so i'm just not used to the pay to play culture that has developed in the 20th century, i mean the 21st century. when i went to work for the war on poverty in buffalo, i was astonished that people from corruption were granted and my friends from boston, it was the same thing. in the '70s and '70s i was very involved in politics. we occasionally came across efforts at pay to play, but they were initiated by developers, by project sponsors, certainly not by the planning commission or supervisors or whatever and they were essentially what would you say, crushed. i have mentioned before how gordon schenn came before i don't know whether it was the supervisors or planning commissioners at that point because the case was before both and announced that, well, you know, we've been offered the equivalent of a million

dollars if you'll approve this and we're not supporting it. you know, if you want to prove it, we'll take the money, but do you want to approve this. and to the people who did take the money, self-help for the elderly was always for sale. they would turn out a whole room full of elderly ladies who believed they were there for the purpose of chinatown. and the developer would be giving them money for trips to the golden gate park, whatever, they were ignored completely. just dismissed, they weren't even there. when an organization from the mission agreed to take money, i think they were probably just naive about it. again, it was just not going to be part of the consideration and the lawyer tim acosta

called me. either your planning commissioners are soliciting money to be given to non-profits and so on as opposed to making decisions. >> clerk: your timer has elapsed. >> chairman: thank you. next speaker, please. and, yes, that did happen. i remember very clearly when the then president of the planning commission solicited behested payments from individuals and organizations that were practicing in front of the planning commission. it was wrong. next speaker. >> hello, supervisors. this is debbie lauren. despite some of the comments about alleged misgivings around non-profits, the vast majority of behested contributions for non-profits are of great benefit to the city and county of san francisco. we support the reform of san francisco ethics law to

increase transparency and protect against corruption and we always want to work with the board in that context. ethics reform does have implications for first amendment rights, charitable giving and civic engagement and we are just urging the board to take a cautious approach and take your time to analyze the nuances and potential for unforeseen consequences in order to make sure that this legislation is right. last time this came up was whether to disclose a ban. we are especially concerned about the significant expansion of the definition of interested parties going beyond personal benefit by saying it's anybody who attempts to influence legislation or administrative action even with the exceptions in the law, it could include a lot of grass roots public policy activities like rallies or petitions and including

noninterested parties would make it even more significant. the danger is having a definition that's overly broad and vague so that it doesn't draw a clear line between what is and what is not permitted and could have a chilling effect on what is permissible and desirable fundraising and most significantly for us, we have many wonderful non-profit who serve and we want to make sure it's mitigated so it doesn't force them to choose between public service and their responsibility to their organizations through their day jobs where they need to raise money, city organizations, and ensure donor confidentiality and thank you for considering these comments. >> chairman: yeah. i'm happy to look at those definitions with you and my staff in the intervening week, but i think the fundamental

notion of interested parties contributing to folks who are at decision-making capacity during the pendency of a contract or license is a no-brainer, but i'm happy to look at those definitions and see if they need to be tightened up. next speaker, please. >> can you hear me now? >> chairman: yes. we can. >> david pillpell again. so thank you for answering my earlier questions on items two and three. the a.b.a.g. websites suggested that supervisor mandelman and mar are on the board with supervisor ronen and on the regional planning committee. i know. >> chairman: no. >> in any event, i assume you'll straighten that out. on this matter, i look forward to the agreement and we will need clear guidance with ethics

with examples and scenarios distributed to all board and commission. members, department heads, campaign consultants, lobbyists, friends of groups, political committees and i would require existing board and commission members and department heads to sign an acknowledgement form that they have received, read, and understand the new requirements. i would encourage the city attorney to update the good government guide and finally, i'm hoping that the refuge working group will meet again sometime today. that's all i have on this right now. thanks. >> chairman: thank you. are there any other members of the public for public comment on this item number one? >> clerk: that completes our list of public comment callers. >> chairman: thank you, mr. young. so, colleagues, what i think we should do is so we can have them be in the file is that we

should adopt the amendments so we can discuss them next week and get public comment on them and in the intervening week, i will work with folks we have heard from and anybody that we heard from on any amendments to those amendments if necessary. so i would like to move the amendments and, of course, the underlying chief sponsor of this matter is supervisor haney who is also in receipt of these amendments. he is not on the call this morning, but i'm sure we will hear from him in the intervening week. i can talk to him because he is not a member or a quorum of this committee and we'll endeavor to do so. on the motion, mr. clerk, a roll call, please. >> clerk: on the motion to amend, [roll call]

the motion is adopted without objection. >> chairman: all right. and, that concludes our -- >> clerk: chair [inaudible] >> chairman: i will make a motion to continue this item one week to september 27th as amended and, on that, a roll call, please, thank you, mr. young. >> clerk: yes. on that motion, [roll call] the motion passes without objection. we have one more thing that we'd like to bring up before we adjourn. >> chairman: mr. young. >> clerk: yes. i'd like to call on our deputy director samara, she'd like to provide comment on a.b.a.g. if you don't mind. >> chairman: why don't we then re-open item number -- >> clerk: oh, yes. please do.

>> chairman: well, it's up to you. >> clerk: you can re-open, but we do not need to rescind the vote or anything like. >> chairman: all right. call item number three for informational purposes. >> hi, members of the committee alisa samara the lead deputy. i would just like to clarify the comments for a previous caller about the regional planning committee. i did call a.b.a.g. and they have confirmed that is a correct title. it's a committee under the executive board. so the motion and the title is correct. >> chairman: all right. yet another example of the clerk of the board of supervisors not ever making a mistake ever and that, thank you ms. amara, concludes the rules committee meeting for today, september 20th. we are adjourned.

madame clerk, will you read the roll call, please. [roll call] you have four commissioners president. you have a quorum. >> thank you. due to the covid-19 health

emergency, given public health recommendation issued by the san francisco department of public health, this meeting is being held via teleconference and it is being televised by sfgov-tv. for those watching on live stream, please be aware that there is a brief time lag between what is happening and what is being viewed on sfgov tv. i'd like to extend our thanks to staff and i.t. staff for their assistance during this meeting. if you'd wish to make public comment on an item, dial 415-252-3100. the chair can interrupt and ask you to limit your comment to the agenda item. we ask that public comment be made in a civil and representful manner and refrain from the use of

profanity. please address your remarks to the commission as a whole, not to individual commissioners or staff. madame president? >> thank you. before calling the first item, i'd like to announce that the san francisco public utilities commission acknowledges that it owns and are stewards of the unseated lands located within the territory of the tribes and desen danlzes of the historic federally recognized mission san jose band of alameda county. the san francisco [inaudible]. that every citizen residing within the greater bay area has and continues to benefit from the use and the occupation of the tribes land. since before and after the san francisco public utilities commission's founding in 1932. it is vitally important that we do not only recognize the history of the tribal lands of which we reside, but also we acknowledge and honor the

fact that the people have established a working partnership with the san francisco p.u.c. and are productive and flourishing members within the many greater bay-area san francisco communities today. madame clerk? >> thank you. [echoing] >> i'm sorry. you know what to do. >> yes. thank you. sorry about that. your next item is item number three, approval of the minutes of august 24, 2021. >> any corrections or discussions on the august 24 meeting? minutes. seeing none, public comment, please. >> members of the public which who* wish to make two minutes of comment specifically on the minutes of august 24, dial the number on your screen. to raise your hand to speak,

press star 3. >> moderator, do we have any callers? operator: there are no callers wishing to be recognized at this time. >> any further discussion? seeing none, may i have a motion and a second to approve the minutes of august 24? >> commissioner, i'm back. i'll make a motion. >> all right. may i have a second? >> second. >> it's been moved and seconded. roll call, please. [roll call] >> and you have five ayes. >> thank you. next item, please. >> next item is item number 4, general public comment.

members of the pub who wish to make two minutes of general public comment on matters that are within the commission's jurisdiction may do so by dialing the number on your screen, meeting i.d. 1462870622 ##. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. >> do we have any callers? operator: there are currently three callers in the queue. hello, caller. your line has been open. you have two minutes. >> caller: my name is francisco. and i have been participating in this types of deliberations with the san

francisco public utilities commission for the last 30 years. maybe 35 years. and what i see today, lots of ploys, machinations and shenanigans. this pandemic has had -- has the san francisco public utilities commission to hide many things under the rug. the time is coming. i was looking at the agenda today, and i'm going to address certain thing on their agenda. and i see how convoluted you all are.

