madam secretary, will you call the role, please. >> clerk: [roll call] >> clerk: we have commissioners present. we have quorum. the department of public health and the governor mission and mayor breed have lifted restrictions on teleconferencing. this meeting is being held via teleconference. for those of you watching the

live stream, please be aware of the live and what's being aired on sfgov tv. if you wish to make public comment on an item, dial 1-415-655-0001. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. you must limit your community to the agenda item. and ask you to limit your comment to the agenda item. that you refrain from the use of profanity. please address remarks to the commission as a whole and not to individual commissioners and staff and i also wanted to announce that closed session item number 14 which is conference with legal council

is madam president. >> president: thank you. before calling the first item, i'd like to nouns that the san francisco public utilities commission with the territory of the ohlone tribe. the san francisco p.u.c. also recognizings that every citizen has and continues to ben hit of the ohlone tribe.

since the founding in 1932. it is vitally important that we recognize the history of the ohlone people but have established a working partnership with the san francisco p.u.c. and are productive and flourishing members within the many greater san francisco bay area communities today. madam secretary, will you read the first lied please. >> any discussions on the meetings july 27th or august 4th. >> clerk: dial (415) 655-0001.

meeting i.d. 146 864 4853. press pound twice and star three to speak. mr. moderator, do we have any calls? >> madam secretary, there are two callers wishing to be recognized. hello, caller. i've opened your line, you have two minutes. >> thank you. i want to speak on item number 13 which is on the agenda, but it's in the closed session. so is it proper for me to speak on it right now? >> i'm not sure. this is the public comment session right before we go into closed session. that will be called separately.

>> next caller, i have opened your. >> prior to the meetings. i hope you'll incorporate. that was the only one i wanted to call attention to with the description on the closed session. should read 67.10e.1 and i would encourage the city attorney or outside county council to check that code reference. i believe the 67.8 references are about the description for the closed session thanks for

listening. >> madam secretary, there are no more callers in the queue. >> secretary: public comment on item three is closed. >> president: okay. is there a motion and a second on i believe the minutes of july 27th. >> secretary: yes. so the nonsubstantiative changes for july 27th. >> president: all right. is it necessary for us to make an amendment to that? >> i would check with the legal

council if it needs to be changed. >> president: i understand i can try to get you an answer, but it won't be right now province. >> i gotcha. >> secretary: yes. the minutes reflect what was on the agenda. >> all right. so then should we go forward with this and then do something later? or you can't say anything about

it. it's nonsubstantiative. may i have a motion to approve the minutes of july 27th? >> i'll move. all right. is there a second? >> all right. roll call vote. >> secretary: [roll call] >> president: all right. then, may i have a motion and a second to approve the minutes of august 4th. >> president: it's been moved and seconded, roll call vote, please. >> secretary: [roll call] >> president: okay. next item, please. >> secretary: next item is item four, general public

comment. general public comment on matters that are within the commission jurisdiction. do so by dialling (415) 655-0001. meeting id 146 864 4853 pound pound. please press star three to raise your hand to speak. >> moderator, do we have any callers hello, caller, your line is open, you have two minutes. >> to commissioners, my name is francisco de costa and as i see it, from the corruption has

reached that point. every time you go behind closed doors, it's like in the land where we treasure our freedom. let me remind you, there's a big difference between freedom and license. and that is why you're practicing when you go behind closed doors. shame on al. ya'll agreed to a process to

choose somebody to manage the san francisco public utilities commission. now you have brought a fox inside the chicken coup and you have no shame. i see what alare doing. it's poor. it's not transparent. you are not doing a service to san franciscans. you are doing a disservice. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. hello, caller. your line is open. you have two minutes. >> i'm speaking on my own behalf. i would like to thank the p.u.c. commissioners and staff who participating at the event

on july 15th on a foggy summer's day. supervisor mar was inquiring why there were no solar panels on south basin. he was advised because south basin has been seismically retro fitted. i spoke regarding the rumbling noises at night which started roughly one year ago. i would like to mark the completion of the first phase of the project. regarding the erosion at ocean beach. being deposited in the disposal site. the p.u.c. commission, u.r.s. to study possible sites to the south facilities, internet

service area. the site u.r.s. stated was the most promising on the ocean side treatment facility. this south facility could be designed to incorporate an ocean water pump station. this is confirmed the designer of the facility in carlsbad. during catastrophic fires, the process could be bypassed to provide salt water to dedicated awol system. an article should be included in the commissioners' pact. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next caller, your line is open. you have two minutes. >> thank you. good afternoon.

i wanted to draw your attention to the fact that the unimpaired flow between february and june of this year was just 13% so it looks like we're competing a terrible pattern only to have to dump water following those dry periods. before year 2001, 2004, very dry and then we had the reservoirs still pretty full. we had to dump 66% the following year. and then the recent drought, five years. and 2017, 79%. so we can do something about this. let's not let this pattern continue. right now, you have in storage

71% of capacity. that's enough water to last four and a half years. there could be no rain, no snow for four years and we don't run out of water. there's an opportunity to allow the tualamie to do a lot better. this is something we can do something about and i look forward in the coming months to coming up with a better plan to the way it's currently managed. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. hello, caller. your line is open. you have two minutes. >> hello commissioners. this is john, president of the golden states association. i represent most sport and commercial san franciscan men and women and related businesses and industry. tens of thousands of jobs.

i just wanted to comment today that we understand the state of california approached the sfpuc and other water in the valley last week and essentially laid out our plea might be the right word that the state is being pretty forceful. our understanding of the deal of the table is a very bad one under any way of looking at it. for one thing, it would make your water rights a junior to the state water project and the central valley water project which i would think you would find troubling. from our perspective, we think that the sfpuc should look broad support of the tualamie

voluntary agreement until and unless the very significant questions raised in the national fishery service peer review are addressed for the public and everybody else to see what's going on here. we've not yet gotten a decent response from your staff to the findings of that peer review which basically say the so-called science in your v.a. is not sound science. so we urge you to reject the v.a. proposal that's being forced on water users by the state of california. i will stop there, thank you. >> thank you for your comments. hello, caller. your line is open. you've got two minutes. >> okay. thank you. commissioners, this is alvi. i hope you're doing well. i want to just comment on three items real quick. number one, the city

establishment is a paper. nothing more, nothing less. i think you have seen the paper news, how this mayor got tried if for violations of ethics, imagine, the mayor herself with a record number of a fine. to -- it came to my attention last week dwayne n. jones, the one that's the gate keeper for contracting in the city and one of the primary reasons why your contracts are going through the roof with their cost overruns have held an outreach meetings specifically for individuals that he knows and he contracts with. so it's city contract, a billion dollars or whatever the number is is being advertised through a third agent, annen agent of the p.u.c. and that agent is selectively asking individuals to come and attend an outreach meeting. what that means, you're lowering again the pool of available contractors that are

willing and able to bid on the job. so, again, before you start blaming the contractors for the overrun, this is one item where the corruption and the cost overrun that you're complaining about and your staff are complaining about is evidence. one meeting very few individuals does not reflect the city and county of san francisco inhabitants and the city. the last item i could mention that last time, but this time i want to mention on the record. you need to ask your staff, why did they include a very stringent specifications for the b.i.m., b-i-m and just to let you know that specification that your staff has asked for cost $18 million to implement. so, before your staff come back

to you please try to understand. >> thank you, caller. your time is expired. hello, caller. >> can you hear me now? >> go ahead. >> hi. david pillappeal. i just wanted to call your attention to the great highway which the mayor has announced will re-open to traffic need to be closed on weekends for the current situation. look. i don't want to get into the debate about the use of the great highway as a road, but i

wanted to make sure it's a continuing interest not as a roadway, but as a containment structure for what the west side transport storage and transport box from the richmond and sunset water sheds to oceanside treatment plant and southwest ocean fall. i just wanted to note that for the record that there should be thanks very much.

