this is an action item. do i have a motion to adjourn? >> i move. >> director: thank you. and a second >> seconded. >> director: a motion to adjourn by commissioner ortiz-cartagena, seconded by vice president zouzounis. commissioner adams is absent, [roll call] that motion passes four to zero with three absent and the meeting is adjourned at 6:18 p.m. thank you, commissioners.

>> vice president zouzounis: thanks everyone. >> president laguana: bye you guys. >> have a good night. >> good afternoon and welcome to the san francisco public utilities commission meeting. i am president sophie maxwell. madam secretary, take the roll please. [roll call]

commissioner paulsen is excused from the meeting. and given the health and mayor breed have lifted the restrictions and this meeting is sell vised by sfgov tv. and for those watching on live stream b aware there is a brief lag between the livestream and to extend the sfgov staff for their assistance during the meeting. to make public comment, dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 146 434 0611 pound, pound. and limit your topics to the agenda item and to be with the

public comment made in a civil and respectful manner to refrain from the use of the manner and not to individual commissioners or staff. >> thank you. before going on, we talked earlier this year about acknowledging the first people and today is going to to be one of the acknowledgments we might have different ones at times, but that is something that we will do. so i am going to start. the san francisco puc acknowledges that it owns and the stewards of the unseated lands located within the

historic territory of the ohlone tribe and other descendants of the historically federally recognized mission citizens, barona band of alameda county. the san francisco puc also recognizes that every citizen in the greater bay area has and continues to benefit from the use and occupation of the ohlone tribe of aboriginal land. since before and after the san francisco public utilities commission founding in 1932, it is vitally important that we not only recognize the history of the tribal lands on which we reside but also we acknowledge and honor the fact that the ohlone people have established a working partnership with the san francisco puc and are productive and flourishing members within the many greater san francisco bay areas communities today.

madam secretary, will you read the next item please? >> the first order of business is item 3, approval of minutes of july 13, 2021 regular meeting and jug july 16, 2021 special meeting. >> colleagues, are there any corrections or additions to be added to the july 13 and july 16 minutes? seeing none, madam secretary, will you open this up to public comment please. members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment specifically on item 13 the minutes dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 146 434 0611 and press star 3 to speak. limit to the topic of the agenda item being discussed and the chair can interrupt and ask you to limit the comment and be made in a civil and respectful manner and refrain from the personal

comments. please address to the full staff. do we have any callers? >> madam secretary, we have one caller in the queue. caller, go ahead. you have two minutes. >> caller: can you hear me okay? >> yes. >> caller: great. david pillpal. i communicated a couple of incredibly nonsubstantive edits to secretary hood before the meeting. i submit they will all be incorporated. i want to make very clear that donna is doing a great job under all of this craziness that continues to happen, and so i thank her on behalf of the public for all that she does.

we did have outstanding issues about thousand resolve chosed discussions are reported and reflected in the minutes. i am sure that will get worked out. in the future it would be great to find a way to post presentations that come in late or are put together at the last minute by staff so that the public has access to those after the meeting. but otherwise the minutes are great. and donna is doing a great job and thank you very much. force >> thank you, caller. there are no other callers in the queue. >> public comment on the minutes are closed. awe thank you. may i have a motion and second to approve minutes of the regular meeting on july 13?

>> so moved. >> second. >> [roll call vote on the minutes] >> you have four aye's. >> a motion and second to approve minutes of the special meeting of july 16. >> i'll move. >> second. >> roll call please. >> [roll call vote on july 16 meeting minutes] >> you have four yay yays. >> thank you. next item please. >> a next order of business is item four, general public comment. members of the public who wish to make two minutes of general public comment on matters within the commission's jurisdiction and are not on today's agenda may do so by dialling 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 146 434 0611.

pound, pound. to raise your hand to speak, press star three. we ask public comment be in a civil and respectful manner and refrain from the use of profanity. please address your remarks to the commission as a whole and not to individual commissioners or staff. mr. moderator, do we have any callers? >> we have one caller in the queue. >> thank you. >> caller, i have unmuted your line. go ahead. >> caller: the information as -- the information that i wanted to talk about the bio solids and the digested. the public was promised initially -- and i'm going back to the year 2016 -- that they would be informed what is

happening. and as you know, commissioners, this is not about running our mouth. this is about action. we, the people, haven't been informed about the timeline and the goals. we hear that that goal and won $1 billion plus. if you commissioners think that you can waste taxpayers money that has been wasted for $300 million that the community deficits, you are sadly mistaken. i'm watching you all like a

hawk. i have been watching you like a hawk since the year 2002. thank you very much. next caller? >> caller: david pilpal here. my only item for general public comment i assume since there is an item in the closed session that the general manager contract negotiations are continuing in closed session and ultimately an employment agreement and start date will be discussed and voted upon in open session. thanks very much. >> thank you for your comments. madam secretary, there are no more callers in the queue right now. >> thank you.

general public comment is closed. >> next item is item five, communications. any discussion on communications? >> seeing none, we open up for public comment. >> member who is wish to make two minutes of public comment on item 5, communications, dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 146 434 0611, pound, pound, and press star 3. limit your comments to the topic of the agenda item being discussed and remind you if you don't stay on topic, the chair can interrupt and ask you to limit to the agenda item. we ask public comment be in a civil and respectful manner. please address your remarks to the commission as a whole and not to individual commissioners or staff.

>> mr. moderator, do we have callers? >> madam secretary, we have one caller in the queue. caller, go ahead. you have two minutes for item number 5 communications. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am addressing you regarding communication and previous communication. specifically the letter and allegations of misrepresenting mr. dennis herrera's history, background, and experience. i don't know why no one is responding to it. if you have been informed that there is allegations, at least respond to it. i am not asking you to confirm it or deny it. i am asking him to respond to it. i'm also still baffled as to why he would go to a job site when

he has not been confirmed to be the next general manager. that is a fact. is he the general manager or not the general manager? these allegations are serious and there is no one in the city except the commission and room 200 that will ever and forever bring in the fox to guard the hen house. i advise you humbly to please read the newspapers, the western observer, the mission local. we are not crazy, commissioners. we are the real thing.

he shows up on tv saying don't believe the crime rates and we see it every day. people are leaving the city because of this crap, so i'm asking you again, i know you are in a binder right now between abiding what you have been told -- >> sorry, caller, your time is expired. >> next caller. i have unmuted your line. you have two minutes. >> commissioner, we are given two minutes to wax our opinion. and those of us who are interested want something

progressive to happen. in order for something progressive to happen, we have to follow the laws. we cannot tolerate people making their own system or ways in the middle of nothing. as far as i know, you were supposed to pick a candidate and in the middle of the process, someone through a wrench in the wheel. and the at least you can deal is while you are dealing with the selection that hasn't been transparent. there is accountability. what else are we going to do? the f.b.i. is already involved. who else are we going to call? the c.i.a.?

