank the commission

for their continuous support because it has made a big difference to the staff going through this tough time and just again want to thank you guys so much. that is what we've been doing operationally through the emergency. if you have any questions or comments? >> commissioner: these are wednesdays at 1:00, correct? are they going to be every wednesday? >> we've going to provide a schedule so people can anticipate the topics. >> commissioner: i'm looking forward to it. >> steve richie's really good by

the way. >> commissioner: we know that. >> yeah, he's a rock star. all right. shall we continue with the real estate update. >> clerk: public comment on this? >> commissioner: you said through the month. ending in july? >> up to september. >> commissioner: thank you. all of the us would like a schedule. >> clerk: would you like for me to call public comment on item 6a. >> commissioner: please do. >> clerk: members of the public

who wish to provide 10 minutes of public comment on item 6a dial 1-888-273-3658, access code 310 310642 and and pound then pound again and then 1 and 0 to be added to the speaker line. do we have callers in the queue? >> not at this time. >> clerk: public comment on 6a is closed. next item is 6b real estate update presented by rosanna us he will. >> i'm the p.u.c. director and head of real estate services. i'm pleased to present the

p.u.c. real estate report. i'm briefly describe the work we do and then summarize our key projects and some new initiatives. this is what we do. real estate's services is to negotiate real estate over real property where the p.u.c. has jurisdiction and issue licenses for parking lots, trails, utility crossings and landscaping primarily for use in the p.u.c. right of way. and the second mission is to lead the review team and support. the teams that propose third-party projects for potential impact on our infrastructure and land. in the past several months we

worked with colleagues to complete real estate transactions some of which we've been working on for years. the transactions fall to three c categories, land purchases, transaction of lands and transaction purchasing property for capital projects. these projects will all sound familiar because we sought commission approval for these transactions. the water quality include three properties. together they added 956 agricultural acres to the alameda watershed. it was bought to protect native species and habitat consistent with the alameda watershed management plan. secondly, we worked intensively on the disposition of the water

enterprise property. the largest transaction for $11.4 million recently came to you for approval and is being heard this week by two board of supervisors committees. we also closed escrow on the property at 639 bryant for the 6.9 acre property of 2000 marin and they have roughly equivalent value of $63 million. we also spent time at sonny veil. it took time because of the survey work to separate the lots to be sold from the p.u.c. pipeline right-of-way. after a public notice we negotiated a purchase and sale

agreement. bidder withdraw due to the uncertain economy introduced by the pandemic. when the economy is more receptive we will resume efforts to sell the lot and the retaining unutilized property the reservoir and right-of-way. and an industrial property is located in a critical location from the treatment plan. the existing tenants and the p.u.c. will use it for construction and equipment storage. here are some of our new initiatives. we issued an r.s.p. for a location and negotiating a lease with the new tenants. secondly, on behalf of the waste

water enterprise we have a list of the easements and compiling them on an online database. it will ensure and it's not locked in the public right-of-way. the second initiative has been a close collaboration of natural resources of the land management staff to refresh the 2015 interim water pipeline right-of-way use policy for san mateo and santa clara and alameda county and we anticipate bringing it to the commission for approval after management reviews and approves the draft policy. and the impact has been minor meaning to date only four

tenants have asked for rent deferral the reasons are almost our rental agreements are around ground lease and the p.u.c. has few retail tenant and the rental is static due to the high percentage of agreements with other agencies. and in negotiating the agreements the p.u.c. has been following the june 1 memorandum we were paying attention to rapidly changing events, the economy and policies issued by the city administrator and other agencies to make appropriate adjustments to existing agreements in conform answers --

conformance of city policy. this concludes my report. i'm happy to answer any questions. >> commissioner: any questions or comments? >> when we have property like the mitchell ranch and there's an improvement on it, like au house, how do we deal with that? our colleagues are in charge of the watershed property. typically a watershed keeper or a manager will occupy the house from my understanding. the allocation of cottages to watershed paper allocate m.o.u. reporting reporting to seniority. >> commissioner: i'd like to learn a little bit more how that gets allocated to the 2800 square foot house or more. is it -- how is it? by the seniority, who determines

that and what's the agreement? i'd like to know that and also how many we have and how they're occupied. >> it's assessed according to the m.o.u. and has been escalated by the c.p.i. i'll send you a copy of the m.o.u. and report for your review. >> commissioner: and the number of properties we have. around the amount of rent we are looking in the m.o.u. of the agreement and the cumulative amount. >> yes. >> commissioner: great. thank you.

>> commissioner: what are we doing with encroachment on our properties? >> the p.u.c. has an encroachment policy which i understand was amended in 2015. it is a hybrid effort. the water said papers and the right-of-way managers look out for encroachment and manage them. they come to me if they need letters to remove them asking the encroachers to remove their ebb -- encroachment and we work with the city attorney's office and we have someone we employ to

go out especially to meet with the encroachers and asked them to remove the encroachment. it's a never ending duty because we remove some and others pop up like weeds. we have someone on our staff a former right-of-way manager who love encroachment removal and has a good relationship with almeida county public agencies and has been working with them to remove encroachment from the wholesale scale. >> commissioner: so he loaves encroachment removing? >> he does. >> commissioner: good. we need somebody like that. my second question is on page 4, under the lease and license

expenditures. it says you're going it bring somebody in to evaluate. let me read over this again. you talk about a chart and the ref recommends the p.u.c. hire a consultant for master analysis for the next fiscal year. >> i think that may have been eliminated in the budget profs. perhaps michael collins can speak to that point. >> i'm here.

we want to do a master's facility plan to have an idea of what we need and where. we've been planning on an basis different corporate yards and we're growing out of it before covid-19. we are always looking for additional space whether it's office space or corporate yard spate. we need the ability to plan on a p.u.c. wide basis and start breaking it down to different enterprises and bure scro. -- bureau. we have contract money in it for next year. >> commissioner: so it's still in the budget? >> yes. >> commissioner: i'm curious where we had to go out of house to do this.