>> thank you for your comments. madam secretary, there are no more callers in the queue. >> secretary: thank you. >> president: next item. >> this item is. >> 5h, the water supply conditions update, i'd like to just know if mr. richie or mr. collins can comment on how bad is it? what are we doing about it? is it possible it's going to get worse? better? what do we know? >> steve richie, assistant general manager. is it going to get better? one certainty is that is uncertain. as far as the amount of water in storage currently, we're in decent shape in the water

projects have really dominated the news with how horrible they are off in the drought. we are looking right now and have advised our customers to try to comply with the governor's call for a 15% voluntary reduction from 2020 levels. we advised our customers of that back in early july. we're tracking that now. recently, it looks like we're at about a 10% reduction. so that's good. what we have told them is that while we're doing better off than some other systems, if this fall stays dry, we will likely be calling for something more dramatic beginning in early january so that people don't get the ideas they should be watering their gardens if it stays dry. so we're prepared to take more

steps there as far as the state of and working with customers on how to deal with the river downstream. >> mr. richie, i'm not advocating this, but i'm asking a question. if we imposed a 15% mandatory rationing and used the results of that to improve the condition of the river, can we do it? and how much difference would it make?

>> well, first, we would have to acknowledge the same old truth which we've dealt with which the water goes in to don pedro and the water is strictly controlled by the districts and so we'd have to make an arrangement with them if we wanted to do that. especially if we wanted that for a further reduction in use. how much water would that be. i can't tell you off the top of my head. it would be something that, again, would then be devoted to the river for relatively uncertain returns and knowing that we've reduced our water supply. the other thing we are actively dealing with right now is the second emergency executive order with government issued. because the state of oroville, the power plant has been taken off line and there are other places where hydro power

generation is reduced. right now, we are working on conversations about what they're expecting from us as we move forward while we're at the same time working with the curtailments of our diversions from the state water board. so, you know, we're looked at as somebody who can do something good on both sides of the ledger there, but we can't necessarily do both and maintain our system's integrity. so we're trying to get into that conversation and hopefully we'll have a meeting later this week on dealing with curtailments as well as dealing with the desires to maintain the integrity of the grid. >> any follow-up on that. is there any way you can bring a sort of briefing after you have this meeting. it would be great to know what conversations you will have and how the discussion goes and the

second is i was wondering if the 10% you mentioned, is that sort of overall reduction for the system or is it just san francisco? >> actually, it was 15% of the governor's executive order back in early july. >> i'm just wondering, you mentioned there's a 10% reduction in water use. >> oh, yeah. that was our observed during the month of july, we observed a roughly 10% reduction in water use among all the customers collectively. >> collectively. okay. thank you so much. >> what we can do is report back to the next commission meeting about the complexities of these things because we also will have had the state regulations on curtailments go

into effect by then. it is frankly a very complex situation that we're dealing with this year because of the extreme drought particularly being suffered in the sacramento valley. >> yeah. it would be great to see different situations, what role can we play? how much water are we talking about? how much electricity are we talking about and just get a broad sense and i'm really curious to now if you release the water and it goes to san pedro, sorry, don pedro. >> it might go to san pedro too. >> exactly. if it goes to don pedro how can we make sure that water if we make a deal with the if they release that water, how will remake sure that that water stays in the river like how can we make sure nobody else is

going to take the water for, you know, agricultural use or other purposes. so it's just -- i'm just so curious -- i'm really curious to kind of see if you can sort of have a diagram or something demonstrating the complexity of a system for us and i think for the broader public. >> yeah. i think we can readily do that at the next commission meeting because, you're right, it is complex and the whole matter of how the state is looking at curtailments, you know, rests heavily on all this. >> thank you. >> any further comments? questions? thank you, mr. richie. all right. is that it then? i'd like to open this up for public comment. >> secretary: members of the public who wish to make two

minutes of public comment specifically on item five conditions update. raise your hand to speak, press star three. do we have any callers? >> secretary, there are two callers wishing to be recognized. hello, caller. your line is open. you have two minutes. >> to commissioners on this agenda item communication, i feel very strongly that most of the agenda items linked to number five are very general in nature. if you are living in the year 2021, and if you are reading or

attending or listening to what is happening, climate change is going to drop physically change the fires are so intense that ya'll should do some documentary on it. you cannot rely on the glaciers because the glaciers have given up and the only way to know that is to do a documentary to see how the icecap has been reduced. so we have a president, joe biden who wants to enforce or he wants to encourage all of the agreements made in the paris agreement. we have other people who want to do the same thing, but when

we see what is happening in germany, what is happening in china, what is happening in paris, you cannot take for granted anything that's taken for granted. as environmentalist, i was left to travel all over the world and see for myself places that were flourishing. and, now, i cannot bear to read the reports. and we get the plea that we want to save the water. but we continue to waste the water. >> thank you for your comments. your time is expired. next caller, your line is open, you have two minutes.

>> thank you again. this is peter. brief comment on item 5 which is the water supply agreement update. a big part of that is what to do about santa clara and they've also requested an additional 6.5mgd and people often ask me who's going to pay for that water? is it going to be spread out throughout the system. and i just hope this is part of the discussion that's been happening around the water supply agreement. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. hello, caller. your line is open.

you have two minutes. >> great. can you hear me okay? >> loud and clear. >> all right. david pillpell, i have comments on three different items. 5b, the i will follow up with the staff and the management folks on the letter. very interesting. on 5e, the scu lightning complex deprivation of emergency. no problem with the declaration even though it increases that project cost. but if that was necessary, then so be it. my request is in the future where you've got the approval block on page two for the concurrent -- um, for the commission president you've got

the date there so the permanent record indicates what the general manager's declaration of emergency under the relevant admin code pro vision. and then, finally on 5f, the cpsf disadvantaged community, solar green at the ros program. the level of organizations and the staff content. to not just list an e-mail address. not everyone has e-mail access and in particular, if you're looking at outreach to those neighborhood organizations, they having a number or a

contact person is incredibly important under those circumstances. thanks for taking my comments. >> thank you for your comments. secretary, there are no more callers in the queue. >> secretary: item number five is closed. >> president: please read the next item. >> secretary: next item is item 6. the report of the general manager. >> thank you, president maxwell, and commissioners. jackie rodanzo and pierman herman will be presenting. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm kiara herman.