come on. give me a break because two general managers on the commission. why are we going with this appointment? thank you very much. >> thank you, caller. there is one other caller in the queue. >> caller, go ahead. you have two minutes. >> can you hear me okay? >> yes, we can. >> caller: great. david pilpal again. and i wanted to call to i a tension on items 5b and e and in both cases the memos and information is fine. the people awe thorring the memos are all acting and i look

forward to the day when we have fewer acting appointments and more permanent people in charge of the importance funk functions. that is all. thanks. >> thank you, caller. public comment on item five, communications, is closed. >> next item. item six is the bay area water supply agency update with member sandkulla. >> good afternoon. i wanted to talk about the bay area delta plan and the impact on the customers. and i urge you to protect the fish in the river with ere implementation of nonflow river proposed in the voluntary agreement. you know that bos koe represents the 26 water agent says that

purchase 2/3 of the water delivered by the san francisco regional water system. the agencies, in turn, provide watter to 1.8 million residents, 48,000 businesses and hundreds of communities. boscoe is in the process to update the delta water control plan and continues to support the objective. however, we cannot support the plan adopted by the state board due to the resulting significant impact to the water customers it represents. recently over the last several month, our member agencies have adopted state required urban water management plans that show they would suffer up to 50% loss of water supply from the system during a drought like the one we are currently experiencing if the adopted bay delta plan was enforced. they have also had to adopt contingency plans, drought contingency plans to identify thousand held allocate the limited water supply during a drought which would result in an unacceptable economic slow down, health and safety risk and economic damage to the

residents, businesses and communities and limit the ability for construction to approve new, affordable housing for residents and employees of vital businesses. these are the same unacceptable impacts that we described to the state board as it adopted a plan. they are why bawsa and joined san francisco and other water suppliers with objections related to the plan and the impacts of the agency. the challenge of how to protect the fish in the environment must be addressed, but the plan also seriously threatens the water supply for the people, businesses and communities which must be protected as well. these impacts are unacceptable and require a realistic alternative to the plan. fortunately, there is one thoughtful, scientific-based trva developed by the districts with san francisco public utilities commission. the trva will provide critically needed benefits for the river

fish and environment and reasonable protection for the essential water supply for the bawsca constituents. we made an appeal and the governor newsom has introduced agreements. we support the evaluation of trva by the state board as an alternative to the adopted plan. now is the time for action to show your commitment to the river, the fish and the water customers. as such, we support you and the district's moving forward now with investments in the early implementation to provide critically needed benefits for the fish. i would be pleased to answer any questions you might have.

>> madam secretary, public comment on this item please. >> member who is wish to make public comment on item 6 dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 146 434 0611, pound, pound. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. limit your comment to the topic of the agenda item being discussed and if you can not stop on topic t chair can interrupt and ask you to limit to the agenda item. we ask public comment be made in a civil and respectful manner and refrain from the use of profanity. please address your remarks to the commission as a whole and not individual commissioners or staff. mr. moderator, do we have any callers? >> we have one caller in the

queue. caller, go ahead. i have unmuted your line. >> caller: commissioners, i was listening to mr. richie talking about the customers we had and the customers we gained or accumulated or registered after 1914. at no time during our deliberations do we recount the real, true history of how the river was dammed.

who are the owners? and who is going to save the salmon. they have failed to tell us how much money they get from the computer companies and commercial companies and this is a big operation. i'm not going into the quarry, the clubs that use the water and so on and so forth. i think we have to learn to do a needs assessment. and if it failed in addressing the details of the agreements with our partners, then this is the time to revisit it.

we cannot be supply ample water to whoever needs it. even though they are partners. >> thank you, caller. your time is expired. there are no other callers in the queue right now. >> thank you public on item 6 is closed. item 7. >> item 7 is report of the general manager. >> good morning, president. good afternoon, president maxwell and commissioners. first item i wanted to report on was the update on negotiations with the 2018 bay delta amendments and voluntary agreements. several weeks ago we were contacted by the state team to have a meeting to discuss what

they were putting together and one was a state water contractor representative. one was a federal water contractor representative and one as a sacramento valley water user and san joauquin water valley user. the two two secretaries unveiled a counterproposal to the february 42020 and we do not have a paper copy and it was a power point and we didn't get all the details. what has been happening since then is they have convened the larger water group meeting to unveil the counterproposal. this is quite different and we are evaluating what it means to

us because we don't have the information with what we can provide to the commission would be a recommendation going forward with the state proposal. again, i wish i had more detail on the proposal, but there is still a lot of information that is missing behind the scenes and since we don't have a true written copy, it is hard to evaluate. i would be glad to answer any questions the commissioner might have on that item. >> i have a question. thank you so much for the update. can you actually remind me what was in the february offer and maybe a few highlights of how this deviates from that?

>> sure. the february 4 offer was to develop the ranges of adequacy for the different water types and took the middle number each year of adequacy and what water was being committed to fulfill that and this is a delta outflow and not an instream requirement. and there was shortfalls and in many of the water year types that were being made up through water purchases. and one of the things that is between now and what happened on february 4 is not enough money to buy all the water they wanted to buy and there wasn't enough time to do the things they wanted to do. they have taken the proposal to close the water gap as well and having less water available over the eight-year period. that is the major difference here and the water purchases

that is occurring as well and might be short in dollars for water purchases with the abundance of dollars to improve streams and rivers in california. >> is this related to the 30% bio diversity? >> and the unrepaired flow requirement? >> and they did pass another -- the executive order with 30% by diversity. are they trying to tie this into that or is the money going to come from there? who are they going to purchase the water from exactly? have they identified this? >> to answer the last question first, they haven't identified all the sellers. there are willing sellers on the

sacramento riverside and there is supposed to be infrastructure money to do that. and some of that is appropriated by the state legislature and that hasn't taken place yet. >> if they are tying that to the funneling. and when are we going to -- so when are we going to have the full proposal exactly? >> we hope to have something that we can discuss with you in public in the next several weeks. >> does this go back to the full requirements that we are still sort of trying to sort out? >> that is a really good question because the flow that would be required is kind of looking like this is a delta

outflow than in stream flow. commissioner harrington, you had your hand raised. awe thank you, president maxwell. she was asking about timing. thank you. >> president maxwell, you are muted. >> thank you. >> any further discussion or questions? >> a seeing none, thank you for that. we're looking forward to more, of course. >> any other comments? >> on 7a, no more comments. i wanted to thank president maxwell for the participation in

the press conference the mayor held to the stuc. i think it was a well attended event and we are on our way. president maxwell, if you want to say anything on that, please do so. >> president: i just think the mayor and dennis and scott were there as well and made some amazing points that cannot be disregarded, and some of it is which is that we have been in the power business, san francisco has been in the power business for centuries. we have done very well and so people don't need to be afraid that if we get control that anything other than excellence will happen. that was one of the messages that needed to be done. and how pg&e has been very unhelpful in us doing our city

business of growing our city and housing for people. thank you, then, and no report? >> excuse me, madam president. i need to call public comment on this item. >> on a. >> thank you. member of the public who have public comment on 7a dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 146 434 0611 pound, pound. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. you must limit your comments to the topic of the agenda item being discuss and if you do not stay on the topic, the chair can interrupt and ask that you limit to the agenda item. please address your remarks to

the commission as a whole and not to individual commissioners or staff. >> do we have any callers? >> madam secretary, we have two callers in the queue. >> caller, i have unmuted your line. >> caller: commissioners, i have sent two articles. one from the pacific sun with the other from the los angeles times. i want you to secretary it with you with the voluntary negotiations with the state of california. i know michael is the acting general manager and we have mr.