[inaudible] over a long period of time and you know me. i'm not into getting any favors and i'm not into getting not a single cent, let alone a dollar, but i feel ashamed that y'all are not representing the people. and i'm [inaudible] as item go by and pinpoint to y'all how deceiving you all are because there are still walking with some very corrupt individuals. thank you very much. operator: thank you for your comments. next caller, your line is open. you have two minutes.

>> caller: eileen, calling for san francisco neighborhoods. regarding this friday's workshop on alternative water supply planning, i am urging the p.u.c. to request the san diego presenters include information on the resale facility in carlsbad and that the presentations answer the following questions -- what is the footprint of the facility structure? what are the decibel levels inside these structures? could a similar structure be placed undergrounded cities like san francisco? new subject. for sale by new owners, peter coyote wrote, and i quote, the san francisco i knew and loved has been facelifted. chromed, polished, colonized, homogenized and marginalized as a cultural, innovative force.

the transition was accomplished in a smooth, seamless manner by money and the addiction to power. san francisco is too expensive, too monoculturally wealthy. tech wealth and privilege have transformed it into a cushy enclave for the heartless, end quote. thank you. operator: thank you for your comment. next caller, your line is open. you have two minutes to comment. >> caller: can you hear me ok? operator: loud and clear. >> caller: great. good afternoon. just two items for general public comments. this friday, sfgov tv has a 1:00 p.m. meeting in at least two meetings at 2:00 p.m., including the board of supervisors' government audit and oversight committee which

has one of its closed session items, the regional water quality control board settlement proposal. that is board file 281109 that this commission recommended some months back but there is no real explanation about that. nor has this commission disclosed publicly the contents of the settlement or the context of it. in any event, i hope that the special p.u.c. meeting this friday is covered live by sfgov tv either on tv or online, depending on priorities and capacity. and my second comment, it's sort of in the form of a question. although i realize this is not "jeopardy!", i'm wondering what is the status of the general manager search and appointment process. i don't see anything on today's agenda addressing that. and i note that we continue to have a very capable acting

general manager nine months later and aom woinlering if the commission might address in some fashion where we are on the general manager appointment process. thanks very much on this item. operator: thank you for your comments. madame secretary, there are no more callers in the queue. >> general public comment is closed. madame president, you're muted. >> next item, please. >> next item is item 5, communications. any comments or questions on communications? >> i have one and that is on item g. and i would just like to thank the san francisco public utilities citizens advisory committee for their hard work and their

commitment to this agency and to our city and to their well-thought-out and helpful resolutions. much appreciated and thank you all for all that you do and have been doing all the time. thank you. anyone else? any further comments? seeing none, then public comment, please. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment specifically on item 5 communications, dial the number on your screen. meeting i.d. 1462870622 ##. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. operator, do we have any callers? operator: there are three callers in the queue. hello, caller. i've opened your line.

>> thank you. good afternoon, president maxwell, members of the commission. this is nicole sancoula. i'm speaking today not my position at bosca, but a member of the citizens advisory committee can. actually speaking at the request of the water subcommittee of that committee and the chair, jennifer flaherty, who was not able to participate in today's meeting right now. in the pocket, as commissioner president maxwell mentioned, you have four resolutions from the c.a.c. and each of these resolutions represents the commitment of your c.a.c. members to engage in the important matters under the p.u.c. perview and to provide the recommendations to the this body. i want to call your attention at this time to the second resolution in that list, the resolution in support of a resilient water supply.

the committee felt very strongly and wanted to call this to your attention, using your upcoming workshop this friday on alternative water supply work. it seems timely that this resolution, including the four recommendations that it includes, be addressed by staff and enable the opportunity for the choice ining discuss it at your workshop and we would appreciate that -- appreciate also the comments from commissioner maxwell. it is my pleasure to serve on this for you. thank you very much. operator: next caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: as you know, agenda number 5 has many things on the agenda. and actually there is no

discussion but this is how you deceive the people. and i'll explain. so if you take 5-f, declaration of emergency tree removal, slope repair and debris removal at stern grove, very general statement. but i want to ask y'all if y'all have a plan, an emergency plan, and i can give an example of something that happened in los angeles where over 17 million gallons of sewage was spilled in the

ocean. i want to know, did y'all have an emergency plan, and if i can have it. now, on h, i would speak of the suer inspection and replacement program update. i want to ask you a question. do y'all know anything about a permit, which is called nine minimum controls? and if you do know about it, i want to know when were the large drainage -- [bell ringing] transport facilities inspected last.

operator: thank you for your comments. unfortunately your time has expired. next caller. your line is open. you have two minutes to comment. >> caller: can you hear me now? operator: loud and clear. >> caller: great. so, on communications, on item 5-f, the stern grove declaration of emergency, thank you very much to whoever is appropriate for adding the concurrents and approval date on the second page. i may be the only one who cares, by care very much and appreciate having the concurrents and approval date on there. on item 5-g, the pucac resolutions, one of them dates back to may. i'm of the view it should be included on the next regular p.u.c. meeting agenda and i don't know why it was delayed

almost four months. on the sb-612 resolution, i am fairly concerned that the puccac should not have communicated their position with the state legislature. the city has a very formal process to take positions on state legislation, the state legislation committee that does that. john skarpola can explain that to anyone who's interested. be we don't have citizens advisory committees in the city communicating positions through the state legislature. they don't have the authority to do so. they can urge you to urge the s.l.c. to say take those positions or the board of supervisors or the mayor. but that is just not done and somebody should have flagged that and told the c.a.c. that now they don't take positions on state legislation and communicate to the legislature in that way.

and finally, on item 5h, pursuant to inspection and replacement program update, interesting information there. but it's not in the form of a memo. so in the future if that can be put in the form of a memo so the public can see who it's coming from ultimately, i assume it's greg norby's shop. but whoever's the point person on that -- [bell ringing] and those things should be in the form of a memo. thank you. operator: thank you for your comments. there are no more callers in the queue. >> thank you. item communications is closed. next item, please. >> any further discussion, excuse me, on the -- on anything in 5? seeing none, next item, please. >> item 6, is report of the

general manager. >> thank you, madame secretary. commissioners. first item on my report today is on the curtailment orders that came up. and steve richie will present. >> good afternoon. steve richie, assistant general manager for water. i'm going to report on the tuolumne river diversion curtailment orders. next slide, please. as a little setting for this, this is the latest report on our reservoir storage levels. we are looking at 71% in hetch hetchy and about 68.5% storage overall, less than normal. but some next slides, please. there are some reservoirs that are in much worse shape in california. certainly the ones up on the sacramento river. the sacramento river system, lake shasta t orville and

fullsome lake all quiet low as is st. louis reservoir, which is normally low at this time of year. don pedro reservoir, by comparison, is about 52% full. so, we're in better conditions on the 12 new river than we are on the north state rivers. next slide, please. and the california drought monitor, again, shows continued drought throughout the state and much of the west looks like this as well with a lot of dark brown and red colors throughout the states. next slide, please. ok. to get down to business, on june 15, the state water board issued notices of water unavailability to all water ride holders in the delta water shed. on july 23leder they released draft curtailment and reporting regulations and also on july 23rd they issued notices of water on availability for all pre-14