today, i'll be providing a brief overview of the disadvantaged community and community full of programs before my colleagues jackie. for more information about the plans and strategies for outreach to disadvantaged communities. can you get to the next slide, please. thank you. so over this year, this commission and the california p.u.c. approved clean power sf to implement these two programs. the programs were conceived by the state to increase development and adoption of renewable energy in california's disadvantaged communities. the states are the california p.u.c. to provide funding to

program administrators to contact renewable energy facilities in disadvantaged communities. customers in this program will be able to prescribe in the program purchasing energy from renewable facilities and are receiving a 20% discount on their total electric bill. clean power sf this september to availability while the new resource is being constructed. we are planning to do so and are targeting an early two

thousand twenty-two within five miles of customers. the service start date is dependent on the successful construction to supply participating to partner with local community based sponsors that will act as a champion for the project. the community sponsor will help and help eligible customers enroll in the program and community solar programs. i will now pass the presentation on to my colleagues jackie randezzo. >> thank you kiara.

good afternoon, commissioners i will briefly walk us through the outreach plan for the green tariff and community for each program, the plan will consist of two phases. program enrollment which is phase two. the program for plan will target primarily low income customers in san francisco's disadvantaged communities including renters, fica customers seniors and people with disabilities. currently, there are eleven eligible census tracks in san francisco which contain 16,488

residential electricity accounts. next slide, please. partnering with community-based organizations is a critical component of the outreach plan. we know community members are more likely to listen or take action if they know and trust the messenger. community based organizations will primarily aassist within enrolling customers into both programs and will also provide feedback to ensure we are so

the tariff and community solar programs are running on different schedules and that's had different outreach timing. the table below highlights near term outreach activities for both programs. the first activity is conducting project sponsor outreach for the community solar program which is currently under way and i'll go into more detail on that, on the next slide next slide, please. so as kiara mentioned earlier that the developer partner wednesday at least one local organization to save as a

project sponsor. the effort is to help foster a connection between the project developer and potential sponsor. the sfpuc will not choose the sponsor. the project developer will do that prior to submitting a proposal in response to solicitation to power supplies for the program. to widely advertise this opportunity to san francisco nonprofit and community based organizations, we will utilize a variety of tactics including a press release, social media, blog posts and the clean power sf website. for each of these tactics, we will invite readers and interested parties to share this opportunity with their own networks as well. we have also developed a robust list of over 360 organizations to e-mail or phone for this opportunity from the agency's organizational database and databases developed by other city departments like the city

planning department. the list encompasses direct service providers, religious organizations, community centers, advocacy groups, youth services and more. we welcome your additions and feedback on this list which was provided a communication item 5f on today's agenda. clean power sf will also host an informational webinar series on august 31st and september 2nd to attract project sponsors. we will provide formallies on the webinar series for you to share with your networks as well. after the webinar series, we will post contact info of interested organizations on the clean power sf website in september so project developers can connect with them directly. and, next slide, please. and that is it for our short presentation. so kiara and i are happy to

answer questions that you may have. >> president: any questions, colleagues? >> i have a question. >> president: yes. >> commissioner: thank you, madam president. thank you for your presentation. this is great. just wondering, do we have a sense of potentially any of these community members already using something like this or interested in this or just have you done any tree launch survey or information gathering? >> yeah. that's a good question and kiara, maybe you can chime in on the program side, but at least in terms from the communication standpoint, we have not. i think just one of our goals

as an agency is to be able to provide 100% renewable energy to all san franciscans and so really working on being able to do that while also building new renewable energy projects in these communities is a goal. but we have not done any sort of survey of community members at this time. in terms of interests from potential project sponsors, we have started doing a bit of outreach in anticipation of those webinars and we have gotten some good feedback from organizations already. so i think from that standpoint, there needs to be interest and hopefully among community members as well. kiara, did you have anything to add to that? >> you capture tuesday all, thanks, jackie. >> specific question though.

thank you. >> commissioner: thank you. >> president: along with that, it would be good to know where people are so you have an idea of how far you've come or how successful your outreach was and so that might be something to consider. >> yeah. that's a good point. so i mentioned in some of my materials that we will be utilizing a consultant to help us with developing culturally competent materials and also doing message testing and researching barriers to participation in these programs. so, perhaps within that scope, we can also essentially ask that consultant to do like a preand post survey around some of these feelings to track that progress. so that's a good idea. >> right. thank you. >> president: any further comments or questions? thank you all. very good. well done and thank you for getting back on my ask. i appreciate that very much. thank you. >> you're welcome. thank you. >> thank you.

>> president: all right. any -- no further -- so why don't we open this up to public comment. >> secretary: members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment specifically on items 6a dial (415) 655-0001. meeting i.d. 1468644853 pound pound. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. >> secretary: mr. moderator, do we have any callers? >> madam secretary, there are two callers in the queue. hello, caller. i have opened your line. you have two minutes. >> so, commissioners, chronologically, way back in 2002 in the bayview, we were the first to put solar on 58

homes. it took us six more years for sfpuc to deal with solar. in the interim, from two thousand two, for six years, we were left to defend ourselves and put solar on other commitments. the first in the city and county of san francisco. now, during the pandemic, we've got we see some people say something without outreach.

we have supposedly the space and exactly park that's reachable conducting outreach. more outreach. anyone can make distinctments by taking sentences from somebody else's needs assessments. these people mostly from the east bay coming to san francisco and coming into our homes and trying to rearrange the furniture. you do not even understand what i'm saying. that's the way we have to talk to ya'll because the first question is when we affect such people, the second question is sfpuc. the third question is has sfpuc centered all your claims with pg&e.

the fourth question is -- [bell ringing] >> sorry, caller. your time has expired. hello, caller. your line is open. you have two minutes. >> thank you, commissioners. with all do respect, when i hear the word "outreach" it's a four letter word i swear to god i'm not kidding you and that's because of the bad experiences we've had with outreach. outreach is a fancy word for being a gate keeper. we have experienced this so many times actually on almost every occasion within the city and county of san francisco. when i hear the word "outreach" i hear the two equivalents of it is how can we exclude the majority and include the minority? when i hear civil rights office, i hear how can we violate the civil rights of

residents in san francisco and then there's a contract list. this is the truth, commissioners, whether you believe it or not, this is the truth. that is what's going on. so why don't you scrap this whole process again by issuing another rfp and just give it to, you know, dwayne f. jones. he'll do it for you. he'll take a million dollars and send an e-mail to few people and he'll check the box that he satisfied the contract requirements. i'm asking you again to look into the fake outreach that's being done on san francisco p.u.c. construction contracts. it is literally fake outreach. it is limiting who can go. it is limiting who has the knowledge and all of that is a violation of civil rights and violating the companies that work and have been established in san francisco and work in san francisco.