richie but this is no empirical data even though they have a lot of experience. and to do the he have lifting to stand taller and when we express our sentiments, we are told to be cool. so it is really strong today.

and also exercise and teach you a lot about robert's rules. i never said the f word. nor did anyone during public comment, but somebody from the commission used the f word and said we don't know how to speak and how to behave ourselves. thank you very much. >> thank you, caller. >> caller, i have unmuted your line. >> hi, president maxwell and members of the commission. this is barry nelson with global state salmon association. i appreciate the update and wanted to share our perspective. and we have statements. and the first is that there is a

long record of failing from the end of june 16 and the process has a new deadline from the 5th of august. those deadlines have been failed time after time. and second, about substance, and i have heard some reports of this new proposal. we are very concerned about it. but we haven't even seen the power point. i will refrain from offering comments about the substance of the new package. and i will note that we remain that the process lacks any rigor. and we repeat our request a year ago, almost a year ago.

and the service relied on the foundation of the trva that is still not responded to that review or given the summary of that review and their suggested action. there may be place where is they agree or disagree. and there is no process that this investors has lost any -- >> thank you, caller. there are no other callers in the queue. off thank you. public comment on even is closed. >> thank you. 7b, public comment, i believe

you mentioned that we were today with the press conference and that is the activity of the commission. public comment on that item please. >> thank you. >> member of the public dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 146 434 0611, pound, pound, and press star 3. limit to top comments to the agenda item. we ask that public comment be made in a civil and respectful manner and address the remarks to the commission as a whole and not individual commissioners or staff. do we have any callers?

>> madam secretary, there are no callers in the queue at this time. >> public comment is closed at this time. >> item 8, new commission business. >> president: colleagues, new commission any business? seeing none, next item. >> next item is item 9 with the consent calendar. these are considered retained by the san francisco public utilities commission and there will be no open discussion unless a member of the commission or public request in which event the matter will be removed from the calendar. we have had a request that 9b be removed for discussion. thank you. >> is there any further comments, questions, removals?

seeing none, may i have a motion and second to approve items a and b? items a and c. >> and public comment. >> thank you. public comment please. >> members of the public who we shall to make two comments on 9a and 9b, dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 146 434 0611, pound, pound, and to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. note you must limit comments to the topic of the agenda item being discussed and remind you if you don't stay on topic the chair are interrupt and ask you remain to the agenda item. please refrain from the use of profanity and address the remarks to the commission as a whole and not individual

commissioners or staff. >> do we have any callers? >> we have one caller in the queue. caller, go ahead. >> can you hear me now? >> yes. >> i want to pull item 9b from the consent calendar. i have a couple of comments. thanks. no more callers. >> item b is pulled. may i have a motion and second on item c. >> that is 9a, madam president.

>> i'm sorry. it's been moved and seconded. roll call vote on 9a. >> you have four aye's. >> read item b please. >> an approve the plans and specifications and award contract no. www-714, ocean beach climate change adaptation in the amount of $3,314,000 with the duration of 1095 consecutive calendar days to the responsible bidder submitting the lowest responsive bid minerva construction to provide coastal erosion mitigation at beach south of/oat boulevard and

skyline boulevard. and anna roush is here to discuss this item. >> good afternoon, commissioners. this item is a continuation of work we have been doing to protect the area in front of the oceanside treatment plan. i have come before the commission a couple of times on different components of the project. this is a large climate change and this is one component or a sub project of a larger project. the intent is to use environmentally friendly measures to protect this area and the long-term project is being designed. happy to answer any specific questions you may have.

force >> let's open this up to public comment. >> member of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment on 9b which is www-714, dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 146 434 0611, pound, pound, and press star 3 to raise your hand to speak. please note you must limit to the topic of the agenda item discussed and the chair can interrupt and can you to limit your comment to the agenda item. please refrain from the use of profanity and address your remarks to the commission as a whole and not individual commissioners or staff. >> do we have any callers?

>> we have two callers in the queue. >> a couple of technical corrections. the second to last whereas on that page, second line on october 30, 2015 under planning department case number at some point they changed the case number and in convention and should be 2015-013764. just change the period to a dash. that is also wrong in the staff report, but not worried about that. on the top of the second page of the resolution and to strike the rest of the line and whereas, on june 28, 2021, blah, blah, blah,

and change the case number to read 2015 dash. that is the only technical corrections. and this would award the contract with a three-year change on the timing of the sand removal for this phase understanding that the longer term work is still being planned. i hope that is clear. thanks very much and great work to staff on this. >> thank you, caller. i would like to bring your attention to the followings statement. i want you to look at the bid results. you've got several bidders.

three of them are within a hair of each other which means that they had a really good job in the estimating. but yet the others are way off, completely off. one of them is actually more than double. but the thing is what i do want to bring up to your attention is the following. a lot of these numbers as a result of the gaming of cmd. and let me go on the record. i have had communication and when i mention cmd, they did not know what cmd is, and as you know, commissioners, the board of supervisors are pretty much born and raised in san francisco. but for some of them who don't understand what cmd have been doing and all the damage by the criminal romulus that has been engaging in with the certifications and the contracts.

did you know there is no disparity study done and the last one to found record of in the 2003. and that the city and county is a recipient from the federal money. and you don't know what you have or don't have. you can't put contracts with 5% and put in contracts with 20%. but romulus is a stooge and puppy for duane jones. duane jones sit on his advisory council. the advisory council that are violating the rules in chapter 14b, bluntry. and the cash cow of san

francisco and city assessor. >> madam secretary, there are no other callers in the queue at this time. >> madam president, you are muted. >> do we have to vote on these each or listen to c and then vote together? >> i would recommend you vote separately. >> all right. may i have a motion and second? on item b. >> i think mr. pillpal's amendment are reasonable. >> awe okay, as amended. so it's been moved and seconded as amended with mr. pillpal's corrections.