water right claims in the san joaquin water shed and most pre-14 water right claims in the sacramento river watershed. next slide? san francisco received the july 23rd notices of water unavailability for our points of diversion in the 12 new watershed. the board adopted the emergency regulations on august 3 and the state office of o.a.l.s approved the regulations and filed them with the secretary of state on august 19 which made them effective and it was immediately followed on august 20 by curtailment orders from the state for these points of diversions. for eleanor, cherry, the lower cherry act we duction, or hetch hetchy for early intake and two diversion points that serve camp mather. next slide, please. so we were releasing water above natural flow to meet in-street flow requirements and generating hydro power. water released above the

natural flow had been credited to water bank and we do not expect this to change under curtailment order because it does not affect previously stored water, which is what's in cherry. with the closure of stanislaus national forest on september 1 due to the fires, rafting season effectively ended. now during the first part of september, we did make available generation at home power house on five-minute notice which resulted in our need to keep flow going for the generators right about 60-acre feet per day and then beginning to september 12, we reduced those relices to the in stream flow requirements or full natural flow, whichever is greater to preserve our water storage. next slide, please. curtailment order certificates of compliance needed to be filed by september 3. and the curtailment requirements are stored water and we actually discussed this with state waterboard

staff and they said just reported out, just the way you're doing it. so that is what we'll do. exceptions can be requested for nonconsumptive uses for human health and safety and for water called alternative water sharing agreements. exceptions needed to be requested by september 3 with support and information submitted by september 17. we expect to make requests under specific categories for different situations. for nonconsumptive use, for fish hatchery and small systems of country in early 2022 if it's still dry. and also for the camp mather diversions. that is something that we've been digging into the details of and making sure it's what we need to do to qualify for those exceptions. we filed our certificate of compliance on september 2 and will begin filing reports. the first one is due this friday accounting for new

releases from cherry and eleanor and hetch hetchy demonstrated in our compliance by basically adding and subtracting volumes of water to make it clear that we're releasing the full natural flow that is required. if conditions persist, we'll take additional actions regarding reduction in available water supply january potentially declaring a water supply emergency. next slide. i wanted to report on where with reright now in terms of reductions. from 2020, which was the governor's last declaration that called for a 15% reduction from 2020 demands. so, for the period july 1 to september 12, san francisco customers and our wholesale customers have all averaged roughly 8% reduction since the governor's executive order came out. so, we're doing reasonably well, but not the 15% voluntary that the government had requested yet.

the next two slides show that the outlook would be if water year 2022 is like 1977. basically a repeat of 1977. the first one is demand is at 200 million gallons for dear on average and curtailments last through the entire year as we anticipate if it stays dry. so, what this table shows is three cases. one is the base case of there are no curtailments and curtailment seems to be an issue. the amount of water in storage on september 1, 2022 is projected in the rest of that column there, the base case column. so, hetch hetchy would have 166,000-acre feed. cherry and eleanor would have 169,000 acre and water bank would have about 252,000

acre-feet. and don pedro would have about 820,000 acre-feet. column b shows what would happen if we perceive as we're on track to now with the full natural flow requirements being provided out of cherry and eleanor so you can see the hetch hetchy stays with the same amount of storage as it would under the base case snare yoefm and it would drop dramatically down to about 58,000-acre feeds. water bank would increase to 363,000 acre-feet and don pedro would be about 262,000 acre-feet. in column c, we have a scenario showing the curtailments if hetch hetchy had to droiblt the curtailments as well. and that is the case certainly we definitely want to avoid because that would bring hetch hetchy down to about 32,000 acre-feet by about september 1 of next year.

cherry and el know wour about 102,000 acre-feet and water bank would be about 353,000 acre-feet. the don pedro storage would be a 655,000 acre-feet. we have to acknowledge and accept this possibility and hope for the best and plan for the worst. the next slide shows the same scenarios but is demand would be cut by 10% and down an average of 180 million gallons per day. if we were to cut demand by 10%, you see the changes are in cold couple b and 30,000 in hetch hetchy to action 129,000 acre-feets. cherry and el know would only drop to 50,000 acre-feet and

363,000 acre-feet would be in water bank. if we ended up being forced to curtail diversions into hetch hetchy, again we would be at 50,000 acre feet, a very low number. so, that start to show the impact of calling far 10% level of reduction over the next year, basically. so that is the kind of thing that i think we're going to build into considerations going forward. one other thing to note about these tables is that you end up with a fair amount of water in water bank. the unfortunate part is water bank is out of our reach so that is water that is now in don pedro and can't be brought back into the hetch hetchy system. so, that is a challenge that we will have to face if we end up with these scenarios. i covered a lot of material and i would be happy to answer any questions.

>> i have a question on that last slide. can you refresh my memory on why we can't tap into the water bank? >> the way the water bank is set up, we release water downstream into the water bank and is there for the districts to use where they use to, you know, provide the supply to them. that they would take and it is water then that would allow us to store water upstream. if they don't, that system doesn't work. so water bank is a good thing. if you have in flow and you have inflow that you can divert. if you don't have those things, it's not the tool that it is in normal times. >> ok.

if we have curtailment regardless of how we do it, you are not going to be able to draw from the water bank, even if the situation is dire. >> this draws from the water bank, then we can offset that. but if they don't take waters from the water bank, then -- there is nothing that can be curtailed. >> the whole spoinls to make it past our intake. >>en we physically can't take the water. it can only be exchanged. we can't pick up the water. >> the question is do we need to rethink how we use the water bank or how we do this whole credit rating since it

is considering we may end up in the situation as well. >> i would think if next year is dry and we get into the position starting to declare an emergency, i think we would be in conversation with the irrigation distributions about this. >> and i have another question for you. why 10%? what if governor declares a state of emergency and says 25%. what happens under that scenario? >> it's just another bigger number. we were able to generate these numbers finally yesterday so they are quick numbers generated. the lowest we got to in the last route system-wide in 2013 was 175 million gallons per day so that was everybody pulling pretty hard.

we could end up below that. but i think also that is a matter for the commission to decide. we could, you know, we can run numbers for any reduction we want. we can save 20%, we can save 30% depending on what we think is the best thing to do for the system to stretch its supply and at the same time make sure that we know what we're asking of people. i would prefer that we not be in the position of putting a number out there that's really big and not have a good idea of how we expect people to meet it. >> and then one last question on the water use reductions that you showed the percentages, i think 8% and 7%. i know this is a difficult thing to know and but i was wondering if we know how is that related to covid and water use reduction.

have we seen any increase and commercial water use with these reductions, sort of like reflects conservation or is it still sort of like a lingering effects of covid and [inaudible] at the same time? >> it's hard to actually separate those things out. we are trying to do some work on that. it's interesting to note that the average demand in 2019, the average demand in 2020 were roughly about the same. that was partly driven by 2020 having a very dry february and there was a big spike in water usage throughout the system. so that when there was covid effects later, they were kind of masked by that. so we're looking at this year and trying again to understand, you know, what is really happening throughout the system. and trying to make some good estimates of it. but it does take a little bit of work to do that.