commissioners, i'm begging you to wake up before it's too late. thank you for your time. >> thaur for your comments. and, secretary, there are no more callers in the queue. >> secretary: public comment on item six is closed. >> so 6b is actually talking about operations during the covid-19 emergency. and before we start talking about returning to work on site, we want to highlight that currently 50% of our work force is already working on site. these are our field crews. together with the 50% working telecommuting, we have not had any major disruption of our core services throughout the pandemic. this is captive of off many employees and i want to start by thanking them. all employees are required to mask indoors. employees at high-risk settings such as skilled nursing or

hospitals are required to be vaccinated. we do not have employees in high-risk setting category. today, employees were required to report their vaccination as of july 29th. the city recently extended that deadline to august 12th. we have had 90% of our employees reporting vaccination status as of today and we will actually be at 100% very shortly. employees are ambiguous subject to the current requirement that they be vaccinated following ten weeks of the fda's approval following one covid-19 vaccine. all future employees must show proof of vaccination. our p.u.c. human resources team really has been providing direct services to employees to make the reporting process as easy as possible. they have also been helpful at the vaccination mobile pop-up sites at our different facilities. i would like to thank our acting d.h.r. director kim for

the leadership in this area. as it currently stands, d.h.r. is department of human resources is directed to report back to the work site at least two days a week in september. the city's currently revising their telecommuting policy. our employees will need to comply with this revised policy. once we have that information, we will begin the process to schedule people back into our facilities. a portion of our customer service function. so we do have a public facing function within our office. we need to take an equitable inclusive plan with our employees. our first step is data gathering. operation of plan or coop. this month, we're asking managers if supervisors to object their plans and help prioritize which employees will work first. when we're directed by the department, our current plan is to initiate a phased rendition

over a one-month period. they will be signed two days a week of the month for their admission back to noo the office. the first it allows employees to see each other again. second, it provides an employee an adjustment period. lastly, the i.t. staff and resources to respond to issues, progroups that are essentially returning back to the desk for the first time in over a yearment as can you probably imagine, we don't have cameras, the microphones at everybody's desk. we want to make sure they have a way to communicate with each other. in the midterm, we are piloting and customizing a work place evaluation tool first developed with different divisions. once teams are backed.

the tool will be deployed agent wide and hopefully standardize the decision making around different positions for hybrid, remote work. we also will be able to roll up the data so we can evaluate that decisions are being equitable across the agency. long temple, we'll be able to continue to adapt in covid-19 challenges or any other future disaster scenarios. what does the future work look like now. what do our work places look like. what are the technology needs that we need to have in place. covid-19 has really changed everybody's thinking and i agree we need to continue adapting our approach to attain employees and attract new ones. this will be done in approach with the city's employment department. to help lead that for the city. i will be glad to answer any questions you might have.

>> yes. commissioner moran and some parts of the city to re-opening orders. and you had mentioned the retention issue to what extent to we have a retention issue as by virtue of the covid requirements on site who are i guess part of that is also the people who've been working remotely have to reside within the state of california. what kind of challenge does that present to us? >> it is presenting us some challenges. we've had some key personnel resign or take other positions elsewhere. and, we have people that basically for a variety of reasons and can't go into great detail here who do not wish to come back to the office because of the exposure potential prop

70 to other people. we're trying to accommodate schedules, you know, people with young children. you know that the school districts are the -- they've changed their time that the school is actually open. so it creates a problem where a person may want to be come engine early and leaving early and how do we accommodate that and also we're facing a lot of pressure from the private sector who seem to be more flexible in how they're accommodating the employees going forward. so we're evaluating that, we're tracking that and we want to make sure that, you know, as we talk to other city departments and the department of human resources with the city that we can create some flexibility coming back not having a hard comeback, but rather a soft comeback.

>> president: any further questions or comments? >> i -- will we know -- you've mentioned there are 50% of the people that we have were on site. will we know or do we know how many of those people are vaccinated? >> that's a question that, you know, they have to report their vaccination status, but it's a privacy issue that you really can't ask a person if they've been vaccinated or not. they are reporting that, but i can't see that data. >> i see. and, will we know department by department how many people are generally vaccinated? >> again. it's a really difficult question for me to answer because of the privacy issue. medical information is not publicly available to me. all i know is people have

reported their vaccination status. the key here is once the fda does approve a vaccine. you will have to be vaccinated to remain a city employee. so becomes another question of, again, are people going to. are we going to have medical exemptions and religious exemptions for vaccinations and how are those going to be handled. >> thank you. >> president: why don't we open this up to public comment. >> secretary: members of the public who wish to make public comment on item 6b dial (415) 655-0001. meeting i.d.. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3.

do we have any callers moderator? >> madam secretary, there's one caller that wishes to be recognized. hello, caller. your line is open. you have two minutes. >> so, today, president joe biden gave a speech to us in which he stated that he used the bipartisan model to proper infrastructure bills. you commissioners are talking in very general terms. first and foremost, the san francisco p.u.c.'s an enterprise department. you have failed us when it comes to community benefits. there are a lot of people

doling out money to others that know about it but you're not doing nothing about it. i think that it's time for ya'll to stand now when it comes to high-speed internet especially in the bayview. to have those who need to have so that they're moving to the digital world because ya'll failed miserably when it comes to the community benefits. and, still patronizing and others. who should not be anywhere on the radar. so ya'll can apply for grants and help the community and make up to your misdeeds. but just a suggestion because

ya'll seem to be rambling too much. the community is slowly dying. our youth. our children our elders are slowly dying and there's no empathy and no compassion. and i'm at ground zero. and so is everybody else. [bell ringing] >> thank you, for your comments. your time's expired. madam secretary, there are no more callers in the queue. >> secretary: public comment on item 6b is closed. >> madam president, that concludes my report for this meeting. >> president: thank you. next item, please. >> secretary: next order of business is item 7.

new commission business. >> president: colleagues, any new business? seeing none. next item, please. >> secretary: next item is item 8, consent calendar. all the matters listed here are constituted consent calendar are considered to be routine by the san francisco public utilities commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission or the public so requests. in which, the matter will be removed from the calendar and be discussed as a separate item.

>> hello, caller, your line is open. you have two minutes. >> can you hear me now? >> loud and clear. >> great. david pillpell. so i have comments on 8b,c, andd. i don't think they need to get pulled. i don't have any fatal issues

with them. could i just make comments on those three items right now within two or two and a half minutes? does that work? >> i believe it does. >> okay. thank you. so on 8b, the cdd warehouse office suite renovation contract award on 8b and 8d, the staff report indicates that it's not subject to the ceqa review. i'm just questioning whether that was a planning department determination or a p.u.c. staff determination it's not like a huge issue and i don't disagree with that determination, but i'm looking to find out who made it and whether it's documented somewhere. i'll follow up with staff and the environmental group on that. also, on 8b, i'm interested in whether there's a p.u.c. overall about these spaced plan

that talks about staff at c.b.d., whether they remain a newcomer moves the power field services that i understand is moving to 2000 marin and where the various wait water staff and everybody else is in the area. there's a lot of real estate stuff out there and i'm hoping that there's either a memo, a plan, an app and, again, maybe i'll follow up with the acting g.m. and he can order somebody and point me to the right person or if there are responses documents on the overall space plan for the southeast. and, finally on 8c, i'm hoping on the gary boulevard work that supported and facilitated whatever elements of the gary improvement projects whatever it's called this week that the m.t.a. has been doing and that

hopefully it highlights good project coordination between p.u.c., m.t.a., and d.p.w. and perhaps there's even a model for how we would do coordination among the various departments on important public works. those are my thoughts on your consent calendar. thanks. >> thank you for your comments. hello, caller. your line is open. you have two minutes. >> thank you. commissioners, i have comments on two items 8b which is a minor and 8d, the gary boulevard. i'd like to pull that out of the consent due to a similarity to the van ness v.r.t., but right now i do want to comment on 8b.