>> madam secretary, roll call please. >> president maxwell. >> vice president moran. commissioner hankin. and you have four aye's. >> next item please. >> next item is item 9c, approval the selection of mcmillen jacobs associates and award pro-0164 for the professional services an i greement to not exceed $7.5 million with the duration of six years. i believe mr. robertson is here to present this. >> good afternoon, commissioners. and this item is for professional services and the commission asked us to take a second look and from the

grateful solutions. we had a workshop on april and started our rethinking effort and are investigating and the tool box with sustainable solutions and made a decision to design at risk and to request approval of the tool box. to keep our options open. i am happy to take questions if there are any. >> commissioner harrington. >> thank you very much. i understand why we are doing this and just to be clear for the public that our hope is that we have a different and better solution that replace this is one, and that anything that we're working on would not preclude us to implement the better solution.

and that doesn't preclude us from getting there, but keeps the options open to move toward the smarter technology as we think about the future to address the climate change. >> public comment on this item. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment on item 9c and dial 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 146 434 0611, pound, pound, and press star 3. and remind you that the chair can ask you to limit your comment to the eeg item. please address your remarks to

the commission as a whole and not to individual commissioners or staff. mr. moderator, do we have any callers? >> we have multiple callers in the queue. first caller, i have unmuted your line. >> great. can you hear me okay? >> on 9c, why are outside engineering services needed for this project? why not just staff up or reassign staff from other projects? this can't be the only flooding control project, etc. also, and reading through item 20, the closed section action, i think this somehow related to that on the summary agenda.

and that includes the commitment, i guess. requiring city to undertake flooding response actions with the three control actions and the lower area. and to characterize that basis and claim for that settlement. and i request whether we need to do this right now and with the settlement agreement. and i have real questions about whether to pursue this at this time and i would hold off on approval of item 9c, therefore. thanks.

>> thank you, caller. next caller, i have unmuted your line. you have two minutes. >> caller: thank you. commissioners, i am going to beat the same dead horse called cmd. let me with what this does is this is sending a very strong message from the commission to actually and the protest submitted by one of the primes regarding another fake lbe in san francisco. when i use the word fake, it is really a fake lbe. they can only be done with your money funding cmd and romulus and his criminal enterprise. that is a fact. that is a given fact. yesterday i was doing research and found a signed contract for the same company in another 400 miles away. and what is funny about that proposal is they are clearly

stating they have an offshoot company under a completely different name under a completely different efin number operating in conjunction with the same company that you have and to be disqualified and there to expose to gross $14.5 million and now we have another company that has another offshoot. we have a small business council reporting to romulus who consists of individuals that own multiple companies in the city and county of san francisco. and violating a city charter. chapter 14b. nobody is watching. i call this a criminal activity on an enterprise level. and you are only allowing companies to have paid their dues to romulus, to duane jones

and all those characters that have run the city to the ground. i hope you get the message. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next caller, i have unmuted your line. you have two minutes. >> good afternoon, president maxwell and commissioners. i am peteer from the river trust. and i appreciate your pulling this from the consent calendar for some discussion. i sent you a letter yesterday and i won't repeat everything i said, but i was really impressed by commissioner harrington's comments back in january that led to the april workshop, which was really well done. and i think we all left really excited, and my concern that this investment of $7.5 million

that could lead to pressure to move forward with the project the pressure of the project that is not the right when. there are a lot of green projects that make a lot more sense and fit better into san francisco's environmental values and really serve multiple benefits, especially when we're thinking about one water. so i encourage you to think hard about this contract and mr. pillpal mentioned the settlement agreement. i would love a chance to see that as well. thank you for the opportunity to comment. >> thank you, caller. madam secretary, there are no more callers in the queue at this time. >> thank you. public comment on 9c is closed. >> madam president, you are muted. >> may i have a motion and a

second to approve this item? mr. harrington, are you -- >> so moved. >> reluctantly moved. >> and commissioner, seconding. okay. and then let's move forward with roll call. [roll call vote on 9c] >> you have four aye's. thank you. next item please. >> next order of business is item number 10, approve the selection of aecom technical services incorporated and kennedy jenks consult tanlts for pro-0168 a and b and authorize

the support services and with kj joint venture for pro 0168b and each not to exceed $7 million and each with the duration of eight years. >> good afternoon, president maxwell and commissioners. [please stand by]

class lxxx percent of the supply travels through lines from the city of facilities and this is very from your over 80 years old. in december 2020 the sf puc is using all requests for holes or to context to proposers. each of you being or it is not to exceed 7 million acres of years.

this spring we received oracle monitoring division is all form all patients andstaff reports . that will help community how all four proposals. there were no protests to the evaluation staff recommends ordering two contracts want to be one to egs toexposure . thank you and weare your questions . >> mister harrington c6 light united weare hiring for our staff . i have a question, it is being forced . cmp, this is what the situation and contracts 2 was only because of what's being called

the cmb ball otherwise it woul have been the top vote getter . what do you mean? did someoneexplain that to us ? translate. >> i'll do my best commissioner harrington is necessary we will ask for support. a joint venture with an led for egs is where bonus came from and you are correct. the cmb bonus to change the top two change. the top two were the top two, it just changed theorder of those two . >> the cmb bonus, is whenever there is a joint venture that includes an end dew. >> and local business enterprise. yes. >> i should havedone that but thank you .

>>. >> presidentmaxwell: would you go over that one more time ? the bonus is when? >> here representing services and the way the way it works is that a bonus to measures depending on the picture led partner is. there is a difference in. and it has to dowith . since these two contracts were close unknown the rating bonus toapply . and even rating bonus, the

rating bonus and range from five percent to 10 percent depending on the percentage that theobe purchaser takes . >> presidentmaxwell: any further comments ? is from five. >> vice president moran: criteria of the bond is a function of a awareness organization or what establishes those? >> chapter 14 b is an ordinance of the city they are a sign proposal. all proposals enhance what proposals for this correct.

>> vice president moran: >> president maxwell: commissioner ajami . >> commissioner ajami: i've got question friend he will ask patient. some of the logic model, i was wondering seemingly have, why do we external firms to do that for us? i understand if you are doing some of the physical construction work, why do we people from outside? >> i see this really is here i'lldo for . >> with the emd, build a search

shaft just upstream of the tesla facility and the idea is should there be a search event at the u ve facility that would move upstream into our pipelines so we don't do a lot of transient. we do a lot of hydraulic modeling but this would be more of a transient analysis which is why we would need a special facility. >> commissioner ajami: is that something that would happen more often or is this a one time issue that we have to do transient analysis? i was wondering how often these things would need something like this. i wonder if this is something we need to delve into in-house if we're going to experience

this more or is this something that's going to happenonce in a blue moon so we bring in external contractors to help us with that process ? >> i would say it's not once in a blue moon but it's not every day as well. depends on the scenarios we are trying to run. a lot of time we do have our synergy or our sonar model and wecan do the hydrologic analysis . we can size our pipes but it's really for these cases where we are modeling shutdownscenarios or emergency scenarios. a pipe breaks, you lose a lot of pressure. a pipe has to close very quickly it's those type of scenarios we would need some expertise in . >> commissioner ajami: when we do these kind of modeling's, does the agm provide us with the capacity to run that model

with their scenarios or are they going to stay on the project and to be the ones that have to run itanytime you want to see a scenario ? >> they have tomodel and they have the programming , the software and they provide us a report with theresults. the data for the model , without having expertise in-house to own and operate putting in the data needed to run this model or even to have that specific software, we are unable to do that. >> is there a specific software they use that they have the license for we cannot get ourselves or is this something where we'rereconfiguring the same model ?