>> thank you. commissioner moran? >> just a couple of comments. one is i think this shows the impact of what it first sounds like, pretty innocuous change. it sounds like if you curtail diversions in the middle of a drought, what's the big deal? you're in a drought. but it has a huge impact and a lot of the planning is based on the idea na you can have moments of resale in the middle of the draft. and an issue with water policy being set, state level on one-size-fits-all. i would guess that the impact of their order on their ability to draw water from the water bank is an unintended consequence. i doubt that they thought about that when they were making the order.

but the fact is if you don't have a release obligation, the irrigation districts because of that order, you can exchange it uphill which is the way the water bank works. there are other water banks in the state and my guess there are other circumstance where is this works to that disadvantage as well. so the state board is not only getting into unusual territory legally, but also an area where their information and understanding probably doesn't match the task. >> thank you. commissioner harrington. >> two things. one, i think that we assume everybody know what is curtailment means. it's a technical term. do you mind explaining it so everyone understands what that actually is? and the second part is how does any of this relate to various lawsuits that we've been engaged in? >> yeah. actually, we went over that

question last time we talk about this and i would be happy to do it again. basically it's a state board declaring there is not enough water for people with certain seniority of water rights. they can, quote, curtail their diversions, which means cut off your diversions so that you can't divert anymore water. they did provide exceptions for human health and safety and that is one we're exploring very thoroughly to find out can we minimize the amount we curtail and actually diverse more water back into the system because we need it to survive, in effect, as an urban area. but, yeah. curtailment means cutting off a diversion from a water body. >> and the second part. >> i think i would defer to legal council on that. i know we have a couple of items on closed session today

relating to litigation on things related to the state. in this case t suit we filed relative to curtailment is on the underlying regular leighs. it is not on the orders themselves. so, we're, you know, fully compliant with the orders because, you know, they are not -- they took inaction. for example, in the case of the state water bore's water quality control plan, they never took an implementation action. just a planning action. so, those -- there was nothing that happened that said you have to comply with this now. s in this case, they took action saying you have to comply with this now. >> thank you. >> when do we start preparing for an emergency? you said that we would talk to the irrigation districts in an emergency. but sommes that we would maybe need to talk to them or

have a conversation before an emergency since we're hearing from climate change that this may be the new norm. so what do we start -- >> we talked -- i don't want to mislead you. we talked to the irrigation district virtually every day of the year and about all of this array of issues. what i was talking about relative to that was maybe having a focused discuss about how we may or may not want to see if there is something we can do about the water bank situation. going forward. that's a very particular topic. but they spend every day of the year talking to the irrigation district about this and this topic has come up. >> i was just concerned because i know we do talk to them. but you mentioned that we would have, as you just mentioned, we would have a focused and seems to me that maybe that focus needs to be

-- need to be preparing for that kind of a discussion. maybe differently because things are difference and we hear that it is going to be the new normal. and when we do talk to the state, we have a robust conversation for people in that situation. >> any further comments or questions? all right. thank you. all right. why don't we open this one up to public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment, specifically on 6a dial 1-514- -- 415-554-

any callers? operator: there are two callers in the queue. hello, caller. i opened your line. you have two minutes. >> caller: the first thing i want to bring to your attention is we have about 60,000 salmon swim under the bridge. and most of them, when they reach their location where they spawn, have died. 500 were found alive. i want to ask -- i wanted to reflect, who was here before some of these people came and

started taking water, building the dams and thinking that they're playing god. i want to know do you care about the depletion that this -- the salmon dying and extension -- they are part of our [inaudible]. instead of talk about some bank and your agreement, you should feel ashamed of yourselves. and the other agenda items, i see a conflict of interest with doreen jones and a guy called robinson. i want you all to look into it before i conduct an investigation with the federal bureau of investigation. thank you very much.

operator: thank you for your comments. hello, caller. your line is open. you have two minutes. >> caller: thank you. good afternoon. this is the tuoloume river trust. i found that last presentation to be misleading. i think it's extremely unlikely that ncaaser yo would play out. -- scenario would play out. it seems the argument that the state would require any water coming into hetch hetchy to be released below the dam and the state water board curtailments are not aimed at improving flows and that middle section of the tuoluome. there's the spring flow management plan, which is decades behind schedule. but the purpose of the curtailment is to make sure that there's water available downstream for other uses, be they mental or higher [inaudible] uses.

and i would encourage staff to simply call the state water board and say, hey, you know, we have this water bank and works a certain way and allows us to have water in the bay area and extented trouts. -- droughts. the pointed of the curtailment is to make sure that any water -- naturally flowing into don pedro leads into the lower tuoloume river. of course. that's what they want. they're just not trying to mess with the sfpuc or create better flows between hetch hetchy and don pedro. so, this is more gloom and doom. it's trying to justify yet another lawsuit. the sfpuc has more than one million [inaudible] neat storage. much better shape than others. at the water bank, you look back at history, hetch hetchy is almost always close to full by july 1. and this new fear that the

curtailments are going to punish san francisco with no benefit to the state doesn't make any sense to me. we used to have the bay area water stewards and meet with sfpuc and others replaced by the stakeholder supply group. we need more forums like that. but to discuss these issues, just to mawser that we're all on the same page and understand the issues would be really important. thank you. thank you thank you thank you for your comments. there are no more callers in the queue. >> ok. public comment on item 6a is closed. >> my next item for presentation is on the hetch hetchy capital program and i'm asking program manager catie miller to present this to the commission. katie. >> hi, thank you. i'm catie miller, the director of the

infrastructure division and today i'll cover highlights of the hetch hetchy capital improvement program for the fiscal year of 2021 from april 1 to june 30 of this year. so this slide compares the program status from the end of the third quarter to the end of the fourth quarter. expenditures a close of the reporting period were 196 million total. the program spent eight million last quarter compared to $9 million spent in the third quarter. significant progress was made during the fourth quarter with one project moving into the design phase, one to construction, two to close out and three projects to completion. next slide. this table shows a summary of the project costs forecast compared to their 2018 approved budget. the projects were grouped into categories by funding sources of water, power, or joint water and power. note that even though there are several cost variants

within the categories, these forecasted project costs are in alignment with the fiscal year '21 to '30, 10-year c.i.p. approved budgets. for some project highlights, for the drainage improvements, we advertised and received bids for this in the second quarter. but they were twice the engineer's estimate. during the third quarter, the project team reduced the scope to stay within the existing budgets and prioritize critical safety improvements and repairs such as fall protection on this steep stairway. the contract was readvertised in march and bids were open in april. the low bid was below the engineer's estimate. the contract was awarded in may and the notice to proceed is anticipated this month or next month. next slide. >> can you do me one favor? can you just go back two more slides? i want to see that overall

thing. just very quickly again. if you could, thank you. >> absolutely. so, this shows in the left column, expenditures to date. >> i get it. i just wanted to suck it in for a second here. >> ok. you can see overall we're $33 million above the 2018 approved budget. but, again, this is right on track with 2021 approved budget. just that we're still tracking back to the original budgets 20618. >> ok. i got it. i just wanted to grab some numbers. ok. thank you. >> ok. we're making some significant progress with mountain tunnel. the contractor mobilized the large crane from always -- austria that you see in this picture and began excavation of the new tunnel portal.

the access added and flow control facility at the priest reservoir sites. in addition to a lot of work around the presite, safety improvements to the access roadways continue in construction. this is pretty exciting up there. if you get a chance to go see it, i would love to take you up there. next slide. >> quick question on that one, too. i'm not going to -- just a quick question on that.

why the crane comes from austria versus here versus, you know, what's the specs on that? where you had to get that beast from across the ocean. >> i can follow-up. i don't know the toons that. i was surprised to learn that myself. but i think it is the micro tunneling. the equipment that they use and it is an exceptionally large crane that can lift a very large amount from a very small base. but i can get more information on that and get it back to you. >> we do a lot of that here, as you probably know. this is the town that was known as having more cranes than anybody else in the entire country. >> good point. yes. >> just while i'm raising that, i'd like to get out a quicky update on why the liebherr. >> i will. next slide? for the moccasin [inaudible],

the results from the internal inspections completed in the thing thater of this year were analyzed and were done in a evaluation report. while there is need for some repairs and replacement, overall the penstocks were found to be in relatively good condition. a nice surprise when you get those kind of reviews. next slide. for the moccasin powerhouse and generator step-up unit rehabilitation project, as you recall, there are three subprojects. for the first subpromise to install the generator step-up unit, the insulation contract was awarded to big valley electric in april t.s toys proceed was on june 7 and delivery of the first g.s.u. unit is anticipated in october. for the second subpromise, rewinding the generators, which i'm sure you remember, negotiations preceded with the two qualified contractors and, in play, you all approved awarding the contract to general electric l.l.c.s, pending approval by the board of supervisors for changes to the indemnification language in the contract. the board of supervise source approved these changes to the language that had been negotiationed under review by the city attorney office and the city's risk manager t.