>> we wanted to bring in someone with expertise and provide recommendations in a son to-- consolidated report. when you think of the geographic scope of what we're looking at and the people and different location and what we need to build it's important. >> commissioner: okay. answers my question. any other questions, comments? >> commissioner: i'd like to hear what rosanna was going to add to what michael said. >> we're a rental and lease administration department. we don't really have the in house expertise in our division and we have talented people throughout the p.u.c. but it's a

real art for success plan on a macro scale. we saw sfmta undertake this efforts years ago and it produced a good report i thought was useful in my conversations with my colleagues at sfmta. >> commissioner: so nobody could look at that. >> not in those services but we have many talented people in the p.u.c. >> we don't have the expertise because we don't need it all the time. s we don't have the persons to do that kind of work that's why we'll hire a consultant to help

us. >> commissioner: okay. that's clear. thank you. any other comments before we move on? we need public comment. >> clerk: members of public who wish to prost to provide public comment on 6b dial 1-888-273-3658 access code 3107452 and pound then pound again and 1 and 0 to be added to the speaker line. do we have callers in the queue? >> we have one.

>> caller: good afternoon. [indiscernible] when you spoke on june 23 about the college and how the land was made surplus, you said there was city college personnel mentioned who are part of the process of approving developers of the p.u.c. and i'd like the names of the people you were talking about and i don't expect to you have that information with you today. how would i go about that? maybe i can give you my e-mail address to pick that up r-i-q-u-e, r-i-q-u-e at

yahoo.com. that would be very helpful. and is there any lawsuits going on other than involving city college and the p.u.c. other than the appeal of the ceqa? thank you. >> clerk: i have his e-mail. you can provide his comments. >> there are no other calls in the queue. >> clerk: public comment on item 6b is now closed. next item is 6c the clean power integrated resource plan present clean power sf director mike hynes.

>> i'm the director for the enterprise. i'm sorry i am having wi-fi issues and doesn't want to let me connect so you're stuck with my voice only. i will have some assistance walking through the slides. i'm here to provide an update on the resource planning process we have underway. this is on slide two. clean rsf is required -- >> clerk: i'm sorry, to stop you but the slides aren't quite up yet. we're on slide integrated

resource planning. >> apologize. thank you for being hi -- my eyes. >> it's required to submit an irp to the public utilities commission california commission every two years and in process of develop ting the irp. we'll submit it to the california p.u.c. to project the electricity demand to 2030 and identify a portfolio of electricity resources that meet our customers' demand at the lowest cost while also satisfying local and state policy goals. the major objective of the irp

is to develop pam -- pathways to empower san francisco's goal. the bar chart you're seeing identifies identifies our recent progress and the annual planning targets we're using in our irp for reaching the 2030 goal. each graph is the amount of power we plan to acquire to meet demand in that particular year. the only difference between the green and blue segment the blue can include hydro electric energy that may not be eligible for the california renewable energy standard but still greenhouse gas free. the dots show clean power s.f. exceeded its target for renewable energy in 2018 and 2019 and we're again expected to seed our target in 2020.

-- exceed our target in 2020. the goals the commission adopted in 2015 to guide the clean power s.f. program are also guiding our i.r.p. it includes affordable and rate and financial stability. providing more renewable energy and reducing greenhouse gas emissions and reinvesting funds and local clean energy resources and jobs. we're trying to balance the plans at the intersection of these priorities. to find our preferred portfolio, or submission to the california p.u.c., clean power s.f. is

modelling portfolioing that satisfy the base case scenarios to meet the city's 2030 renewable energy goal and feature local renewable energy resource development. an accelerated case where we see the impact of renewable five years sooner by 2025 and featuring local renewable development. a portfolio that emphasizes matching renewable energy produced with customer electricities in real time is the third one. this portfolio would be designed to minimize the use of the grid to help manage the natural variability of our renewable energy supply and lastly a california p.u.c. required case that meets clean power s.f. share of the state 2030, co2 emission target for 46 million

metric tons of co2. as you all know, change is a constant. people's habits an preferences and city and state policy always changing and they'll have an impact on the electricity demand in san francisco. we used the i.r.p. to plan for changes that influence electricity demand and then identify how those changes influence the electricity supply portfolios we're modeling. our current work is focussed on analyzing two sensitivities. what if 100% of new vehicle registration in 2030 are electric vehicles. and what if all new construction in san francisco is 100% electric. for our work now we're assuming that would occur starting in 2024. after we complete our analysis,

staff will recommend our preferred portfolio for the commission to adopt and that will be submitted to the california p.u.c. the preferred portfolio will tie together our sensitivity analysis, findings from our local renewables report which we submitted to the commission in february and city and state policy goals. what we submit will serve as a resource road map for clean power s.f. purchasing and developing activities an meet program goals through 2030. we must submit an i.r.p. every two years but we'll continue to evaluate our portfolio and plan going forward. in these future i.r.p.s we'll take into account new information regarding electricity demand, local and state policy changes, renewable energy technology and market trends and of course new local resource development opportunities.

we've also been engaging with the community around our i.r.p. at the beginning of the month we held two virtual community workshop to provide updates to stakeholders. they were well attended with 19 participants representing 13 organizations. we used the meetings as an opportunity to highlight the local energy report as well as the i.r.p. process we have underway. we also shared information on marketing and outreach and covid-19 relief measures, state policy issues and the city's public power initiative. i think by most measures it was a success given the virtual aspect of the meeting. so what's next? we are currently finalizing our modelling work and preparing a

written plan with our recommendation for preferred portfolio brought to you for approval at the august 25 meeting. prior to that meeting, we'll solicit comments from the public on our i.r.p. results and recommendation. following commission approval, we will submit the plan with our preferred portfolio to the california p.u.c. by september 21. and that concludes my presentation. i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. >> commissioner: commissioners, questions? >> commissioner: mike, in the ven diagram you showed [audio digitizing]

in the program design we were driving towards the sweet spot. the investment piece is important also but i thought that was more in the cost bucket or maybe there's a fourth bucket that needs to be created because i'm curious about the job creation this program is promising. >> commissioner, you broke up at the beginning but i think you're asking on slide 4 that shows the objectives, the jobs aspect of local investment? >> >> commissioner: correct. >> do view those as linked together because jobs are a

byproduct of local investment. it's not just local investment, operating the program creates jobs. in tying our activities as it relates to new clean energy investments and jobs, that is what we're referring to in the circle. i'm happy to come back and talk more about the jobs that have been created by the program holistically as well. >> commissioner: i would love to learn more and i know we talked about operationally how jobs have been created through the program but i'm interested in the green energy jobs potentially be created. especially when you talk about

what's coming down the pike with [audio digitizing] . my hope is clean power s.f. continues to be a driver and know software and -- or the hardware and the software of the people power also. >> yeah. you were breaking up again but i think i got the gift -- gist of it and one comment very interested in talking more with you about this. i think onest of it and one comment very interested in

talking more with you about this. i think one thing we're careful of look at direct and indirect job creation and there's an economy around clean energy. of course clean power s.f. is the supplier of the electricity and there are things we do that are more direct that may result in job creations. others and i just want to take poi point. >> commissioner: i still want to get in the weeds. even indirectly we're responsible and if we don't make more -- if we're not more responsible we can make anybody else responsible. i think it's important we do that as well. and there was a slide where you had sensitivity.