>> i believe it'sproprietary. i'm not a hydraulic modeling can find any . >> commissioner ajami: understand working with consultants to do different kind of modeling and in some cases it makes sense but they have the data and theyare the only ones , that we are continuously onthem for every situation . so paying for them to improve their model and figure out how to run it differently then they go and say a small utility that doesn't have a lot of in-house capacity would like to depend on something like that but we are a prettymajor utility . we've got a lot of expertise and knowledge in-house.it would be a loss if we can't take advantage of these opportunities to actually train

our own staff for the next level of modeling they have to do or the next thing that's going to come around the corner. so that's just a talk. it would be good to have the model or the data or train our own staff so that we figure out how we can expand what we have for the next time to run the model differently .>> thank you. >> presidentmaxwell: any further comments or questions ? thank you. why don't we openthis up to public comment ? >> clerk: members who wish to makecomments on item number 10 , dial 415-655-0001. meeting id 146 434 0611.

limit your comments to the topic being discussed and do not interruptand limit your comments to the agenda item . we ask yourcomments be in a civil manner and refrain from profanity. address your marks to the commission as a whole not individual commissioners or staff . do we have any colors? >> there aremultiple colors in the queue . first caller, i have commuted yourline . you have 2 minutes. >> caller: can you hear me okay? david philpott on item number 10. i was going to say once again

why our siteengineering services needed for this project commissioner ajami tied into that so thank you very much . i feel like i'm advocating for local 21 or something here but in very real ways, hydraulic engineering, hydraulic modeling is a core function of a utility that has water pipes and pipelines. so whether puc has in-house staff, whether it's with the relationship with dpw whether we argued whether that's good bad or otherwise but there is hydraulic modelingcapabilities in the city and there should be . whether it's for these projects or functions or other projects in the future, building up, maintaining that hydraulic modeling capacity with whatever

software tools for a variety o circumstances, it's pumping the city should have . once again i oppose contracting out this work. weshould either get it through dw or staff up and have that capacity in-house . thank you. >> tank you for your comments. nextcaller, i havecommuted your line . you have 2 minutes . >>. >> caller: i have 2 things to say. number one, every time i see the name aecom, that name is suspect. number two, not once have i heard that commissioners ask how are we monitoring the

effectiveness of this huge pip ? the gentleman said the pipes are from 5 years to 8 years. we want to say exactly. i say 95 and some are as old as 100 years. we want to know how old are these types. i want to know how many times have we had the amount of water that has spilled. these are huge pipes. millions and millions of gallons of water in the sewer. and it's our money. so you're all like this servic , we need it. we need to know the history because there are 2 agm's that can tellyou the history of the water department . ofthe department of public

works . and of all the tomfoolery that's going on with thesan francisco public utilities commission . i knew a hydrologist who works for black and rich and she could give me all the inside dope, all the stupidity going on with sfpuc. left us asked the right question. on behalf of the taxpayers. >> thank youcaller, your time has expired . next caller, i have commuted your line. you have 2 minutes. >> commissioners, i'm going to start with a note commissioner harrington. i hate to tell you this but the word dead horse has a copyrigh

. i'm going to have to submit a claimagainst you. i'm just kidding . it is a dead horse and the thing is regarding this contract, you are approving a contract and i urge you not to approve it for the following reasons. that lbd preference that is being put forward on the table in front of you for approval are a false claim. again, this is another romulus false claim. the company does not qualify to be an lbd and i have said this so many times and i was proven correctly every time i make these accusations. no one has ever challenged me. because they are facts. that's one.two, the same company just on item 9b was disqualified from the joint venturebecause they also overqualified themselves . in this particular case, your

procurement staff all of them lawyers hiding the fact from you. a proposal is not out. a copy is not out. no one has checked the company that has been disqualified because playing isnow all the way to the . i called those puzzles i will be undoubtedly another false claim being submitted. also share the commentsfrom the other speakers . my goodness. modeling is a software like auto cad or any other software and a tuc agency that runs dollars work, not she has damagedthis agency . adcs does not exist. . >> you for your comments.

there are no morecolors in the queue at this time . >> public comment on item number 10 isclosed . >> any further discussions or comments ? seeing non- may i have a motio . commissionerharrington . >> second. so moved andseconded, roll call please . >> i also want to say i appreciate the discussion and maybe we should have further discussion on this kind ofthing . thank you. i 11.

>> 11, authorized the general manager to execute on behalf of the city of san francisco in around the cac project for not to exceed 20 4 years. agm ritchie. >> afternoon commissioners, assistant generalmanager for water .this is the third in a series of and always with the city for the westlake station in this piece of treatment facilities for 2 wells located there. she's a will to the regional groundwater storage. not to exceed $300. she recently 4 years. be happy to answer a life left the water enterprise will answerquestions .

ask mister. >> we are working on this project. line is. is there some specialty billing going out in these kind of overtime. >> this is a matter of planning and design and construction is a series of steps forthis piece . this is an isolated child of the project because these 2 wells the will be operated by abc and we want their system as part of that was well constructed with the puc operation. >> we want to get enough money to go to the next stage. >> we had a good time was the.

>> commissioner, thank you. any furtherquestions or comments . >> members who wishto make two minutes of public comment on item 11 , 655 0001, meeting id 146 434 0611. raise your hand to see, press áthree. stay on the topic of the agenda and being discussed to each and i promise running so you. his dresser remarks to a single individual staff.

>> do we have any callers? >> we have 2 colors and you. first caller, go ahead. on youperiod. >>. recently i support this and all a. i support this project. this is for the ongoing round water rich unit project. as the gm ritchie indicatedthis is . isupport it . >> you for your comments. next fall. i have commutedyour line . >> caller: my question to you is simple. if we are passing daily city in order to meet their needs with the graywater, i want to know

in san francisco how many wells we have all over sanfrancisco . and i also want to know if we have a major fire. in the city, if we have done needs assessment. and i also want to know if we have when it comes to our emergency management a person who has the caliber of the commander as we had in the pas . many times we are talking about water without understanding that if we have an emergency and you know we had one in 1906.

and we had one now with whatever ishappening all over . so i want to know how many bats we had in san francisco and how many of them are actually working? we need to fix them. we did get some pumps. i remember once there was a fire on howard street and we didn't have water from our reserves to fire. so let us take care of our wells before we take care of some others. >> clerk: yourtime has expired . is secretary colors and if you. >>: 11 is closed.