notice to proceed for design was issued on june 21 and that project is in design now. really great moving forward. for the third subproject to upgrade the remaining equipment in the facility, the planning workshops were conducted during the quarter. next sloid. s the san joaquin valve and safe entry project will comprehensively replace valves along the four san joaquin pipelines to improve safe access inside the pipelines for maintenance. for this promise, the construction was resequenced by a location to align with mountain tunnel shutdowns resulting in four future construction contracts. and now these are on track to get out for construction. the phase 1a contract reached 65% design and that will go out to bid and will be advertised this winter.

so, 1b project design commenced and the planning continued for phases two and three. next slide. this is the first contract of the san joaquin valve replacement. construction of valve replacement will take place this winter during the first mountain tunnel shutdown in order to expedite this promise, we're purchasing the large valve in house and using a j.o.c. contract to install the valve. the 66-inch valve that was purchased in march is currently being manufactured and the j.o.c. contract was awarded during the quarter. we're on track to install the valve this winter. next slide? and this project, the four bridge replacement will replace and improve four bridges. out of the 14 bridges that hetch hetchy water and power is responsible to maintain. the current 10-year budget includes funding for the two most critical bridges. owe shaughnessy access bridge

near the dam and the lake eleanor dam bridge, and that is what's shown in this slide. in this quarter, the planning phase work continued for the o'shaughnessy dam bridge and started for lake eleanor dam bridge and m.o.u. for work with department of public works was approved for the planning and design work for the lake eleanor bridge, kicking off that project. and this -- oh. sorry. the substation rehabilitation, last project. this project as you recall was the design-build contract in 2019 was terminated due to a lot of problems with the contract. and so this project is back on track for a design bid build contract. and we are still waiting for the consultant contract for the design phase. i believe that's going to

come to you for approval in the next few commission meetings. in the meantime, because this is a very high-risk facility for failure, we complete add contingency plan and that is a 65% design. and what this will do is if there is an internruption service or a failure, this contingency plan allow us to quickly, under emergency, will replace the breakers with backup breakers. in the meantime, we have establish add phase two project and we're refining the scope and, again, procuring the consultant contract for that and then once we have that contract, we'll fast track that for design and get that one out to construction. and i believe next -- yeah. that s a it. so, that concludes my presentation for this quarter. i'm very happy to share that we're having good progress with the hetchy projects and

i'll be happy to take any of your questions. >> i have one and that is on the o'shaughnessy dam. is that the dam that we all go across when we're going the other side when we're up there? where is that dam exactly? >> that is it. that's thement da. yes. and -- >> and that is the bridge. that's the bridge. is that the bridge you're talking-i didn't mean the dam, i meant the bridge. >> yes. the bridge is to access the [inaudible]. so it's not provide across the main dam. it's a smaller bridge on the way to the dam. >> oh, i see. >> yes. and -- but the safety improvements' work is at the dam. and the added bridge is critical for the future construction projects up at o'shaughnessy dam so they can support the weight of the construction vehicles. so, it is an important project.

>> and the eleanor bridge is -- i mean, what's being done to that one exactly? >> we don't know yet. there was a condition assessment report that was done, oh, five years ago. and it recommended improvements. but now there's going to be full, due to technical, structural evaluation to determine, as you know that structure is 50, 80 years old probably. you saw it's beautiful. beautiful architecture. so, you know, it's part of the dam -- we also have an eleanor dam promise in the upcoming budget and those will be looked at together because, you know, we could just repair the bridge, but we'll be looking at the dam as well. it could be those two projects will come together in the future. >> ok. thank you. >> very early. >> yeah. but i'm glad we're taking care of it. >> me, too. yeah. ongoing.

commissioner ajami. >> thank you. that was a -- i really appreciated that presentation. i have a question for you. first of all, i noticed that increase in budget was mostly on the power side. is that -- was that the correct -- sorry, you had the slide and then you brought it back and -- >> yeah. >> and i was taking notes. is that related to some of the issues you're having at pg&e or just because the cost of work has gone up? and maybe as a follow-up to that, do you anticipate, just out of curiosity, what do you anticipate the increase to be at the end when you're done with spending money and does that mean that we have to forego some of those projects that we had in the list to meet the budget? or are we sort of looking into

bringing in more resources to the table? >> i'll answers that the best i can. what's really misleading about that slide is that the budgets are compared against the 2018 budget. but since 2018, we updated the capital improvement plan. and in the capital improvement plan, we added more power projects and so the entire budgets for the power program is higher than the 2018 approved budget. if that makes sense. so -- and in addition, some of the projects did increase in cost but there is funding there to do those. between 2018 and 2020, some of the projects did go up in cost. but funding was added in the c.i.p. to accommodate that. why did project costs go up? i believe at this point, it

was just the very early planning phase when you don't know what it will take to complete a promise. [please stand by] [please stand by]

>> power revenue side is not my job to answer. the needs will continue to go up. there will continue to be more facilities that need attention. >> is there a particular reason we continue using the 2018 as a base budget? yes, you will hear more about this in the future. we have been having internal discussions about how we report to you. we are really taking to heart your concern about tracing back to the original budget, but also trying to balance with the fact that we need to use what is the most recent approved budget by the commission. you are going to hear more from us in the next few meetings about improvements back to the

original budget with the two year cip approved budget. we decided to not rebaseline this program. we didn't come to you with rebaseline like others. we decided to wait, analyze this, come to the commission to address both needs of seeing the historical values and also baselining to the recently approved budget. you are hearing a lot more about that in the weeks and months ahead. >> good. >> thank you. any further comments or questions? seeing none. why don't we up this up to public comment. >> members who wish to make two minutes of public comment on 6b dial 415-655-0001.

id 1462870622.-pound. to speak press star 3. do we have any callers? there are no callers wishing to comment at this time. >> thank you. public comment on 6b is closed. >> great. my next item is quarterly budget status report. i will ask laura, budget director to present. >> hello, commissioners. i am budget director in the fourth quarter of fy 2021 budget variance report here. overall negative operating ways

water and clean power s.f. being driven by the ongoing pandemic causing delay. this is leading to reduced revenues in water and wastewater. we retold the fy 2021 budget based on economic recovery. due to slow opening of the economy due to covid-19 the actual reports fell short of our economic assumptions. clean power s.f. rate decrease and change in rate decrease to commercial customers. one-time savings carried forward. revenues are also down. across the agency lower interest rates. however, water that refinancing in the fall of 2020 produced

savings for that enterprise. december 2020 salary increases into effect which had not been budgeted. they were delayed six months due to the m.o.u. and economic impact of covid. those impacted salaries we were able to use savings to fund these and didn't increase the budget for these. while these revenues and results are concerning, our financial concerns are projected to meet targets for coverage and research. we were able to cover the shortfalls through reserves. finance team is closely monitoring water sales for the current year to determine impact of continued economic weakness and will provide update to the commission in november. according to the fy22-23 and

23-24 biannual budget cycle we recognize fiscal constraint is likely to be a major theme given uncertainty of economic recovery, potential for continued drought and refinement of clean power s.f. rates in framework. we will be at the next meeting to provide introduction to the upcoming budget process for you. just as we saw at q1, 2, 3 we see significant one-time benefit from the closeout of capital projects that we do to replenish fund balance. this is fy19-20 rebalancing when covid first hit. the de appropriation did not take place until begins of fy20-21 so that is when we see the results.

these savings offset the operating deficit for 20-21. it is important to remember they are one-time savings. diving into each of the enterprises in more detail. the overall net operating results negative $.4 million. we do have the project closeout from the 1920 rebound of $9 million. these results are being driven by sources of $11.1 million. this is driven by weakness in retail revenues offset by stronger revenues. $10.8 million in cost savings offsetting shortfall in revenues largely driven by debt service from refinancing as well as savings in nonpersonnel cost and

savings in salaries and benefits. in wastewater, the net operating result is negative $16.3 million. in addition project closeouts from the 19-20 rebalancing $10.8 million. on the sources side driven by lower than expected volumes due to the impact of covid-19 pandemic on the economy. we have been able to offset that negative revenue number with cost savings. largely driven by salary and benefit savings as well as savings in nonlabor costs as detailed in the slide.