i'm not sure which one that was. what are we being sensitive too? i see that a lot. i'm not sure what it means. >> i appreciate that. the term we're using is related to the analytical work we're doing and it's changing one variable in the model that we're running. so think of this work as they're

actually multiple stages in it. think of it in many ways a big mac problem. we're running software that analyzes a bunch of variables like the renewable energy supply of different technologies, the cost. when san francisco uses electricity when we're projecting san francisco will use electricity. and a sensitivity is, well, what if we change one of these variables. how does that affect the outcome? the variables we're focussing on for our sensitivity analysis in this work is changes to san francisco's demand as a result of some of the decarbonization

policies we're expecting will change consumer behavior. and one of those is electric vehicles and another that we're ing is building energy use. moving from natural gas to electric-only buildings. does that help answer your question? >> commissioner: not really. i just think when you're using terms like that i'm not familiar and i would rather have it -- because i think it's important. i want to know more. i think i would like to have that spelled out a little bit more and then i can getized --

get used to seeing its -- it. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysis,used. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysis,seei. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysis,ts -. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysis,s --. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysi -- it. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysis,-- i. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysi it. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysis, it. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysis,it. >> understood. >> commissioner: and you talked about sensitivity analysis, anyway, when you say it was good what are you looking for and when we say community participation, we should have some idea what we'd like to see. and then we can all know whether it was good or not. there's a base. just to say it was good and maybe there's five people, i would just like to have a little bit more of a clear idea where we're trying to go when we say community participation.

>> okay. i can provide initial response but you may recall, commissioner, we provided a list initially to have the meetings probably when we were expecting to do this in person. i don't have at my fingertips the full count of organizations but it was a pretty long list. i would say probably 30% or 40% of the organizations under that participating i think our goal

with the meetings was one, we wanted to introduce what we were doing with the i.r.p. and share work done with respect to local renewables but we also wanted to ice the opportunity to sort of introduce clean power s.f. to a bunch of organizations within the community that may not have been all that familiar with what we're doing. so we did provide an overview of what we've been up to with clean power s.f. over the past couple of years. we provided opportunities for breakout discussions and our goal in that breakout discussion was really to hear more from the attendees about where their interests might intersect with the work we do to learn from that and think how to better engage with the community.

so i think we made progress on that. we also wanted to provide an opportunity for questioning for members of the community to ask us questions about the work we're doing. i think we succeeded in that. i wouldn't say it was perfect but it was a successful first effort especially given the virtual world we've been operating in. >> commissioner: that's good. thank you. that's adequate. thank you very much. >> commissioner: any more comments? i have a question on slide number 3. it's something i don't think i'll ever learn or understand. are you saying on the graph that large hydro isn't going to count?

is that what you said? >> thanks for asking that. we review large hydro as renewable but the state of california in create the renewable standard program which was intended to increase the development of renewable energy technologies and shift the state more towards those technologies, does not count certain hydro electric facilities as eligible for that program. there's just a distinction between the state's view of what is eligible for renewable. we'd like to refer to it as big r renewable versus little r renewable which is generally a renewable resource that is clean

that does not emit greenhouse gases, for example. so we are including large hydro electric as a resource option in our modelling. what we wanted to show is the green bar are a floor for technologies only eligible for the california state program. the blue portion could include resource s that are eligible and hydro electric. both types meet the city's goal of decarbonizing the system. does that help? >> commissioner: truthfully, i don't think i'll ever understand. it doesn't make sense to me.

i thought the state reversed that and now accept large hydro. >> there are some exceptions. there's a threshold related to the size of the facility. the state for example, considers in its program efficiency improvements to even the large lands that were previously not eligible as eligible. hydro is an interesting one in the state's program. there are a lot of conditions and rules. the message we're trying to communicate here is fairly simple is that for that sort of

30ish percent of the portfolio when conducting analysis we're allowing large hydro to be in the mix. >> commissioner: okay. so we're allowing it? >> yes, we're allowing it to be part of our supply mix and targeting the 30% as the potential share. our modelling effort is cost and to drive the outcome. we're looking for the best resource to meet the goals that clean power s.f. needs and what the commission said forth for clean power s.f. >> commissioner: okay then i'm getting closer on understanding it.

thank you for your explanation. madame secretary, call for public comment. >> clerk: members of the pub public who wish to comment on 6c dial 1-888-273-3658 and access code 3107452 then and pound then pound again and then 1 and 0 to be added to the speaker line.

do we have callers? >> we have several callers. >> caller: thank you for the presentation we look forward to commenting on which particular scenario goes forward. and it's like changing one dial to see the change. we're doing our best to make

sure all is electric. we encourage more regular power update readings. other have their on a regular standing basis for stakeholders or at least some do. a great example is nce. i encourage you to look on their website the community power collision includes basically all community stakeholders in their territory that engage with them.

[chime] >> clerk: you're time has expired. >> caller: thank you. i'll use she and her. this is important and i'm looking forward to the detailed plan to be presented that will be submitted to the p.u.c. i'm looking forward to reading that. i think we need to take an aggressive stance for our acquisition of renewables i'm supportive of a building electr

electr electricification of vehicles and so i want us to have more to go forward. i heard a debate about hydro electric. that is greenhouse gas free. as an agency and brand our renewable should be based on solar and wind so we don't have the questioning over does high dry qualify. it's clear cut and look at geothermal. let's bring it forward but we

need to be aspirational in acquiri acquiring purely renewable resources. thank you. >> clerk: do we have other callers? >> there's one. >> caller: hi, commissioners. this is melissa whyu i'm an organizer with the sierra club. we appreciate your continuedyu organizer with the sierra club. we appreciate your continuedyu organizer with the sierra club. we appreciate your continued engagement with stakeholders and support and i just want to make one additional comment we

recommend you look at a lower metric ton. thank you for the opportunity to speak. >> clerk: thank you. are you further callers? >> no other callers. >> clerk: public comment on item 6c is closed, madame president. the next is 6d the delegation of authority report. >> this is craig lyman and currently monitoring the meeting so i will be presenting this at this time. >> clerk: thank you. as you can see there's one item, one contract on the list that

was a sole source contract. this contract between the month of april and june was a $6,000 contract with green energy annual verification process the super green product offering. a five-point contract. because the contract was less than $10,000 no competitive solicitation was required however, in the interest of fairness we performed an informal solicitation by reaching out and questioned folks who applied. one we entered into a contract with. the other indicated they were not interested in performing the work. that completes my report. >> commissioner: commissioners, any discussion, questions?