the pictures that were released as part of the public record from cellphone, texts, and other messages. $60,000 table. i think the p.u.c. needs to be very proud of the taxpayers' money that you complain about that's being -- that projects are -- a lot of money is being spent on projects and is going through overcross and so forth. so at least recognize the fact and this is exactly the same building, the same location where the p.u.c. has spent $60,000 just on a table and the picture of the table and the text messages are all over the internet. so, with that, i'd like you to move the gary boulevard item out of consent. i'd like to discuss the civil grand jury report related to it and what is going to happen on

this one similar to the vanness crt. >> thank you. madam secretary, there are no more comments in the queue. >> secretary: consent calendar is pulled. request to pull 8c for discussion. all right. then, colleagues, on 8a, 8b, 8d, may i have a motion and a second? >> i'll move it. >> i'll second that. >> it's been moved and seconded. madam secretary, roll call, please. >> secretary: [roll call] you have four ayes. >> president: thank you.

may i have -- will you read that itemc. sorry. yes, you're right. >> secretary: item 8c is accept contract number ww674r. gary boulevard water improvements, improve modification number two. issue contract amount by $994,459 and increasing the contract by 55 consecutive calendar days for total contract of 750 calendar days and authorize final payments to the contractor. and mr. johannson is on responder's item. >> president: any questions or comments? all right.

mr. johannson. >> president maxwell and commissioners. this is allen johannson, assistant general manager for infrastructure. this particular contract in the early phases, it was anticipated would be an interagency contract led by another agency besides the p.u.c. and at the same time, we were involved with the van ness prc. so to have this p.u.c.-led contract and so this was advertised and managed by p.u.c. staff and actually is coming in now within the 10% contingency on both cost and schedule. so it's actually a very successful project. >> president: any comments?

questions? thank you, mr. johannson. may i have a motion and a second to approve this item? >> secretary: madam president. we need to call public comment again. >> president: okay. public comment. >> secretary: members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment specifically on item 8c dial (415) 655-0001. meeting i.d. 1468644853 pound pound to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. moderator, do we have caller? >> madam secretary, there's one caller that wishes to be recognized. hello, caller, your line is open. you have fochlt minutes. >> thank you. commissioners, i'm addressing you related to the similarities

between gary boulevard and the van ness projects. i'm glad there was an admission -- some sort of admission they are similar and the p.u.c. this time decided to take a lead on it. that does not change the fact. again, it does not change the fact how the van ness vrt was an example of not only the corruption, but also the racism within the p.u.c. toward middle eastern and american engineers and contractors. the reason why i say this is twofold. one, i was a victim of it, and, two, if you read the civil grand jury report that wassished roughly about a month or a little over a month ago, they eliminated, they admitted the fact that the p.u.c. specifically the p.u.c. went after the contractor that was listed to do the underground

utility and i'm going to go on the record here. the reason why they went after that contractor is because of his origin, because of his national origin and also because the mayor is a pathetic racist when she was at the board of supervisors, started picking up on that contractor. probably knowing that the plans, the underground utility plans were not marked properly. what's interesting what was also not in the report and for your ben if fit is not only they canceled the $20 million underground utility project with that l.b.e., but they reawarded the contract at $30 million when the p.u.c. said that $20 million was way too much over their estimate. so at one point, you come up with a bogus estimate, you use it to terminate that contract with the true l.b. and then you go and revisit it and the $20 million becomes $30 million. do you know who benefited from

that $30 million? bribery. [bell ringing] >> thank you for your comments. your time has expired. madam secretary, there are no more callers in the queue. >> secretary: public comment on item 8c is closed. >> president: thank you. may i have a motion and a second to approve this item, please? >> i'm glad that we are out in front on this one and not stuck in the middle of all this stuff on van ness. so thank you. and i move approval. >> i'll second that. >> president: okay. so moved and seconded. role call vote, please. >> secretary: [roll call] you have four ayes. >> president: next item, please. >> secretary: next order of

business is item nine, approve amendment number three to agreement number pro0101 and authorize a general manager to execute amendment number three extending immigration agreement by 19 months. for a total duration of 55 months with no change to the agreement amount. this will be presented by derek adams. >> hi, good afternoon, commissioners. my name is derek adams and i'm the project manager for the folsom project and i'd also like to introduce paul louie as my project engineer and the contract manager. he's here as well. i have a brief presentation on the project and starting with a quick background, it's a flooding resilience project addressing historic flooding and the intermission

neighborhood from 10th street to 18th street to the sf.p.i. service levels. next slide, please. so the project shown here subpoena what we refer to as upstream components. 500 linear feet of traditional sewer pipe and box either up sizing or on auxiliary lines to increase capacity in that neighborhood and get it down to the blue line there which is a storm water only tunnel. at 4,500' linear feet and a 12en diameter concrete tunnel over to channel creek. next slide, please. we're currently in the design phase. we've split this project into four separate design and construction contracts, so our progress is varying between 35%

and 95% completion. environmental is pending right where acquisition is ongoing and the planning phase is complete. next slide, please. as i previously mentioned, we have four separate contracts. we're doing the project under. the blue is the initial pipe contract. it's our first one out of the gate. the red is our sewer box contract. that's the bulk of the components work. the large sewer box. purple is our large pipe contract. that's large pipes on piles and then the black is the tunnel. next slide, please. our current project schedule is driven by the four contracts, the design and construction and the single thing between them. says this corresponds to the previous colors on the

different contract. the darker shade is designed through an award and the lighter shade is construction. as you can see, the initial pipe design is due to start construction early next year and then the three other contracts would follow there shortly after staggered in sequence. next slide. and, our total project costs right now is $290 million and it's got everything hard costs and soft costs and i've pointed out just the property acquisition line item is a pretty large number there that points to the importance of the property acquisition over a project like this and the neighborhood that it's in is a very dense neighborhood. the property is at a premium there. next slide, please. so this project has had its share of challenges in the initial design. the first that arose is a

conflict we have with piles holding up the caltrans overpass in conflict with our tunnel and these existing piles. resolving this is going to require quite a bit of coordination with caltrans and their approval. so this is all new scope that's had to be added to p.r.o.o.1010. the next issue we had is the uncertainty with the launch application. so for the tunnel, we need to have a place we can launch from for a pretty long duration. the c.e.r. and planning identified this parking lot in blue to the left there on the west side of the tunnel. but after investing a lot into that design with the s.f.p.c.a., their board eventually declined to allow us to use that property and now the project team has been scrambling to find alternative

staging locations or alignments for the tunnel. we have recently settled on using a caltrans parking lot right about where the circle is in the middle of the tunnel and tunnelling out from that point into two directions and then acquiring the surface permanent easements for the three properties, the florida street properties where the tunnel just has to pass under those properties. that's what we're pursuing properly. so the item today is the third amendment to p.r.o.0101 the second amendment was budget and time extension to hand, to address all of the conflicts, challenges that i brought up on the previous slide, but we did not ask for the full time extension at that time, just enough time to kind of work out how we're going to proceed. we knew we were going to need some money to resolve it. but we weren't sure exactly