in water and power met result is positive $11 million. unfortunately revenues are down. it is a bit misleading. this is driven by good news on the uses side. these are one-time savings due to carry forward. project closeout to support 19-20 rebudget balances 27.3 ms. reduced pro-domestic projects by $.9 million for the support rebalancing effort and general reserve $1.5 million. overall net impact of fund balance 2021 is positive $40.7 million. on the operating result positive $11 million. total sources down $2.9 million

largely driven by lower generation. on the uses side we have total of $13.9 million in cost savings largely driven by closeout prior year unspent funds. $9.6 million. in addition we have general reserve $15.5 million. net impact on fund balance positive $6 million. sources side. total down by $17.7 million. due to several factors including january rate reduction, rate structure changes, slower economic recovery and customer

assistance. user side $8.1 million savings. this is largely driven by salary and benefit savings. and savings from power purchase. last slide. summarizes key financial ratios. operating results all ratios on target to meet sfpc policies. >> one question. you said. this is commissioner paulson on the previous slide you referenced the salary and benefit savings. i missed that. what did that mean? >> in clean power s.f., we saw $3.3 million in salary and benefit savings throughout the

year due to vacant positions. >> vacant positions. thank you. mostly vacant positions? >> yes. difficulty hiring, yes. >> question on that one, also. are you saying last year we spent $3 million on salaries this year $7 million and half won't be spent. was that intentional? you are not hiring people or it is happening because it is hard to hire people? that means we didn't have half the staff we expected to have? that seems odd. >> no, i don't think it was intentional. it is incredibly difficult at this point last year we did think carefully how much to budget for salaries and budget and clean power and no hiring

plan that showed a plan to spend that money. it is difficult to hire and turnover for various reasons. >> does that affect something we don't have half the staff we expected to have? we cut the positions and never filled them? >> i would love to answer, eric. i mean commissioner harrington. it is a challenging year to hire. we definitely need to fill positions in power in the clean power s.f. program, the he t.c.h. y program. there are few candidates applying in the trades. i will say with covid

challenges, retention is an issue. we lost key staff to the city's policies around remote work and workout of state. these are just tough transitional times, but we are definitely moving to fill positions. we have our utility analyst positions out on the street now. trying to fill 15 vacancies. we know we will not be able to fill 15 vacancies. we don't have 15 applicants. we had to extend the filing period for applicants to get their applications in the hopes that we can get more applications coming in. it is a difficult time largely because of covid. people are kind of staying put. you know, the city's hiring process is nonconducive to getting people on board. it takes a very long time from

requesting a position to having that position be filled. that is not -- some is not within the p.u.c.'s control. when you recruit, it is frustrating. you recruit people and say please apply. three months later they say whatever happened? we are still trying. don't give up on us. it is challenging. those issues are not unique to the numbers you are asking about specifics for clean power s.f. these are challenges across the agency. >> the reason it is here half of the money to be spent. it is a bigger chung of it missing. >> some transition of temporary to permanent which allowed that bump in available positions, commissioner, that you are referring to. we have the happy circumstance

to say that we are going to convert temporary to permanent positions. we didn't get to fill some of those. >> happy to hear the conversation how we can do things differently. it is under the jurisdiction to make it work. thank you. >> follow-up question. thank you for the clarification. i was wondering did we have issues hiring before covid and covid basically exacerbated the situation? we didn't have any problem before and covid is the issue? i am wondering is there like a set of recommendations that we can have a smarterter conversation on hiring? another conversation i would like to have the whole utility business is having a hard time

attracting good talent from top universities. it is not as attractive. people don't see it as the career path that past generations did. what are we doing to make it more attractive. i was in a meeting this morning related we were talking with a group of people representing the utilities on issues. they were talking how to get all of this top talent from top universities wanting to work there because of how they have reenvisioned how they do business. maybe we should have that conversation. >> yes. i see our general manager on screen. i will be quiet. >> thank you. we can have that conversation. covid did slowdown the hiring process and created a number of different issues for us because

of the testing that was suspended during it. i also say that we are having a hard time recruiting people into the utility business as well because we are trying to reimagine our jobs. it is a more mobile work force. if somebody has relocated can work for google or facebook or something like that we lose that engineering talent. we are also, you know, home growing our own trade people to the future. that is something i have been talking to the unions about to partner doing that. there are a number of things per couldlating to address this issue. the biggest problem we need civil service reform. that is needed in san francisco. it is too hard to hire somebody in a timely manner. it takes six to eight months if

you can get somebody on board. we would be glad to have a conversation about the ideas we were pursuing how to pursue through the city process. >> i think that is extremely important. we are one of the most unique parts of the country. we have stanford and some of the best and highest institutions of learning in the country and in the world. there ought to be some way to tap into that and we have young people coming in high schools. we start them with internships. there are ways to do this. i know we have always talked about this. it is not that we haven't thought about it. we need a way to do it. commissioner paulson, did you have something to add? >> no, thank you, chair. i was going to say that there is a lot of loaded words on this teen the need to get somebody in

and then what the political climate is in san francisco. there are times when it is like, my god, michael carlin found the exact person. he is the only person that can do this thing out of this dam or whatever else. now it takes eight months from beginning to end to get that person done. there is an eight month lapse. there is a hiring and firing thing. this idea every time somebody gets a job, a contract, there is like some time there is arbitrary assumption of corruption that you are bucking the system or something. we also deal with good government issues in the mix of this, too. this is not just we have to ramp something else. we have to do it in a way to

respect good government culture and history and all of the other stuff that has to happen. i just want to put that marker down. none of this is unfortunately a quick fix. even though everything we are talking about is quick fix. thank you, commissioner. >> thank you. i would also like to hear maybe at some point how the new trillion dollar infrastructure from washington is going to impact and help or not help with some of the things we are doing. if any of that money can be used to deal with some of the issues that we are facing. thank you. any further comments or questions? >> we will open for public comment. >> members of the public who

wish to comment on item 6c the quarterly budget status report. call 415-655-0001. (146)287-0622. to speak press star three. >> madam secretary, there are no callers in the queue at this time. >> public comment on item 6c is closed. >> next item is wastewater enterprise quarterly report. i will call on steven robinson, program director to make a presentation. >> thank you. this is the quarterly report for the programs april through june of this year. i will share current updates for

the three southeast area major projects. a few construction updates across the city. on the left the ocean beach climate change adaptation project part of the master plan containing three phases including work happening now. you may have seen media on this over the weekends. army corps of engineers working on the beach nourishment phase. we are building a sand berm using 225,000 cubic yards of dredging material that will protect critical infrastructure and expand the beach. ribbon-cutting event last thursday september 9th. the image you can see the the bulldozers spreading material on the ocean beach itself. middle image is the force main

rehabilitation at embarcadero and jackson street. theyen falled additional sections in collaboration with m.t.a. and public works we implemented a bicycle detour for a alternative route along the embarcadero. third on the right is oceanside plan digesture gas utilization project. the work is ongoing. this quarter the contractor focused on erection of the new holder assembly which is in the image on the right. it is a tank 59 feet tall to hold the unused excess digesture gas. these are showing the data for the 70 projects in phase 1 now representing $3.655 billion. last quarter we closed at 44.7%

complete. this quarter 5.7. -- 45.7. shown in blue text on the right piechart, the blue area shows 8 projects in pre-construction. last quarter 11. green area is 18 projects in construction. 17 last quarter. gray area to the left is 44 projects. two more of those this quarter compared to last. this table is 3.1 and 3.2 from the quarterly reported showing the costs. on the left broken down to phase 1 we looked at. priority projects we found from phase 2 and 3. these were initiated in 2018 and then in 2020. summarize expenditures to date,

forecast cost and variance between budget

. >> okay. well, maybe we could get -- i would like a little bit more. why i should feel that comfortable that the animals will not smell the gas. >> we can follow up with that. thank you.