madame secretary, can you please open it up to public comment. >> clerk: members who wish to provide public comment on item 6d dial 1-888-273-3658 access code 3107452 and and pound then pound again and 1 then 0 to be added to the speaker line. do we have any callers? >> madame secretary, there are no callers in the queue. >> clerk: public comment on item 6d is closed. the next item is 6e water ent

price capital improvement program report. >> i'm going to share highlights from the water enterprise third quarter report on work performed january through march. [please stand by]

>> : the program has a cheefed d 35% completion. inspection of the beta vision pipeline number two was performed on the city valve lot and found to be in good condition which will significantly reduce the scope

of work for that project. the reservoir improvements continued in final design. anticipated to be advertised very soon. as i explained before, minor interruptions were experienced at the end of the first quarter due to the shelter in place. i'll walk through some highlights to go over some of the great work going on out there. this scaffation is bein ex scaf.

>> that will be construction out there around the same period. next slide, please. in january 2020, sft c submitted a letter to the safety of damns including a commitment and draft scheduled to our 18 u unregulatd

damns. the water enterprise vip will additionally address the damns in the regional system as well as damns in the local system. this highlights some of the improvements happening now, and these will be going on for quite some time. next slide, please. for the san francisco ground water supply project for the park. phase two construction of these wells were 90% complete in the third quarter. the bottom photo of a worker wearing a mask during the third quarter. these wells will be converted

for potable use. that brings us to the west side recycle water project. the treatment facility at the ocean side water control plant is for than 50% complete in march. the top photo shows the concrete walls and some of the piping that's being constructed. this project has made significant progress in the last six months. the pump station shown until the bottom foe oh photos is more th% complete. we can also see workers working with mafng masks on. main replacement continues to replace one hundred to one hundred fifty year old drinking water pipes in san francisco streets. at the end of the third quarter

seven miles of pipe have been replaced for the year. sneak peek of the last quarter, due to the reduced traffic in san francisco due to covid 19 an additional six miles was replaced for a total of twelve point two miles. this is the c bd staff working with masks due to our covid situation. improvements on our fire fighting water station continues. this is anticipated to be completed at the end of 2020. this is a graph of pump station number two. there's been significant tearing out of old and retro fitting of improvements. the supply contract was advertised during the third quarter. nineteenth avenue street quarter contract was awarded during this

quarter. this includes two blocks of efsw pipes and tw potable pipeline. with that, that completes my presentation but i'm happy to take any questions. >> commissioners, questions. >> i have an observation to make. on the front page of the presentation, it says-it should be noted that this report does not include all the expenditures accrued for the work completed from july 1, 2017 through march 31, 2020. that's three years. i'm just baffled why we don't have those expenditures in.

that doesn't make any sense to me at all. >> i can take a stab at that- >> your third paragraph. >> when the people converted to people software from fema all the previous data needed to be updated. i believe we have that completely updated except for the reports from other city departments when they do work. unfortunately we still don't have a good way of receiving accurate information from other city departments through the people soft system. i believe that is the oh only remaining discrepancy that's left to resolve. i believe most use of our

project controls is anxious to work on that but it's been a long standing problem. i believe kathy can probably speak to that in a little more detail. except for those interdepartment transfers, the reporting is accurate. that's my understanding. >> i feel it's been three years. there has to be some accountability on that. >> can i get back to you with some feedback on that? >> sure. that would be fine. >> : kathy would you like to say anything about it. kathy, we can't hear you.

>> : i just want to say that we havwant it to say thatwe have ar department's at the level. it's not a project by project level. that's the way they have the project set up at their end. we've been try to go woring to h their finance team to help us recover those charges. we do have it on a no program level just not by individual projects. >> okay. when do you think that will all come together?

>> also. what we could do is give a number for the overall program and not break it down. we know what the number is for the overall program. we like to have it project by project so we can monitor which projects and what their costs are. when they convert it, they didn't convert it the same way we convert it. that's why we doapt hav don't he details like we used to have. we have it for the whole program. maybe we put that overall number in there so at least at the program level that number would be accurate.

>> well, that would be a start. perhaps it should go on an ongoing list of things to look into. >> since we converted from famous to people soft we've been working closely with the controller an everyone. actually they've made some major strides in working with us, there were some other major issues at the close of the fiscal year that would definitely slowed up construction. but we work collectively with them. i feel comfortable and confidence that we will resolve this issue, it will take a little time. we will put it on the list. we'll give you an idea of when we hope to resolve this issue with public works.

>> i'm still saying three years is a long time. >> it's a long list. it was a very long list. >> i agree with you. >> all right. any other comments? thank you for your report. >> thank you. >> madam secretary, could you please open it up to public comment. >> member of the public who wish to provide two minutes of

comment for item e, please dial in and pound followed by pound again. one and steer to b and zero to e speaker line. >> do we have any speakers in the queue? >> there are no speaker nz these queue. >> closure planning and committee engagement. >> good afternoon commissioners. i hope you can hear me. i apologize-can i get the power

point up? project manager. i'm here today to provide you a brief update on the closure of gerald avenue. the reason for the closure during construction is to ensure safety, efficiency and security. the start of the closure will be no earlier than january 2021. i know at the june commission meeting we did state in the fall which was premature on our fault.