what that would be at that time. so now that we have chosen a path forward. we've come forward today asking for a 19-month extension for a total of 55 months in order to complete the design as laid out previously. next slide, please. and, next steps for us is environmental clearance, imminent. the right away acquisition, as we say we still need to acquire easements and we need air space lease for tunnels. i'm also taking park in upper uslus creek water shed planning to see if there's any opportunities those folks are doing that could be applied. it's a similar type of project

although, a very different neighborhood, but i'm joining to see if i can find these in my work. that's it. do you have any questions. >> mr. adams. i have a question. >> yes, please. >> just wanted to first of all thanks for your presentation cps i'm a little confused how we ended up in that situation with the caltrans pile foundations because it's just so obvious that there might be some problem there. i would have said like maybe

the first thing would be would have been like should we go check that and that makes me really concerned that this wasn't done earlier and then now we are like talking about alternatives and i'm wondering if you are seriously thinking about alternatives in a different way and maybe future projects, we should not be dealing with this issue or we should actually flag such locations as a location of concern that we have to pay more attention to or do our due diligence before getting into the project design or contracting. another question i have for you is i noticed in your circle, in your presentation, in your slide that you had, you said, i think the problem area was that circle and you also said the new design in one of the alternatives, you're thinking about to directing their water from the same location down, is

that what i understood correctly? >> so, yeah. the conflict is in that circle area is with existing piles from caltrans. in -- it just happened z to be kind of a happy accident that the resolution with the option that we're going with is just a little to the right of that circle is that caltrans owns a lot of parking lots there and so we're going to stage from that area to tunnel. so it's just a conduction staging thing. so it's not shown from the florida strait there all the way down to the tunnel. so we'll be digging that in the middle because there's just not a lot of open parking lots in

this neighborhood that we can access and so this is one of the few where we had a property owner that was willing to work with us and in your first question, that's a good one. it's something that occurred in the c.e.r. before i took over the project. so i can't speak to the level of due diligence that was done in that time. so essentially what happened was we knew there was an overpass there. folks looked into the belts to determine what they looked like and to determine there had been a subsequent retro fit from the 89 earthquake that was not available and also that we had expanded the foot panel piles and implemented where we were in the planning stage and got to and discovered there was essentially this retro fit that occurred. >> i think it was just a matter

of them digging deep enough. i apologize i wasn't around to know what kind of due diligence they did at that time and maybe paul louie can provide more detail than i and when they dug into this a bit deeper and discovered that something that, you know, was just not foreseen to be that large. >> i'd like to add that i recognize i came in late after the planning process was over. however, i'd like to say that part of my job is to obtain those drawings from whatever agency along that alignment. and when i asked caltrans for

their as builds. so d.p.w., they did the initial planning. they requested two years before i did and then when i compared two as builds together, they were the same. so then what happened was i handed it over to consultants and they did their due diligence and they realized that something's wrong here because they realized that there was -- there should have been some drawings there for this retro fit. but that's when i went back to caltrans and i asked them, hey, are you guys missing some as builds. and what happened was they sponed that they gave me everything they had, but we know something's missing. and they searched through their

records on their own and that's how we were able to find the missing records. >> and, i appreciate that. thank you for clarifying. i just want to say, you know, obviously they want to do their due diligence because they don't want to end up in the situation. i think from our end, maybe it would be like -- it would be important for us to be a little bit more, you know, dig a little bit deeper sometimes because obviously, we are -- i mean, it's such an obvious location. that's one of the reasons any project can have a lot of surprises. but sometimes, certain locations are prime for such conflict. so it's very important to kind of identify those and maybe do a little bit deeper due

diligence to make sure we don't end up paying for something that they would not be able to deliver and then they'd have to charge us again for more work just that's my observation and i ambiguous wonder if sfpca was a driver of that line and try to which is again sort of makes me wonder if we should sort of settle that situation before sort of going through this design project. >> yeah. i was going to say the same thing was that sfpca was designed to be a thought process. >> it wasn't. >> no. it was a so. again, i totally agree.

>> i'm not sure i'm following where we are right now. reading this project scope says we might have an alternative. so what have we decided to do? i mean, because in the scope of work it says that, they've discovered the foundation or moving them moving the tunnel. so what have you decided to do?

>> so we're relocating the piles. that's what we've decided with caltrans' initial feedback was that we were relocating the files and we are tunnelling from the middle and i apologize my slides were not we have resolved what we're doing and have a final schedule to move forward with. >> so why did you choose to move the foundation rather than relocate the tunnel? >> we looked extensively at relocating the tunnel and it was actually quite a bit more expensive and it turned out because of the tangle of those

freeways, you can see there's freeways in every direction. every relocation attempt was worse and we ran these pascal transand they degreed that our proposed relocation in the piles was the least intrusive thing we can do. >> and so i know things have been overlooked. to me, this has really, you know, moving the piles, are we sure? and do we have everything on board? have we done all of our due diligence to make sure that we don't make any mistakes? and, who's doing this work? how long is it going to take? and what goes before that so that we are sure that when you do this work, it's going to be done correctly and there's not going to be oops, we didn't see? >> yeah, so the relocation work

is being done by our consultant under p.r.o. and under design. it's going to be reviewed and approved by caltrans. the caltrans is going to sign off on the work consenting to the movement of the piles of the relocation of the piles and the work itself would be done by our contract or in coordination with caltrans. so they're going to basically have some input into the work itself, how it's done and they're going to then bless it and then take it when it's done. they're going to accept the work, the relocated piles at the end. >> and, so, if they accept the work, we are no longer liable? >> we are no longer liable. there's some provisions and state law that allow us not to be liable that caltrans is

reviewing and approving the work. there's still some reliable. but they feel the risk is no greater than anything else we've been doing. we've also gotten larger insurance from the contractor, not the contractor. sorry. the designer for the design work. >> and, authentic the contractor has done this work before and you know it and you've seen it and it's approved. the contractor's going to be doing this work? >> the construction work itself, we have not hired a contractor yet. >> oh, the designer then. >> the designer that's designing it is in our o1 o1 contract and caltrans is aware that's what we're doing and is

work with them. >> and then so once we do, do we have any idea how long it's going to take? >> the work itself or the construction work? >> the construction. the design is almost done, is that right. >> the design, yes, moving forward. the construction itself, paul, i need you to help me out with this one, but i think the relocation of the piles is a couple months. >> the relocation of the piles should take place while the contractors are mobilizing their tunnel boring machines. it will take about a year to arrive. so during that one-year period, the foundations will be moved.