>> any other further questions or comments on this item? seeing none, public comment. >> members of the comment who wish to comment on item 6d. call 415-655-0001. (146)287-0622-pound pound. press star 3 to speak. do we have any callers? >> madam secretary, no caller in the queue at this time. >> public comment on item 6d is closed. i just want to thank you, steve, on that report. it was well-done. thank you so much. >> that concludes my report for this meeting.

>> any further comments? next item, please. >> 7. new commission business. >> any new business, colleagues? >> next item, please. >> 8 consent calendar. all matters listed will consent the consent calendar are routine by the san francisco public utilities commission to abilitied upon by a single vote. no separate discussion until it is requested in which event it will be considered as a separate item and removed from the calendar. >> colleagues, any items to be removed or discussed? seeing none, public comment, please. >> members of the public who

wish to make two minutes of public comment on the consent calendar dial 415-655-0001. id1462870622-pound pound. press star three to speak. >> there is one caller wishing to give comment. your line is open. >> david pill plow. item 8a on the resolution page 1. second to the last whereas clause, there is an extra backslash at the end there you might want to remove that in adopting the resolution.

thanks. >> thank you for your comment. there are no more callers in the queue. >> public comment on item 8 is closed. any comments, questions? seeing none. may i have a motion and second to approve consent calendar? >> moved and seconded. roll call, please. >> president maxwell. >> aye. >> vice president moran. >> aye. >> commissioner paulson. >> aye. >> commissioner harrington. >> aye. >> commissioner ajami. >> aye. >> five ayes. next item.

>> item 9. approve the addition of scope and increase of $19,983,100 to the existing contract for db126 authorize the general manager to approve future modifications not to exceed 47550600 there with no change to the contract duration $47,550,600. >> good afternoon, commission president maxwell and commissioners. i am maria crystal cruise. project manager for the distributed control system upgrades project. for a quick overview and background, the control system otherwise know as dcs is

integrated platform for automated control supervision and operation of plant and various processes. these dcs upgrades that we are implementing under the sewer system improvement program is t replace wastewater enterprises existing dcs which was installed. this installation will support replacement and adddition of new processes that are being brought on by other projects such as the new head works and biosolvents projects at the southeast plant. this project is currently delivered as progressive design-build delivery with emerson process management. it is a system-wide type of work which is dependent on the overall programs execution. the contract's initial work was

primarily centered at the southeast plant booster pump station. the plan is to progressively add in or phase-in dcs services at our wastewater facilities such at north planes, oceanside and all of the other pump stations in our wastewater system. as per our previous approved modification in 2019, we were able to add and start dcs work at the north point facilities. to date my project team has completed manning activities in southeast through booster and north point facilities. with us closely working with wastewater staff we updated the wastewater dcs standards and converted the pump station into the new dcs. my team and i are currently in

design and coordinating with other ongoing projects on site. for this item that we have here before us today, my team and i are requesting the approval to increase the db-126, dcs contract cost contingency by $19.98 million to enable us to add dcs services at oceanside treatment plant and other pump stations into the contract scope of work. with this i would be happy to answer any questions. thank you. >> commissioner harrington. >> thank you very much. i have concerned when contracts start at $20 million and now $47 million. when we went out to bid on this, did we announce this was the first phase, that we were going to have an ultimate contract of

50 to $60 million. people bid on $20 million and maybe others would have been attracted if it was a bigger contract. could you talk about that? >> at the r.f.p. project the document itself, there was language other verbiage that said that for this first phase of work of dcs, it would be primarily centered at these facilities which are southeast plant, booster and included channel. then there is the statement that as additional work in the future once we secure budget we will be expanding the dcs scope to all of the other facilities such as north point and oceanside and the rest of the pump stations in the sewer system. >> that is great. what do you think that total is going to end up being? >> when we first began in 2015,

our initial estimate was $50 million. the current budget itself that we have approved right now is at $63 million. i believe we have some budget also allocated in the future to expand this project system-wide. >> thanks very much. >> commissioner ajami. >> i appreciate the question. i had a similar question. i was wondering if as you were expanding the project do we already have understanding of how much it would cost so we know at least the expanding

under the same contract is getting us the best deal or is this something that you are sort of booked into and we are i can understand because of efficiency it might be interesting to continue on. making sure cost wise it is the same. another follow up that they have based on the comment you just made was the $60 million that you mentioned was not for the system-wide? or it was for the system-wide? >> it is for stage one dcs. delivering from planning all the way to installation and commissioning at the southeast plant location. >> system-wide what is your expected cost of something like

this? >> right now just the contract itself referencing back to our estimates in 2015. $50 million. i believe i might have to bring in my director steve robinson. we do have aloe indicated budget -- allocated budget in phase two, three, four in north point and oceanside area. >> i can add on a little bit. overall in the entire cip $120 million for total project budget to interface with all aspects of the wastewater system. not something we want different projects because it all integrates together. it was the plan because of the progressive design and build nature of the contract we were able to control and release the work as we progress from one facility to the next.

i hope that helps answer the question. >> thank you so much. >> did that answer the first question that you had, commissioner ajami? >> i can answer the first question. >> when we first went out to advertise and bid this contract it was through a competitive process so the cost structure or framework within the contract was for the bidders to put in a base price up to the unit per unit of deliverables so then we basically take that fixed base price and from there negotiate the base price to negotiate when ever we have to add the scope

in. >> basically we had a competitive process to put in there as part of this bidding? >> commissioner harrington. >> final point. i think it is helpful that we can say that in our summary so that people know this was not a coast over run or -- cost overrun or surprise. this was planned. make sure people read this that it was planned to go higher so there are no surprises. they did a $20 million contract. make it look like we know what we are doing in the write up. >> valuable for new commissioners to come in to have the context. you don't have the context what is going on it is very difficult to add those numbers and not be

surprised. >> i think it took awhile for us to get to $120 million overall. that was the question in the beginning. it took awhile to get to that. as commissioner ajami and commissioner harrington said it is best to put it all out in the beginning. thank you for all of your work. further questions or comments? thank you. then why don't we open this up for public comment. >> members who wish to comment two minutes on item 9. dial 415-655-0001. id146-287-0622-pound pound. press star 3 to speak.

any callers? >> there are two callers in the queue. your line is open. you have two minutes. >> good afternoon. my comments regarding this item is not on the technical part but more on the process. one of the commissioners mentioned put it out in the open from the beginning. that is never the case of the p.u.c. this particular contract is a contract that someone really needs to look into it. start with $20 million. $47 million. $51 million. god knows where for the next 15 years. what is interesting. the report in front of you is admitting a fact undisputable. rdt is one of the subs on the original proposals.

i am looking at copy of the proposal in 2016. they have four individuals listed. jones, colway, smith, robinson. four individuals milking the p.u.c. how many subs on the team? two, three? i see two. one of them copted out. i am not buying the conflict of interest between what they do at p.u.c. with this project. that is one. another major flaw. montez, one of the subs committed steven mottler as quality control manager. that is such unfactual. i will tell you why. steven has never worked for montez. he worked for qei. now unless montez is owned by

qei which is very possible, both are dbes and sharing employees between the two companies that is violation of federal guidelines, a crime for violating 49cfr146. this is what you get when you allow cmd to play the games. the contracts. now you have got the fraud and -- >> thank you for your comments. your time is expired. next caller, your line is open. you have two minutes. >> can you hear me okay? >> loud and clear. >> david pill plow. item 9 the staff report is vague about scope changes for this fairly sizable increase in cost on the project. i appreciate comments and discussion. it was not obvious to me that

this was intended to be a larger thing that ended up being smaller with add ons later. in the future if there is something like this, i think the staff report should reflect that in the discussion. i also was not clear reading the staff report if the board of supervisors approval is required for this more substantial change under charter section 9.118. i guess i also wasn't clear if the resolution as written contemplates delegating authority to the general manager to negotiate future changes without returning to the commission up to the new proposed $47 million budget. those are my comments on item 9. thanks. >> thank you for your comments. there are no more callers in the queue.