mister richie, is it possible for us to answer at least one of thosequestions, honeywell's behalf in san francisco ? >> yes it is. there are six of them is the sanfrancisco groundwater project . right now to all those wells are used for tradition at goldengate park . they will be placed by recycled water next year so we will have all of the san francisco groundwater wells available in san francisco. and then the water storage and supply utilizing wells in san francisco and california water service company daily city operating the visual system is asked to a local system are all designed to meet the overall

needs of the system . >> while you're working with dailycity becauseredoing it as a regional project . >> that's correct .>> thank you. callers, anyfurther questions, comments ? then maybe have a motion a secondon this ? move and then asecond . roll call vote please. [roll call vote] >> presidentmaxwell: next item please . >> clerk: item 12, authorized the general manager to execute a memorandum of agreement in the modesto irrigation district on allocation of costs for the

fish that are below the don pedro project until the federal energy commission issued a license not to see my to nine years. >> this item is an oa between san francisco and the irrigation district for allocated managing costs on below don pedro until issues a new license for the don pedro project. this is the replacement and 08 for the 2011 okay commission to terminate on june 21. patient was needed because we were working reaching the tenure of our board of supervisors approval came about because we anticipated license will be issued in216 x did not . so we had to 2011 and enter into this new agreement which the irrigation districts one has approved bmw and the other

is proving it again today . it has a term of nine years unless a new license is issued before time-lapse not to exceed $9 million. it is basically the same terms as the original mo a with cost-sharing on these studies and other ancillary issues being a third san francisco and twothirds between theirrigation districts . i'd be happy to answer any questions . >> presidentmaxwell: any questions or comments on this item ? yes,commissioner harrington . >> commissioner harrington: i remember ourdiscussion about this . the question is is this in effect until thelicense, then what ? >> then what would happen is that it would be analyze in the fourth agreement which would probably take effect on that. that's what we would be looking

at is how much was covered by the cost sharing division before agreements and how much wouldhave to be covered by any other agreements . [please stand by]

-- i don't see some kind of standard when it comes to these agreements. there are certain people, and you know, i'm talking from 19 #, before that it was the water department. i'm not seeing astute leadership where we are really managing control of the water in a

holistic matter. we know right now that -- endangered species. that should be our main focus -- >> thank you for your comments. madam secretary. there are no other calls in the queue at this time.

any further comments or questions. may i have a motion and a second to pass this item. >> i move. >> second. >> moved and seconded. may i have a roll call vote, please. >> (roll call). >> next item is item number 13. authorize the general manager for the public utilities commission for the boost service energy service program. funned by rate payer funds. the budge is four five hundred seventy nine thousand over six

years. >> good afternoon commissioners. i'm a manager for customer solutions for power sf. submit an applications for the public utilities commission to secure rate payer funds that will be targeted at food service. energy efficiency is a critical resource for integrating renewable into the grid. this is reflective in the state and city goals. there's a distinct need in energy need. due to a state wide trend, there's a gap in services that are specifically targeted toward our city's unique needs.

as a community choice program, administer a portion of funds to align the pg and e bill. small, medium, and large grocery stores and non-profit institutions that provide food services. targeted out reach to reach small businesses across the city and reaching those whose english is not a primary language. having a manager be a ambassador

for the program to build that gap and build credibility. the program was -- sorry. the program was codeveloped with the sf department of the development. their staff has a wealth of knowledge of rate payer programs in the past. this program will be designed a pay for performance model. two important things to note about this. no up front costs to the customer. small businesses --

participates receive a free energy assessment and estimates their savings. they would enter into an agreement who hires a contractor to do the installation. they make sure the program is completed. the cost is offset by program funs and paid for by the customer by the cost savings they receive. payments are reduced so there's a built in incentive to make sure the projects are implemented completely and as well as possible. additionally we'll contract who will independently audit and

after the two years any additional savings we'll continue to the lifetime of the commitment of this bill. finally my last slide here is budget for the program. we're eligible to receive four point five million dollars for three years. we're expecting to achieve fifty three hundred mega watt hours of energy savings over that time. next steps, if approved, we'll send a letter it requires a vote of the commission to be approved which we hope to happen in six months. during that time we'll do other program set up tasks and serve

customers by 2023. that concludes my presentation and i'm happy to take any questions. >> any questions, colleagues? >> i'm wondering, you talk about us assisting vulnerable communities and food security and so. is there a community involvement in that. how are we connecting with folks that want to help on this. >> that will be the out reach plan that is set aside in this bhujet and we're hoping to reach out to direct service providers to help make those connections. using the data to find small

businesses that might be more targets. we can guide and lead the out reach process. that's really where that will happen. the out reach that will come from the program. >> i'm assuming they are a regional or national organization, do they leave us with more knowledge that where we starred. >> the knowledge that we'll gain is in our partnership. the rate payer funding. they have a lot of institutional knowledge about running these programs. doing the data analysis that needs to happen to verify savings. we're hopping that partnership

can happen to make our team more capable and knowledgeable about running this program. >> a partnership, the statistics item i was teaking to was the technical knowledge about setting data transfers. >> i thought you also said that the community out reach was also going to be going to the department of environment. is there staff or community partners. >> we'll be partnering with department of environment and working with the implementation

phase. happy to come back to the commission with more details and bringing more specifics because we want to make sure we're being effective in reaching customer support. >> i think it's a great program. let's make sure it's well run. >> can you give me an example of a hard to reach who are you going for. is there a certain amount for the large, small, micro. what tends to happen is the large gobbles up everything. if you're talking about a food bank, that's a large program. give me an example of a perfect person you're trying to reach that you're trying to reach

that's in the community or whatever. >> smaller markets or corner stores. they are not targeted because the cost effectiveness is not as positive. means there's more work that needs to be put into out reach and receiving a small load. we want to make sure we're doing more out reach. it is important that we serve large businesses in this program to even out the savings. we have a threshold that we have

to meet. we don't have a specific target of large and small. it's a goal of ours to make sure that small and large businesses are included in our program. >> small businesses are small, it may be a mom and pop not fluent in the language. is there an opportunity to help with all of those if there's an application process. is there somebody that's competent in someone that we work out with the. >> we'll plan for that. in terms of language out reach, we'll be working with our communications team to make sure that we have translators and

translated materials and shepherd folks through that if english is not the primary language. >> do you have a goal in mind? do you have a percentage or a goal in mind of how many and what you can reach and what would make it the the most efficient. >> we don't have a specific goal in mind but i can get back to you on looking at what the number of small businesses that we mieg be able to reach with this program is. >> thank you. >> thank you so much for your presentation. that was great. lots of questions were already

asked. i have two questions for you. one is, when you are talking about working with the department of environment. i'm wondering what they have that we don't have that we might need to do to be better at it. when you are reaching out to these communities or businesses, i wonder if there's a way to work with the water enterprise. do they have a low flush toilet or is there a way, those are my comments and questions. >> the first question about what we have, primarily experience.

getting funding, reporting. i mentioned the data challenges. they have done a lot of work already. i'm looking forward to the data and knowledge transfer so clean power sf are more knowledgeable about how to run programs like this. the second question about out reach. i'm looking forward to working with them a little closer to launch how to emit that launch, if they don't fit our program, the regional energy program for small and medium businesses. if they have a site set up, we'll make sure they are

referred to way. >> what do we think the time line is for this -- for us getting the application in. >> we are hoping to submit the application in august so we're queued up and ready to go. we're hoping to hear back in six months. we'll have a year of ramp up time in our agreements. our target launch date would be early 2023. >> this program is for three years. the entire amount is for three years. >> yes. >> is there an opportunity to go back or does it depend on if they go back. >> it will be a great place to

experience. it may make us eligible in the future. it's porn for us to get in well and set up in the future to take advantage of these funding opportunities. >> thank you. any further comments questions? thank you for your comments. let's open this up to the public. members of the public who wish to make public comment please dial the number on the streen. to raise your hand to speak please press star three.