>> so this is not an open ditch. it's tunnelling? so there's less conflict? >> foundation modification is excavation. they're going to dig four shafts straight down next to the foundation and then they're going to remove the piles and then they're going to drill new piles in replacement. >> all right. well, yes, commissioner harington. >> commissioner: sorry. my connection is weak, i hope it works. i realize this started several years ago and in some way, i'm happy we've had all these problems because this in time gives us time. i'm hoping by the time you get

to go out to bid would change that quite substantially. so i'm hoping that you do not overconnect and so i would caution you not to overconnect which may not be blessed in the way that you're working on it right now just to be clear about that. >> excellent. and i would go into that and say whatever you do. we'd like to have as much information on that as possible. we want to make sure we've done our due diligence, you know. yes. >> commissioner: i think maybe another thing to remember is it would be good to every one of these missteps is an opportunity to create a work plan or a process plan that would help us next time to not end up in the right situation. so it would be kind of good to

create some sort of expectation and i know you sort of have something like that as you go through the project design, but that did not take us where we need to be with that one. and i just also want to add my voice to the comments by my colleagues on this is a new opportunity. you know, we struggled, but maybe this is a new opportunity for us to think what we are going to do. >> president: all right. thank you. thank you, gentlemen. why don't we open this up for public comment. >> secretary: members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment specifically on item number 9, dial (415) 655-0001.

meeting i.d. 1468644853 pound pound. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. do we have any callers? >> madam secretary, there are three callers in the queue. hello, caller. your line is open. have you two minutes. >> thank you. where do i start on this item? >> first of all, the celebration over the success of gary boulevard is short lived, commissioner harington. city property sold for $1, that can only be done by willy brown. two, i recognize that the project manager just took the job after it was initiated. but it is extremely concerning to hear that presentation that

i heard today. first of all, you're dealing with caltrans. caltrans ride away. they are highly unlikely that will allow any contractor to come in without a retro fit work on a major pile under the 101 and allow anybody to mess with it to begin with. two, i find it extremely difficult to believe that the retro fit that took place in '89 due to the loma earthquake, they couldn't find the as build plans for them. they have stringent requirements and excellent record keeping for project. something is definitely wrong here and maybe we can call cathy hao and her son, the engineer she hired to work under her and asked them what the hell did they do here.

$4 million is just the beginning. you can't blame anybody except the corruption at the p.u.c., the corruption that has been instituted for years and years. $4 million is just the begin, commissioners. you have no idea who's going to come up next. here's what happened in seattle. that's a real story and that's a justified story because really, no one knew sitting in someone had it anywhere. >> sorry. caller. your time has expired. next caller, your line is open; you have two minutes. >> first and foremost, way back in two thousand two, we had

somebody dig three conduits and one of you on this so-called commission knows what i'm talking about. marin street, the large main was compromised that took over two years to fix. i don't know if ya'll think that the people at home are stupid, they're going to listen to this conversation and they agree with the adjudication. first and foremost when we have a situation like this, which is very serious. we should of had somebody from caltrans. secondly, we should of had a structural engineer. i don't know if anybody.

i don't know. either one is somewhat of an advocate. one is a high drol gist. somebody else is good in financing. but i don't think we have a real qualified structural engineer. i know what i'm talking about because i established an infrastructure group a technical support group and property management group at the presidio and worked with qualified engineers. i will not tolerate nonsense like this. this is nonsense trying to mess with it. i wish ya'll the best. >> thank you for your comments. hello, caller. your line is open. you have two minutes. >> can you hear me now? >> loud and clear. >> great. david pillpell.

on item nine. i take a different approach from those previous speakers. the presentation on this item is not posted on the website. i he or she request a copy of that presentation and i just want to reinforce, this is exactly the kind of item, this is exactly why these staff presentations while we're meeting online like this need to be posted whether they were provided to the commission secretary by the deadline or created beforehand. they need to be posted. the public needs to be able to see the slide not just by staff, but when they refer to them. i've made my point on that. i would ask whether other nearby public buildings muni has some facilities there. animal care and control is in

the neighborhood. there's public right of way and a treat avenue which is an old railroad right of way. were those locations considered? i don't know. the city should have design immunity on a project like this but i don't know how this relates to the resolution from that item. 21-204 and staff has not provided a copy of that settlement agreement in response to my records request. i got a nice letter saying it won't be available until it's available. i'm not happy about that either. i would add an absolute completion date, may 31st, 2023 in the resolution which is

october 31st, 2021, plus 19 months and the comma is in the wrong place in the final resolve clause if you go to -- [bell ringing] >> duration of >> thank you for your comments. i'm sorry. your time is expired. madam secretary, there are no more callers in the queue. >> secretary: thank you. public comment on item nine is closed. >> president: may i have a motion and a second to move this item. is there any further discussion on this item? seeing none. may i have a motion and a second to approve the item. moved and seconded. role call on the item, please. >> secretary: [roll call]

you have four ayes. >> president: thank you. would you please read the items and call for public comment to be heard in closed session. >> secretary: the following items will be heard during closed session. item 12 pursuant to government code section 5479 and 57b. consider for employment. the san francisco public utilities commission pursuant. 5.4945f and 57.56 and san francisco's administrative code section. labor negotiator unrepresented employee to the negotiator, commission president sofie maxwell. issues under negotiation, wages, hours, benefits, working

conditions. item 13 authority at all and as i noted at the beginning, item number 14 conferring. has been removed: members of the public who wish to make public comment specifically on the items to be heard in closed session dial 1 (415) 655-0001. meeting i.d. 1468644853 pound pound. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3.

>> there are two callers in the queue. hello, caller, your line is open, you have two minutes. >> so what i want to say is what i've said before. you're going to closed session and ya'll do whatever ya'll want to. so we want to know what happened during closed session, we have to wait for an hour, an hour and a half and we don't know anything. the statement ya'll make is we've got nothing to disclose. this very congress so luted process illegal in many respects even though they had

administrative code is a shame that in san francisco, we have stripped solo to choose somebody who shouldn't be the general manager. to say it, so have a good time in closed session. i hope you have some refreshments. >> i'm representing the sierra club. my comments pertain to agenda item number 13 to be discussed in closed session.

we are approached to the s.f.p.u.c.'s legal battles. this lawsuit is counter productive in many ways. commissioners should direct staff to withdraw from the lawsuit. the sfpuc and its customers would be better served by negotiating with the board instead of litigating. i'll negotiate some key reviews. first, you're going to lose. you have no. failed to pass a peer review. you have no articles published to support your position. the state port on the other hand has hundreds of peer reviewed articles and research supporting the need for higher flows to protect the eco system. second, the state is bigger than you are. it has more resources and more power. third, you'll get a better deal by negotiating. the state board wants to

setting this issue. finally, you're on the wrong side of history and opposed to the environmental values of your own customers. there are plenty more reasons to drop this lawsuit. get moving once and for all. >> thank you for your comments. hello, caller, your line is open. you have two minutes. >> hello. i assumed that in item 13 you're likely to hear a proposal regarding the state agencies regarding the voluntary package. simply put, we urge you to reject that package for

multiple reasons as a result, we do not believe those talks we do not believe is for the p.u.c. to discuss the voluntary agreements in closed session. we believe they are the right to hear about the proposal and to hear your reaction to that proposal. number two, the what we know of the package and we have been briefed regarding the package suggesting it's completely unacceptable. providing that water has no foundation. setting enormous holes. it includes as a foundation the trump administration violence which brings enormous

implications. we urge you to call a workshop that would allow us to work with you to talk about the details of this package which has enormous implications which frankly none of your staff understands. finally a refill agreement which we think would make your water rights junior to those of the state bad deal for san francisco. we're going to reject it. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next caller, your line is open, you have two minutes. >> thank you, good afternoon, for the last time. this is peter directmeyer. i want to remind you that for more than a decade, there's been an agreement that it's in a state of psychological

crisis. but phase one of the delta plan was adopted in december of two thousand eighteen, more than two and a half years ago and nothing has happened. the delta is dying under our watch and this is just terrible and san francisco has been a much better place to contribute to any other water agency. your storage gives you so much flexibility. now, you might be discussing the v.a. in closed session which made me think that normally, you'd get a report on the delta plan in that there wasn't one today which makes me suspicious as well. and that would be inappropriate to discuss that in closed session. so if that is part of the agenda, i encourage you to pull that from closed session and address it in public at your

next meeting. thank you very much. and see you next time. [please stand by]