the major construction work on this project necessar necessitan this project. there will be significant number of construction vehicles and

workers crossing gerald daily. we've identified a number of tools to notify of the cloases you're. of the clez closure. we're going to ensure that the detour roads are in good condition and very drivable. if a particular intersection is congestion like during a peak commute hour, we can change the timing of traffic signal as

accordingly. a separate travel route for construction trucks sm we truck. we continue to monitor as needed during construction. next slide, please. here is a summary of our approach for the gerald closure. we conducted a traffic analysis as a part of our project planning and eir evaluation and obtained early comments from the community. the yellow box where we are today we're working with the construction contractor who is already on board about the activities and schedule. we're confirming detour routes and taking into account existing site and neighboring conditions including other construction job that's are happen inning the area. we are evaluating the

feasibility of reopening gerald during non construction hours. a partial or full closure as the construction activity increases. in doing all of that engaging the community in our plans and siem taiwe'll clearly communicat

we're planning and give feedback. ultimately by the time we close gerald the community will be informed on how to navigate the closure. we're committed to monitor the task aretraffic area around the construction area. that ends my brief update. i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. i also have our director of communications if there's any specific ow reac out reach quess well. >> commissioners, questions? commissioner maxwell, you were

the one very much engaged with this question. do you have any questions? have i lost everyone? >> i show commissioner maxwell is showing on the meeting. i don't see her video, however. >> okay. any comments or questions on this item? hearing none, could you please open it to- >> i just wanted to let you know that we met with commissioner

maxwell and gave her the presentation. she provided input. she wanted to make sure that we presented our plan at the commission meeting so the community knows what our plans are. >> oh, good. that answers my question. madam, secretary could you please open it to public comment. >> members of the public who wish to provide public comment please dial (888)273-3658 follow

the instructions to be added to the listening queue. >> we had a discussion about this some time ago and-this is

the type of mickey mouse that is happening with the san francisco commissioners. mickey mouse. we need representation. i mean, this is sickening. this is really sickening because as the fbi is going so deeply into the general manager, th whs happening at treasure island. there's not even a small project that we have standard. and missing is ethics and morals. what example-i know some of you are here for many years. when are we going to put things on track? when are we going to have some

standards? when? some other method is going to come through the board of supervisors. >> thank you. your time is expired. mr. moderator do we have any other caller ns in the queue. >> there are no other callers in the queue. >> could you make a comment. i'm curious who the point person-i can anticipate with this project and the road closure there will be a lot of community members with questions, i'm wondering if it's been very clear who the staff person or people at the pu c will be to receive those comments ancomments and if therr

that people can call or form of communication. i can just imagine that folks would want someone to be able to address their concerns to. maybe that's a question for the general manager, i don't know. >> we have presented a communication and out reach plan. i don't know if tyler wants to speak on it. >> that's a great question, commissioner. i think there will be a couple points of contact depending if it's the question people have. if it's a question about the closure itself or the conversations leading up to it. we have a team on the ground at the plant that has some great relationships in the

neighborhood, regular e-mail and other communications going out. i can provide the commission with the name and names of those people on the team and any information that we're putting out to the public in terms of an eight hundred number or general e-mail they can send things to, i can bring that back to you guys. >> that's would be great. i highly recommend that people know who they can speak to and what number they can call. >> we plan to go door to door as well. because she thought that was very important to go and knock on everyone's doors. >> good. any oarmin other comments?

any other speakers in the queue? okay sm the nex. the next item on the general manager's report. 6g. deputy manager, do you have any ieitems to report for item 6g? >> no. that's the end of my report. thank you. >> let's check the time here. if we're going to take a break. why don't we do one more item.

item seven. >> item seven is the ocean bea beach. >> i'm a project manager with a focus on climate change related efforts. if you could put up my presentation. i'm of the project manager for the ocean beach climate change project. i'm here today to provide a brief update on the project in response to the letter you received in the san francisco surf rider foundation. the letter was e-mailed to the commission on may 14th 2020. as a result you've requested an update. the letter asked that the city

in light of the uppacts no impae climate adaptation project should remain a priority due to the alarming rates of erosion. i'm here today that this project continues to be a priority for the sfpu c. the letter of erosion it refers to is at the southern end of ocean beach. the tunnel depicted by the blue line is the piece of equipment that all of the infrastructure is at risk if we don't address

the water level rise due to erosion. the anticipated changes to traffic flow and open space and coastal access amenities. as such the sfpu c declinate ded three phases. the long term project that is currently being developed. the short term improvements remove excess sand from north ocean beach to south ocean beach

where we have this infrastructure. >> speaker: .we anticipate thate placed in this area next year. for the long term improvements. this work started with the development of the ocean beach master plan. once that was done a number of other critical steps have been completed including the latest mile stone of the engineering report. the main objectives of the long term projects include adapting

to climate change, protecting critical waste water infrastructure and protecting water and habitat. in order to meet these objectives this will permanently close the skyline. it will change how people dpet iget inand out of the san franco zoo. it's necessary to address climate change and creating open space amenities. this is an example of the conceptual engineering drawings that were developed. each cross section drawing proposed where the wall will be placed in order to protect the tunnel. conceptual engineering was

completed late last year and now we're on the conceptual design package. we're also planning for an developing the schematics needed to construct the open space and public components. there are a number of competing needs that must be accommodated in this very limited space. the main access to our facilities, pedestrian and bike trail, rest rooms, parking, emergency vehicle access and the ability to get the necessary equipment into this area to get sand into the beach. it's a tall order and requires a number of agencies to participate. we've managed to move from a rather simple cartoon looking

schematic to this layout that is meeting this long list of requirements. we expect to finish 35% design in the next few months. based on our current schedule we anticipate this project will take four years to construct. in order to meet that schedule we'll need to complete both seqa and nepa. that completes my brief update on the ocean beach adaptation project. i wanted to circle back to one of the main statements in the

surf rider letter where they ask that the city not lose sight dealing with the climate change and covid 19. the city departments can maximize efficiencies and maximize dollars. integration program charter that will govern city actions going forward. as you can see here the sfpu sfs a core agency to further the

city's response due to climate change. i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. >> commissioners, any comments or questions? >> i would just like to say i'm trilled to see this project at this point and that there's a time line and commitment to make it happen. thank you for making this happen after many many years. >> i'm excited to see all this work going in with multiple departments, i mean, i think we all lived in the city so long. you wake up and the weather report is ocean beach is closed

today, this is closed today. you know, people have to be thinking smartly and i think you an your team and others are really-i do have one question. from the slope passed park mer c ed how long do you anticipate that route being closed down? i know when you said 2027 is when the anticipated finishing is from design to actual finished construction, how long would that be shut down? that route? >> are you speaking of 35 or could you clarify- >> everything from the skyline that you are showing me right

now. >> that's a permanent closure. that's part of why this project including sfmt. from slope to skyline will be permanently closed. >> got it. okay. >> okay. >> just real quick summary, i don't want to get into th weeds. the traffic design going from the end of san francisco down to daily city and all the other stuff, what is that going to be? people have to good through 19th avenue? >> we're working with sfmta on a larger area and how traffic will be rerouted and encouraging

drivers to get off before they do reach slope. you will no longer be able to continue on the great highway. it will be redesigned to allow for safe pedestrian and bicycle crossing. it will have what we're planning for is a new entry point to this asset for a beautiful open space. that's where the traffic will switch from being able to continue along the great highway and will be forced to turn on sloat. you will no longer be able to turn left onto the great highway unless you are an employee and going to one of our facilities. there's a new public parking lot