>> i did look through the draft filing and in a couple places there was a budget summary including the top of page five of the staff report.

those are just broad categories for the years referenced. i'm looking for the budget detail and how much is staff versus consultants and how much of the work would be puc versus department of the environment. perhaps that's not happening with this item, it looks like this item is not an applied for grant appropriation. it's applying for a grant but not the other steps. that's how i'm reading it, if i'm misunderstanding the nature

of this particular program i'm happy to learn more about it. if you approve it today, i'm assuming it will come back. >> thank you very much. there are no other callers in the queue at this time today. >> public comment is closed for today. >> thank you can there a motion and second to approve this item today. >> (roll call) gentleman thank you. next item, please. adopt a approval by the board of

supervisors when required and advance notification and consultation for resolution. >> good afternoon, i'm deputy agm for the power sf program. you have before you a resolution requiring advance notice of potential need to have power supply for board of supervisors. it would only be executed prior to board approvals if they are required to meet guidelines on

state law. this resolution provides advance communications and notification to you about these circumstances. we're responding to resolution, to meet state law deadlines and market deadlines out of the control. execution and for the commission and board of supervisors for approval. in providing this to you today they are also present this year as well. several factors create

uncertainly requiring obligation obligation. for the california system operator. the potential for increases in cpu c in calendar year 22 that might further reduce further adequatey in the short term. power staff have already issued six solicitations for resource

capacity and force solicitations conducted by third parties. we have not met adequacy requirements. prior to it the deadline as needed. we also anticipate participating in approximately ten solicitations held by third parties over the following two months or so. some of these may be issued in mid to late september. the vast majority follow normal sfpuc circumstances. what we're talking about here is

revenues of over $100 million to make sure they remain in splines compliance of state law. similar advanced notification in an opportunity for consultation of these circumstances through a similar resolution. a draft of the proposed resolution is attached it agenda item 14. that concludes my presentation.

>> we have no callers in the

queue. >> can you hear me okay? >> yes. >> great. i'm getting tired of hearing myself. on item 14. related to the commission or amendment about these approvals. i also think some background or history might be useful here. in a minute i'll say in december

of 1987, down in the basement of city hall there was a hearing of this commission of power agreements of pg and e to wield power to the city and this was under threat who was a powerful member of congress at the time. there was a measure that ultimately became a new charter that required board of supervisor approval in excess of

$10 million or ten years. it was a very difficult time dealing with hedge power an the politics around that. thanks. >> there are no other comments in the queue. >> public comment is closed. >> thank you. may i have a motion and second on this item, please. >> i'll move it. >> second. >> moved and seconded. roll call please. >> (roll call).

>> next item, please. >> next item is item 15. green infrastructure grant guidelines. improving surface area and authorization the general manager to the existing grant agreement for the new grant agreement based on overages or change orders based on specified criteria. >> i work in the utility planning division. i work on a variety of our programs. today i'm hear in my capacity of our green infrastructure grant

program. it was launched in february of 19. it was to design and maintain green infrastructure on their property. since the programs inception we've awarded nine projects. two have completed construction so far and the remaining are in various stages of construction. especially given the majority of

the program has been operating in the covid 19 pandemic. throughout the time since inception the team has been conducting social distancing site visits, helping these projects get from our pipeline into our application field. this is a snap shot of some of our awarded projects. the school district. our future projects.

amazon park in partnership with the park department. an example of our private schools the proposed change in front of you today is is a cost peracre award. the amount of acreage can be managed for storm water. you may remember the graphic on this slide. it explains the concept which is the drainage management surface. we use this to set the maximum amount of award we can get. cost data from 2017 to estimate

an average cost to implement green infrastructure. the change in front of you today is to increase that threshold to $39,000 which really is just to adjust for the cost inflation. this change really supports our programs cost for these projects. it's an important piece in our ourproperty owners. this will apply retroactively who are also in design so challenges related to bid overages can be accounted it for

in this change. we also just wanted to let you know that this change is happening as an interim step that the team is currently working on and a variety of lessons learned and we'll be bringing those lessoned to you at the end of the year. >> can you give me an example of just one of the lessons learned that will be incorporated in this project. >> we'll be looking at stream lining some of our design review require ms to help us achieve better design review and

reducing some of the those barriers to enri and working with our grantees to achieve a better result. >> i had a question on data. i'm wondering if we're working on any of these grantees to implement the monitoring programs, obviously all this green infrastructure -- we should use them as a lab to investigate our work. >> we don't have any resources to identify that wrying now. right now. one of the interesting pieces with this program is we have a lot of data about how these

facilities work on a facility by facility basis. i think these green infrastructure grant projects give us an opportunity to work on a pipe leading scale to look at how much the green infrastructure has a whole on the site. i can bring that to the attention to our monitoring team and give that in place for that. >> i appreciate what you are providing here. i think it would be really important for us to rethink how we can monitor the systems better not just at our facilities but we have to think what can they bring to the

table, if it's not money, it can be data. i think data -- even if they are are bringing money to the table, what i'm thinking about, i don't want to ten years from now wish i could install infrastructures. the second comment i have for you is how do you know if they have dedicated money for operation and maintenance of these systems. these green infrastructures are still infrastructures and need to be maintained. do we know if they have

allocated budgets for that. i'm wondering what's going on with that part. i appreciate your part or coming back to us with the full monitoring and censoring because i think it is important and it would be a missed opportunity. to your point for long term maintenance, it's already layed against the property before we issue payment for construction. that is a legally binding agreement traveled with the land, even if the property is is sold that 20 year deed restriction stays with the property. the other half of that is the the work that we do with our property owners. because of that 20 year deed

restriction is not people who are looking to flip or sell within the next five to ten years. we're coming out and doing an inspection. if we find something wrong, let's work with you to make it maintained. i think that will be a longer term lesson learned. >> this is agm from waste water. in terms of the performance monitoring. we're aware of that need and

have a very specific set of goals in our current business plan in that area. not in the extent of the iot type. that's an area we're interested in exploring. we were suck is heful inlet inlet lastyear for a grant to fr research on the storm water pollutant of the green infrastructure. as we get information and results from that study we'll look to bring it back to the commission. it has a ways to run that's a ways out. we're paying attention to the aspects of the green

infrastructure. it's very much a data driven report. thank you. >> any further comments, questions? seeing none. thank you and we'll go to public comment. >> if the public wishes to make public comment specifically on item 15. to raise your hand to speak press star to three. limit your comments to the topic being discussed. refrain from using profanity p. address your remarks to the commission as a whole not to individual commissioners or staff.