>> that room is sitting in room 200 is a racist witch. under her rule, people of color has been dieing in hunters point and treasure island. p.u.c. employees of color have been rooted out from the p.u.c. because of her and her gang. that is a fact. bringing dennis herrera to be the general manager is the worst mistake.

you had a process to gate new general manager. you published it. then all of a sudden s someone -- someone from the machine need to be rewarded. come on. you got nothing to lose. no one is going to -- the worst thing that can happen to you if you go back to your real jobs. that's the worst part. >> clerk: thank you caller, your time has expired. there are no more callers in the queue. >> president maxwell: public comment is closed. next item please. >> clerk: item 11 with a motion on to assert any client privilege regarding matters listed below as conference with legal counsel.

>> president maxwell: motion and second? >> second and moved. >> president maxwell: roll call vote please. >> clerk: [roll call vote] you have five ayes. are we ready to move in closed session? >> president maxwell: i think we should take a 10 minute break. please stand by. >> next item please. >> clerk: item 16, motion regarding whether to disclose

the discussion during the closed session. >> president maxwell: seconded. roll call vote please. [roll call vote] you have four ayes. >> president maxwell: madam secretary, is there any further business before this commission? >> clerk: that concludes your business for this meeting. >> president maxwell: then, this meeting is adjourned. thank you all.

>> we worked very hard with the san francisco venue coalition, the independent venue alliance to advocate for venues. put this issue on the radar of the supervisors and obviously mayor breed. the entertainment commission and the office of small business and we went to meetings and showed up and did public comment and it

was a concerted effort between 50 venues in the city and they are kind of traditional like live performance venues and we all made a concerted effort to get out there and sound the alarm and to her credit, maybe breed really stepped up, worked with matt haney, who is a supervisor haney was a huge champion for us and they got this done and they got $3 million into the sf venue recovery fund. >> we have represented about 40 independent venues in san francisco. basically, all the venues closed on march 13th, 2020. we were the first to close and we will be the last to reopen

and we've had all the of the overhead costs are rent, mortgage, payroll, utilities and insurance with zero revenue. so many of these venues have been burning $1,000 a day just to stay closed. >> we have a huge music history here in san francisco and the part of our cultural fab lick but it's also an economic driver. we produce $7 billion annual' here in san francisco and it's formidable. >> we've been very fortunate here. we've had the department of emergency management and ems division and using part of our building since last april and aside from being proud to i

can't tell you how important to have some cost recovery coming in and income to keep the doors open. >> typically we'll have, three to 400 people working behind the teens to support the show and that is everything from the teamsters and security staff and usualers, ticket takers, the folks that do our medical and the bar tenders and the people in the kitchen preparing food for backstage and concession and the people that sell key shirts and it's a pretty staggering amount of people that are out of work as a result of this one verne you going tarkanian. it doesn't work to open at reduced capacity. when we get past june 15th, out of the into the blue print for our economy we can open it it 100% and look at the festival

in full capacity in october and we're just so grateful for the leadership of the mavor and dr. coal fax to make us the safest ♪ america and this is been hard for everybody in san francisco and the world but our leadership has kept us safe and i trust them that they will let us know when it's safe to do that. >> a lot of people know about america is military stuff, bullying stuff, corporate stuff. when people like me and my friends go to these foreign country and play music, we're giving them an american cultural experience. it's important. the same way they can bring that here. it sounds comfy buyia, you know, we're a punk band and we're

nasty and we were never much for peace and love and everything but that's the fertilizer that grows the big stuff that some day goes to bill graham's place and takes everybody's money but you have to start with us and so my hope is that allel groups and people make music and get together because without out, hanging together we'll hang separately, you know. >> other venues like this, all over the place, not just in the san francisco bay area need to exist in order for communities to thrive and i'm not just talking about the arts communities, even if you are here to see a chuckle bucket comedy show and you are still experiencing humanity and in specific ways being able to gather with people and experience something together. and especially coming out of the pandemic, the loss of that in-person human connection recovering that in good ways is going to be vital for our entire

society. >> it's a family club. most our staff has been working with us for 10 years so we feel like a family. >> what people think of when they think of bottom of the hill and i get a lot of this is first of all, the first place i met my husband or where we had our first date and i love that and we love doing weddings and i expect there to be a wedding season post 2021 of all the make up we haddings and i hope that many people do that because we have had so many rock ep role weddings. >> i told my girlfriend, make sure you stand at the front of the stage and i can give you a kiss at midnight. at this got down on one knee at

the stroke of midnight. it wasn't a public thing, i got down on one knee and said will you marry me and is he she had are you [beep] kidding me and i said no, i'm dead serious and she said yes. we were any time homicideel of the show. we just paused for new year's eve and that was where i proposed to my wife. this is more than just a professional relationship it's more than just a relationship from a love of arts, it's where my family started. we'll always have a special place in my heart. >> venues, you know, represent so much. they are cultural beckons of a city. neighbors can learn and celebrate and mourn and dance together. venues and arts and culture are characterized as second responders to crisis and they

provide a mental health outlet and a community center for people to come together at and it's the shared history of our city and these spaces is where we all come together and can celebrate. >> art often music opens up people to understanding the fellow man and i mean, taz always necessary and if anything, it's going to be even more necessary as we come out of this to reach out and connect with people. >> we can sustain with food, water and shelter is accurate and does anybody have a good time over the last year? no. >> san francisco is a great down. i've been here many years and i love it here and it's a beautiful, beautiful, place to be music and art is key to that. drama, acting, movies, everything, everything that makes life worth living and

that's what we've got to mow proteasome no san francisco and that's what is important now. [♪♪♪]go. >> shop and dine the 49 promotes local businesses and changes san franciscans to do their shopping and dooipg within the 49 square miles by supporting local services within the neighborhood we help san francisco remain unique, successful and vibrant so where will you shop and dine the 49 hi in my mind a ms. medina

>> it's been a long sim since we've been back in the streets and we're excited to be here. this is not only a celebratory time for us to commemorate this project and to recognize the hard work that was put into it, but also just recognize that as we continue to reopen the city in a responsible and safeway, that we're also celebrating the neighbors, the neighborhood, and all of the unique characteristics of our city and it makes san francisco special and that's going to be a big part of our recovery. we have a great program today. relatively s