where folks can park and access the coastal amenities on what used to be the great highway. >> got it. that's a great question. sloat will turn from most likely a lazy street except for sundays with people going to the zoo into a major thorough fare where they can get bottled up. i assume that's part of what the consequences of fixing all of this stuff. par pr that's correct. we did a pretty big traffic study. taking advantage of the closure

when there was sand on the highway to how drivers will react to that. all of that information is being taken into account when coming up with a design. looking at opportunities further back closer to lincoln to encourage drivers not to come down the great highway of their alternate destination is skyline or going further south of san francisco. >> got it. i don't want my comments to say that all i care about it cars, because i deaf netl definitely . this is a line in the sand. this is shut down of final design of going through process. this is just eliminated as a traffic route. in order to do the inevitable climate change work that you guys are doing such a diligent

job of taking care of. is that a good blow up summary. >> yes, it is, sir. thank you. >> i have a question. i'm curious to know why the port is involved with this. >> the port is not involved with the master plan and ocean beach climate adaptation master plan. the port is looking at the broader efforts across the city. the port is not involved with this particular project. >> i see. okay. any other comments before we go to public comment? madam secretary could you call for public comment, please. >> members of the public who

wish to provide public comment on item seven please call in. >> there are no callers in the queue. >> we'll take one more item and then we'll take a recess. item eight, please. >> item eight is the water supply and conservation update.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. i want to report to you on an audit that was recently completed by os c a. when you look at asset management, there's a lot of definitions. one that i like is a coordinated approach to managing the physical assets. in this case the pipes and damns and all the pieces of the regional water system to minimize expenditures while

maximizing the useful life of that asset. this audit including a thorough review of the existing pu c documents. the draft report was shared with the staff in this effort. their comments were incorporated and the puc received the final report. next slide, please.

the audit report focuses on a number of conclusions. the puc embraces the basic principles of water management and water and power divisions.

guiding direction exists at the management level. there are differences between the two divisions and i think that's not surprising given the differences in facilities used, the age of the facilities and the management of the facilities has come up over time. that was one of the things that was noted. next slide, please. rot report also presents general recommendations. the puc develop a uniform approach to risk that would be used for both the water supply division as part of the puc's overall asset management work. the report also references a risk framework and assessment tool by water an power. based on recent conversation

with puc staff, the report recommends that water supply and treatment seems like there may be some additional better tool available. i look forward to better conversations with puc staff on that. several other recommendations are provided for the one to three year time window. having water and power and supply and treatment divisions adopt the same standards to bring them both into alignment together. a commitment to review and update asset registries for five year intervals. asset registry is a list of all the assets being managed and maintained. for a system of your size, that is a significant effort in it of itself. formulizing the approach across the utility and reviewing and

updating the current policy. there are also eleven other recommendations listed in the outer time years. but again, from my experience tend to be things we continue to review as time goes on. next slide, please. as you can imagine your whole sub customers who have invested in this system are seriously interest inned this ris issue, e of your efforts and want to make sure this is something done to standards and above. for example, the water supply agreement requires the p c to adopt a policy by this december. my understanding is that proposed policy is included in

an upcoming draft report provided to us in early august. we look forward to engage withing that and this commission. we intend to engage actively in that policy's significance as we look forward to this implementation. provide regular updates to the board and to our member agencies. i really want to thank the executive team for it's leadership on these matters. it's been critical in moving forward. lastly, the audit report itself is posted on our website. that concludes my comments. i'll certainly answer any comments you might have.

>> commissioners, any comments questions? madam secretary, could you please open this to public comment. >> members of puck lick wh publo provide two minutes of public comment please dial (888)273-3658 press pound and pound again. dial one and zero to be added to the speaker line. mr. moderator do we have any callers in the queue? >> madam secretary, we don't have any callers in the queue at this time.

>> public comment on this matter is now closed. we are now going to take a brief recess. please return at five minutes after four for the continuation of

calendar. there is no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission or public so requests and it will be removed from the consent calendar and moved as a separate item. >> commissioners, any discussion. madam secretary, will you open this up to the public for comment. >> member of the public if you

wish to provide a two minute comment please dial the number listed and follow the instructions for public comment. >> there are no callers in the queue at this point. >> thank you. public comment for this item is now closed. >> may i have a motion and a second for the consent calendar. >> motion. >> second. >> madam secretary, will you take a roll call vote. >> (roll call) motion carries.

next item, please. >> next item is item 11 authorized clean power for customers enrolled in the clean energy for low income families december 30, 2020. this will be presented by mr. hines. >> thank you. good afternoon, commissioners. can you hear me? >> yes. >> i was able to get my video working. very excited. as you know, these are tough times we're going through with covid 19. in fact, we've seen a significant increase in the

number of clean power electricity customers. customers enrolled in the discount programs. the proposed credits cover roughly one month's credit. that is single family, multi family residential customers and

small business cuf customers. less operational complexity and better transparency to our customers when compared to a percentage based discount. percentage based discounts are more difficult to apply given that power shares a bill with bg anpgand e and requires budget changes that could delay our implementation of this kind of a relief measure. if you adopt this action, the credits will appear on our customer's bills in the month of october. we will continue to conduct out reach so they will receive the credit and give them a regular discount on their energy bills. with that i'm happy to take my questions you may have.

>> any questions, comments? >> do we know how much we have budgeted for this since we have an idea of who the customers are? how much this is going to cost us overall? >> yes, we do. we're estimating this will reduce clean power revenues by three point two million dollars in fiscal year 2021. we've estimated that including a continued growth in the enrollment in the care and fair program. >> the new thing is a one time, they can participate at anytime they choose for one time?

>> no. we're targeting one month of implementation. we have about 40000 customers currently enrolled. our enrollment has been growing since covid 19 began. we've been promoting this discount program. we want to it use this bill credit to provide some additional immediate relief to these customers. we also think that it has an additional public policy benefit which is to try to encourage more customer that's may qualify to sign up. we get as many customers that are eligible in san francisco-and they will benefit from ongoing bill discounts on

their energy bills. court so d>> so did you have ton enrolled for some time for this benefit? >> that's part of the reason why we're recommending october. one, october is not too far off, it gives us the opportunity to provide relief quickly. and it gives us a couple months to get more customers enrolled. the ject i eligibility is that e customer is enrolled by september. >> if i enroll september 29th i'm eligible for the october- >> yes. >> okay. thank you. >> are the credits in any way proportional to the amount of

injury that individual customers use? >> we're proposing a fixed dollar amount be credited base on the average usage of customers in classes we've looked at customers enrolled in the three groups i mentioned earlier, we calculated what their approximate monthly bills would be for full electricity service and we're proposing that the bill credit be a set of the average value. it's not proportional to individual's customer usage. >> but it is by class? >> yes, it's relative to the

average customer usage. >> how much disparity is there in the classes? what i mean is a flower shop may not use as much energy as another business. are the classes variable enough? >> there is some variability. we're targeting customer class, there's some amount of, i guess, homo general ait

homogeneity in the class. >> thank you. >> any other comments, questions? could you open this to public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment on item 11 dial (888)273-3658 access code three 310-6452.