>> i want to address the parts of the city.

can the puc produce any document that takes place for any of the projects under this program.

any documents? any inspection reports? i don't think so. i don't know what to tell you. >> thank you for your comment. next caller. >> let me bring to your attention the contract monitoring center. any of your visited contract monitoring center, why? that center where focus groups

could have met, even virtually if you go to that center, the conference room has been converted to the office. why don't we have people of color? why don't we have indigenous people who started the program that represent that in san francisco. some of you know it, some of you don't. when it comes to wasting tax

payers money. they talk about the department of environment. it started because of pg and e. >> thank you for your comment. next caller, i have unmuted your line. >> the gi grant program modifications. i would refer to the advance notice regulation change that

was in compliance and very helpful. i think there should be another way i to apply for the program besides e-mail. the guidelines in the staff report said the only way was via e-mail. not everyone has e-mail, that's discriminatory et cetera. regarding waste water planning and i understand one person may be leaving and another person may he not have a medical situation. if that's the case, i send well wishes to the person leaving that's a great loss to the organization.

and well wishes to the person not feeling well. how that for a coded reference. >> public item is is closed. >> do i have a motion and second to move item 15. roll call, please. >> (roll call). you have four ayes. >> next item, please. >> negotiations they will return to the commission with contract.

>> we had a long discussion about this item last time. we put a lot more information into the document. we're bringing back a recommendation to you. we starred the discussions and negotiations. this would give me the authorization to come back to you on how to modify or terminate this contract. i would like to move this item today. i'm happy to answer any questions related to that item as well. >> commissioners any question

comments. >> all right. i want to thank you for the talks and comments and questions that you answered for me. thank you for reaching out to the other commissioners. let's open this up to public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make a comment please dial the number listed on the screen. raise your hand to speak press star three. limit your comments to the topic of the agenda being discussed. we ask public be meadz in a sifc

and respectful manner and that your comments be made to the commission as a whole and not to any one commissioner or staff. >> this is the big flying el elephant that just dropped every couple weeks. where is the list from cmv. all of them are attorneys. they just forgot to put the list of the lde's.

wow. hilarious. this is more like a circus, not a contract administration. the purpose of the contract is to list down who you list on the contract. let me tell you off the top of my head who is a contract. lbe who has been known to fly to get contracts. one contractor has to use someone. all of them are friends and connected with the criminal establishment in the contract. i'm not here to tell what you to

do with the contracts. based on what i see you are fixing these contract. last month or last week, you claimed the contractor is increasing the costs. are you serious? we need to stop the deployments that you impose on the contractors. >> if this contract had followed

the standard and again and again these type of contracts come before you and you think the people at home are stupid and we wedon't understand how the biddg process is done and standards have to be maintained. we don't understand about goals and time lines. we don't understand about accountability and transparency. some of us tell you really what is wrong. what is wrong is that there are utter corruption. blatant corruption. you're saying authorize them to negotiation with a crook.

did i mention the names before? it's a shame and we have the san francisco public commission -- everything about this contract is wrong. >> thank you for your comments. next caller. >> if anne were still on this

commission, i think she would be ashamed. i think this highlights a huge problem. we're now in tough spot of engineering down and rebidding elements of the project and delaying completion further. bad choices. the bay view community was promised a new bio facility to reduce odors. the community was promised a new facility -- we're in a lose,

lose position. i would support the resolution and hope for a win win negotiation but i have to say this really sucks. >> public comment is closed. >> thank you. may i get a motion and a second on this item please. >> (roll call).

>> this is certainly the case where contracting is not presented themselves. that is a disappointment. my understanding is when you look at those engagements over all they are by and large successful. this is a notable exception. it's my understanding as part of the upcoming audit program.

>> i would like to see about other projects about who is doing them and how they move forward and what kind of contracting method they use. that would be extremely useful. >> thank you very much. we will move forward and have a better outcome. i'm not saying this from somewhere out of the sky. we're putting some things in place that will help us have a better outcome. next item please. >> i will read the items to be read in closed session an public

comment on those items. >> consider public appointment hiring of general manager of the public utilities commission. conference with legal council. members of the public who would like to make comments on items being discussed in closed

comment. if you do not stay on topic, chair may ask you to stay on topic. please address your comments to the commission as a whole and not to individual commissioners. mr. moderator do we have any callers? >> we have two callers in the queue at this time. caller, i have unmuted your line. >> what i want to say is this. we agreed that we would follow a

separate process. tonight as you go into closed session an listen to some attorneys who will talk to the charter and the powers that are given to the mayor and powers that are given to you. you the commissioners can speak your mind and listen to the people. you are not doing that. you just want to go listen to the mayor who has an you will y.

we need to claim the house. sanitize it. you don't seem to understand. this is is what makes us crazy. if you say a word. don't say a bad word. >> thank you for your comments.

next caller, i have unmuted your line. caller if you wish to comment, please raise your hand again. next caller, i have unmuted your line. >> i want to address this closed session item which is the appointment of a general manager. commissioners, some of you have been in the city. some of you have been general managers. i can only imagine the pressure being put on you right now to go along with this thing. i'm appealing with you. you have nothing to lose. this whole thing about the city establishment, city family. this is all bs.

all we need is someone to say no. i've said it. they cannot touch me. they cannot touch me. instead of being hunted, i'm hundreding them. hunting them. he was involved in a exam. scam.that is a fact. his own attorney accused him. we need someone to come in and clean up the city. that's the bottom line. there's no other motive. the people of san francisco are

serving. they are looking at four individuals right now to say no. please clean up all the garbage that has built up for years and years. please stop blaming the contractors for your miss deeds. >> thank you for your comments. next caller, i have unmuted your line. >> last time. as i said earlier, i assume general contractor negotiations are continuing and it will be brought forth with a start date

for best practice. on the proposed settlement a set agreement, the public has not seen that settlement agreement. i would continue to a future meeting and make it publicly available.

i don't think you're okay to approve it today. i think you're required to provide ten days availability. i'm not sure how to make a written request so i'll make a oral request. those are my comments on your closed session. >> thank you for your comments. there are no other comments. >> our public comment session is closed. >> we'll go into closed session.

everybody will be there and we'll take a ten minute break with everyone. if that's okay. >> i think we need a motion to assert attorney-client privilege. >> i'll make that motion to assert. >> roll call vote please. >> (roll call).

>> i think he did raise some disclosure issues that we'll address in closed session. >> i'm happy to address it now. the sunshine agreement is ten days before it needs to be approved. if you do today end up taking an action it will be a recommendation to the board of supervisors, it will be heard by the board. given that the board is going absurd on august resource, we

don't anticipate that the board will be back until septembe >> the commission recommend the board of supervisors resolve and setel the litigated game on closed item 20. closed session item 20. your next item is 22 a motion regarding whether to disclose the discussions during closed session, pursuant to san

francisco administrative code section 67.12a. >> thank you, i'd like -- >> i'd move not to disclose. >> and a second. >> i'll second that. >> ok. it's been moved and seconded. not to disclose. >> yes. >> [roll call vote] >> clerk: you have four ayes. >> is there any further business before this body? >> no, madam president, that concludes your business for the day. >> thank you. this meeting a adjourned and thank you, colleagues. >> thank you.