>> we have one caller in the queue. >> thank you. >> thank you, members. this is very important, electricity is really important, i support the idea of a fixed credit which certainly recognizes the needs of those who because of their situation can't buy a whole lot of electricity. these are challenging times. i think we have an imperative using this policy of allowing enrollment to reach out to those who would be eligible for care whether they are in power sf or

not. that way they can all take advantage of this benefit. this is what public power is all about. it's for the people. this is worthy of your approval. i hope that you will do this, thank you. >> there are no more callers, thank you. >> thank you. public comment on item 11 is closed. >> may i have a motion. motion for item 11. >> second. >> madam secretary, will you

please take a roll call vote. >> (roll call).

>> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm the rates commissioner-suspend all watt ir and power shut off due to non payment. this suspension was part of the mayor's emergency declaration for covid 19. it's since been extended twice given that there's a continued

state of emergency in san francisco. it's been five months since the start of the local state of emergency. as i'm sure you're all aware, we're still seeing high transmission rates of the virus, we have hospitalization rates continuing to rise breaking errors in san francisco. water for hand washing is an essential mitigation effort for limiting the transmission of the disease. it's impossible for families to stay home and remain socially distant if their home doesn't have water or power. in the last few years, we

average around 1200 shut offs a year. around five thousand customers are behind on their payments and in line to get shut off. not all of those would get shut off. it's a clear increase and we do not believe it would be appropriate to increase shut off at this time. it would continue both the moratorium shut off for water and power and suspend late payment fees. the more tor moratorium would ll january 2021. it does not eliminate debt but

gives breathing room during the emergency to ensure we're doing our part and support our customers in covid 19 while maintaining our own financial susustainability. as well as the one time discount this is our part to meet this moment of need during this emergency. the recently passed racially justice association found that water is a basic right. this is something we really want to look at over the next few months as part of this moratorium so we ensure when we do restart our collections process we're doing so as part of our high standard that we set out for our racial justice

policy. i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> any questions or comments? hearing none. can you please open this for public comment. >> members of the public wishing to make a public comment please call (888)273-3658 and pound and pound again to be added to the speaker line. do we have any callers? >> there is one call in the queue. >> thank you. >> thank you, members.

this is extremely important. while i've been fortunate over the last thirty years in that i've always had it. i've experienced water and power outages. things go down in a hurry. there are people who are having trouble and we are taking ownership of this by not returning customers to default by pg and e. water and electricity is a health and welfare issue. i hope that we will climb out of this crisis sooner rather than later. people will over time make their effort to pay. in the meantime it is essential that we continue with this policy and not shut people off.

i know what it's like to do without when there's a power outage or power failure. i don't want anybody to do without. it's essential that you have to sign it, thank you. >> thank you. are there any other callers in the queue? >> there are no other calls in queue, madam secretary. >> thank you. >> may i have a motion on this item. >> i move- >> second. kr>> and i have a second. madam secretary, would you take a roll call vote. >> (roll call).

five ayes. >> the motion carries. next item, please. >> next item is plans and specifications in the amount of 30 million four hundred forty two thousand two thun and w hunr the duration of calendar days whiesdayswhile under bid. >> agm for infrastructure. this is to upgrade electrical systems in order to receive additional power which will be needed for the new bio solid

facility as well as other improvements at the south east plant. it will also pro vie provide ups for a second source of power at the plant substation. we're here to request awards to the lowest responses and responsible.

>> (roll call) five ayes.

>> motion carries. >> authorize the general manager to approve future modifications for the contract with no change to the contract duration. this will be introduced by shelby campbell. >> thank you. this project is a c mg c construction project. this is coming in higher at this case for the higher bid packages sm the projecpackages. to pay for additional higher and

practices during preconstruction. we're asking to replenish the construction contingency. >> was this redid or- >> no the way it work ss is we hire the general contractor. the contractor hires trade packages. there's an evaluation of whether to award the trade package. we're almost close to the end of awarding all the trade packages. what happened is we generally have enough money to award the trade packages or allow the contractor to award the trade packages. what we did is we used

contingency within the project construction budget to make up the difference on some of these paid packages where the engineer's estimate was a little lower than what the actual bids came in at. >> i see. okay. okay. any questions? comments? madam secretary, can you open it to public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of comment please dial 888-dial one and zero to be added to the speaker line.

mr. moderator do we have any callers? >> madam secretary, there are no caller ns in the queue right no. >> thank you. public comment is closed. >> may i have a motion to move item 14. s>> so moved. >> second. >> madam secretary, could we have a roll call vote. >> (roll call) five ayes. >> motion carries. next item, please. >> approve plans and specifications and award contract number ww693 in the

amount not to exceed 9 million six hundred eighty nine thousand with the duration of four hundred eighty nine calendar days. >> commissioner this item is before you because we received only one bid. we did do extensive out reach. we don't think if we rebid that we would receive additional bidders. we ask that you a wor award this contract to the responsive bidder. >> i was rather curious why we only received one bid.

this doesn't seem like unusual work. >> it is not comeucial work. unusual work. we reached out to the contractors that usually do our work. one was already busy on a project. another said they preferred to bid on the civic notation as opposed to the as needed. they didn't bid on it. there were various reasons that i think we originally had five bidders potentially and some of them just did not respond. >> do we normally do it as needed? >> we normally always have at least one as needed spot for a repair.

>> have we had problems with it in the past? >> in the past we have had one bidder or two or three at the most. >> so this is not unusual behavior? >> no, it is not. >> this particular construction company has done a lot of work for us in the past. they are no strangers for sure. >> any questions or comments? >> i'm glad everybody asked all the questions that they have. that's why this-all of you commissioners are so diligent and spend your time here asking these questions. sometimes there are places that just because the price isn't low enough people keep asking for morbids whether it's in the

private or public sector. if there's a single bidder that as president king said that's done a lot of this work before, there's fiduciary diligence by accepting this type of stuff. i'm going to support this based on the report from system general manager how. that is my comment. thank you. >> thank you. madam secretary, will you please open this up for public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make public comment for two minutes. please call in and follow the instructions to be added to the speaker line.

mr. moderator, do we have any callers? >> madam secretary, there are no call nz ths in the queue. >> thank you. >> may i have a motion for item number 15. hello, commission. >> i'll move the item. >> i'll second it. >> okay. good. madam second, roll call vote, please.

>> five ayes. >> the motion carries. next item, please. >> next item is item 16 to authorize the general manager to authorize the puc and energy council. this will be presented by julia almond. >> thank you. barbara hale general manager for power. i'm here before you today to seek authorization for install electric home water heaters. this will be done through our contractor as we gear up for our first clean power capital plan.

this is one of the first new programs we launch. water heaters using natural gas are among the largest sources of greenhouse gases and air pollution. that makes this a key area to focus on switching from gas to electric as we strive to meet the city's climate change goals. a specific appliance followed a heat pump water heater. better for grid integration. this technology isn't widely adopted because there is a general lack of training and installation experience among contractors. it's not commonly in stock among distributors. these are circumstances that create obstacles for quick water heater replacements. this program will provide

training and incentives for contractors in the bay area to install heat pump water heaters in the county. a central application hub and incentivization level will make it easier for us to market that program. anthis includes single family ad multi family units whether owner or renter occupied. it would not cover buildings with a central blower or other large water heater. thcreate a regional prodpram tht

covers much of the bay area. this will allow clean power sf to join with minimal resources devoted to program development. this allows us to quickly seize this opportunity to promote a new emission reducing technology. i have a few slides if you could pull those up please. here we show the organizations involved in the program and funding the program. the bay area water management district offered a grant to fund development. the grant was awarded to the bay area regional net work, a public

agency that funds programs in the bay area. they select the energy council as the implementor for the council. a joint power agency governed by local officials and cities within it. they manage a number of energy and waste reduction systems sm thsystems.develop a web portal r incentive applications. if authorized our clean power assess program will join east bay community energy and m c e as participating community choice aggregators. fund incentives for installation that's occur within san francisco and also contribute towards the administrative fees to cover the program activities i just described.

clean power sf will also conduct out reach among san francisco based contractors and consumers to promote the program. next slide, please. to join this initiative the p c will execute an agreement with the energy council. we propose an initial investment of one hundred twenty thousand dollars this fiscal year for participation over a three year program duration. this investment will provide incentives for up to about three hundred forty five installations over those three years. we recognize that this is a modest goal. we think it's appropriate given san francisco unique building stock and the fact that heat pump water heaters aren't widely

adopted. our goal is to jump start the market. once interest in the technology develops and we learn more about how it performs in san francisco. with that i ask for your support and happy to take any questions. thank you. >> when you say work force development, do you mean that later on there will be special training or you have-we're looking at green jbs. jobs. it seems like this is something new and an area to do special training in that. >> the progr program as proposed already including a work force training element. what we're imagine s imagining s the program matures we would

develop san francisco specific aspecaspects of work force development. >> when we talk about training since there aren't very much kron tractors doing this work, who would be eligible to be trained for these jobs since it's brand new to everyone. >> they have to have the appropriate contractor's license. there are about ten contractorss currently ted up to work with them on this plo program. we would be looking to expand that to more san francisco contractors. that includes just one that's a san francisco based company. >> if whoever decides to try

this, they would get a discount from san francisco? >> they would get a incentive payment-the contractor would receive an incentive payment. the contractor would receive the training. the incentive payment would go to the contractor and that would make it more a affordable for the customer. >> they would pass down that incentive. >> that is the inspectation, yes. it's much like the other incentive program we have, for example. go solar sf. the customer signs that incentive payment over it to the contractor that performs the installation. this program is established to tart with the contractor so they

are encouraged to market and encourage the type of this particular appliance. the heat pump water heater. >> sounds great to me. i'm really pleased this is happening. i like the pa partnership model. i like the insenniv incentive pf it. i appreciate your work on this. >> excuse me. i'd just like to recognize the good work of julia almond on our staff. you're thanking me, really it goes to julie. of course her boss. >> please extend our appreciate to them as well and to her. thank you.

>> thank you. >> very good. may we have public comment. >> must bees of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment. please call the number on your screen and follow the instructions to be added to the speaker line.

>> greenhouse gas emission reduction from building elect

ricelectrification. extending the use of heat pump technology is necessary to help meet our climate goals an to me, it can't come soon enough. this would be a good start, this program. also, i'd like to see the program reup until the time an d funding run out. i would like to see the funding include more types of residences. thank you. >> thank you. mr. moderator, are there other callers? >> madam secretary there are no more calls in the queue. >> thank you.

public comment on this item is closed. >> any further discussion on this item. hearing none, may i have a motion on item 16. mov>> move it. >> second. >> (roll call) five ayes. >> the motion carries. next item, please. >> item 17 approve the terms an condition to execute a redesign with the pin pence peninsula co.

>> good afternoon. this is a reimbursement for cal training to relocate two poles they are putting into electrified cal trains. we have an easement. we don't own the property and the fee. we have the three and four line in the easement and want to be able to preserve in the future to run the four lines. we relocated the pole and were able to successfully come up with a way to do that. this is to reimburse them for their time and effort. i'll be glad to answer any questions. >> commissioners. any questions? comments? could we call on public comment.

>> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment on item 17, please call the number an follow the instructions to be added to the speaker line. mr. moderator, do we have any callers? >> madam secretary, there are no calls in the queue. >> thank you that closes public comment on item 17. >> may i have a motion for item 17. >> move item 17. >> i'll second it.

>> and then the roll call for item 17. >> (roll call) thank you. five ayes. >> the motion carries. madam secretary could you please read the items for closed session. >> yes. closed session item 20 is an existing inmitigated claim investigating city of san francisco for unmitigated claim for all claims and the city to pay the claimant. item 21 anticipated mit mitigatn

at plaintive. >> members of the public who wish to make a two minute public comment on items heard during public comment please call the number on your screen. please follow the instructions to be added to the speaker line. >> mr. moderator do we have any callers? >> madam secretary, there are no call nz ths in the queue.

>> thank you. public comment is close. >> i'll move it assert. >> second. we need a roll call vote on this. >> (roll call) five ayes. >> the motion carries. we will now enter into closed session. >> count off for closed session will begin shortly.