>> item 9 is closed. thank you. colleagues any further questions or comments on this item? seeing none may i have a motion and second to approve? >> i will move it. >> second. moved and seconded. roll call vote, please. >> president maxwell. >> aye. >> vice president moran. >> aye. >> commissioner paul zone. >> son aye. >> commissioner ajami. >> aye. >> five ayes. >> next item, please. >> item 10. authorize the general manager to execute a second amendment to the planning coordinator agreement between the city and county of san francisco public utilities commission and california independent system operator corporation. this extends from november 11,

20211 to november 10, 2031 for a total duration of 16 years not to exceed $500,000 subject to board of supervisors approval under charter section 9.118. mr. ritchie. >> this is extending the agreement with the independent system operator kaiso to provide planning coordinator services under federal regulations. the water and power is registered as generation owner, transmission owner, operator and planner. we are required to have a planning coordinator for the bulk electric system. somebody who is looking at what all other utilities are planning in terms of work. this is a required thing we need to have. the caiso is the authorized

services in the balancing authority area. that is why we are recommending a second amendment to make this long-term contract with the caiso. i am happy to answer any questions. >> questions? comments? seeing none public comment on in item, please. >> members of the public who wish to comment on item 10. dial 415-655-0001. meeting id146-28703622-pound. press star 3 to speak. do we have any callers? >> there are no callers wishing to be recognized at this time.

public comment is closed. >> motion and second to approve this item, please. >> i will move. >> second. >> moved seconded. roll call vote. president max women. >> aye. >> vice president more ran. >> aye. >> commissioner paulson. >> aye. >> commissioner harrington. >> aye. >> commissioner ajami. >> aye. >> five ayes. >> thank you. next item, please. >> 11. approve the program rules for and authorize the general manager to implement the rain barrel and rain cistern rebate program. >> this is steve ritchie. this is the first of three items for your approval. in this case it is verying us

start to implement the rain barrel and rain sister rebate program within the tuc. it used to be administered by the urban farmers store when they were the only source of the materials. now there are more available we would like to take it in house and manage this way. our head of conservation is here to answer any questions if you have any. >> commissioner harrington. >> i love the rebate programs. glad we are bringing them in house. we are talking about over the next year maybe spending $80,000 on three programs combined. that makes me think it is not catching on, not a big deal, amount not enough or something. if we do want to go into landscaping in san francisco we

can't do 10 of these in the next year. how did we make this more meaningful? >> these programs work together in a suite. we have shared with you our 2020 conservation plan that talks about our many different measures. in the laundry to landscape gray water programs, particularly, we tend to get smaller numbers of folks participate just because of some of the site conditions they have to meet. we also provide a lot of education and informational materials along with that. we see it as a valuable program. people go through the training and do learn about how to connect their water with their irrigation. it has that benefit.

again, we look at them together as a suite of programs. we estimate conservatively how many people will participate. we do regular marketing. we are always looking at ways to get folks to apply. >> in that marketing do you know if it would be picked up twice as much if it was $200 or $500 or a thousand dollars or if the process to apply was easier or harder? have we figured out? this is one of many programs. if they are useful and important, this doesn't seem like it is getting there. >> well, if we take the rain barrel and cisterns first we have quite a bit of participation over 1500 people participate in the last four years. that is a bit seasonal. when it rains people are more

interested even though we market all of the time. i don't necessarily think that is low participation rates. for the laundry to landscape, again, it is a little bit more involved just in terms of people have to put in a valve with the washing machine, make adjustments with their gardens and we have looked at different mechanisms through the discount program we had on site technical assistance. we looked at different ways to provide more holistic services. realistically to laundry to landscape gray water program it is not high participation. we see value in it. we get data and information. people get training, and we just have to look at it combined with other programs that are higher

participation. the rain barrels are popular. >> they don't make any sense in san francisco. if people want them thanks is great. somewhere where it rains all year. specifically have we looked to see if we made the amount of money better or more would it may being a difference? have we tried to figure that out? >> we have looked at that providing -- right now if you look at the rain barrel and cisterns. the amount of incentive is substantial percentage of the cost. the rain barrel averages between 80 to $150. with our rebate at $100 a.that is a fairly substantial amount. cisterns range from $500 be to $1,000.

most people purchase the $500 level. i don't think it is an amount of incentive price. i do think there is just the fact that a lot of times people have a lot of interest. when it comes to seeing it through and buying the thing and putting it in and applying for a rebate, participation or interest will fall off. if we were looking to -- we have explored that we continue to look at ways to maybe improve the ease and reduce the barriers. >> my request is could your communications group do a surveyor outreach to prove that? what would make a difference in terms of up take? cistern or rain barrel. the laundry to landscape and hot watery circulation. if we offered enough money might

get more attraction. could you check in an official way without reach or questions to the community to see what might make a difference in terms of uptick would be helpful. >> we can look into that. the hot water pump program is new. we are estimating conservatively what might be participation. we will definitely do marketing and outreach. i would add we have explored other approaches like direct solve approaches where we hire a contractor and they completely put the device or fixture in. it is fully paid for. there are pros and cons of that approach, too. with the rebate approach it is the least amount of money from our agency, the greatest ability for us to ensure something gets

put in. there is more effort on the part of the participant. >> we definitely can do some surveying and outreach and get back to you with a sense. >> thank you. commissioner ajami. >> just, julie, thank you for answering all of those questions. i had the same questions. my general question was on the last two items with hot watery circulating and also the gray water piece. how much is the cost of doing that? i don't think you touched on it but the second question i have

for you. do we do advertisement or outreach when people are remodeling or doing major remodeling they have to get a permit from sfpuc, hey, since you are doing this there are a few other things to consider as part of your project. just because some of these projects are easier to be done than your, you know, in the midst of other activities and harder to kind of do without thinking about the process. those are my questions. >> in terms of the cost for hot water pumps, the actual pump and associated parts range between about $100 to $500. again, rebate is set at $100. this is the first year we have

done this program. when we see the cost of what people pay we may adjust that. that doesn't include if they decide not to put it in themselves and they hire a plumber. there could be installation costs. it doesn't require a plumber to do it necessarily. the laundry to landscape cost that rebate covers three essential components of the laundry to landscape system. three way divertter valve that allows somebody to run the rinse water to the garden instead of the sewer. piping and component retails $175. it could be higher or lower. one hundred dollars rebate is relatively substantial portion. laundry to landscape if somebody

chooses to hire an installer that could be more expensive. your point about doing outreach and add vertising to people remodeling. that is a great point. we don't specifically i am not aware of having targeted just those looking to remodel. it is hard to identify them. we do outreach to a number of different ways and try to be as broad brush as we can, for sure we can look into whether there is some additional means to hone in on folks who are specifically looking to make landscape upgrades or home improvements. >> just to let you know, you probably know this. people want to do remodeling, pair permit process needs to be reviewed by sfpuc.

i notice because we just went through the process. maybe that is a point that we can catch this. another idea is to reach out to landscapers who work in the homes and maybe this can be something they can offer as part of the process. i wouldn't underestimate installation costs. these are complicated. people are not that -- this is not. maybe six years ago people could fix cars and do a lot of things. these days we know how to turn on and off things. we don't know how to open the hood of the car any more. it is very difficult for people to become this huge thing they don't want to deal with. i think some of those are quite valuable and can be of value.

i think one thing i would say we talked about this for the toilets and some of the laundry. it would be good to create maps and follow-through and see where we are doing what. to track who is doing what. the numbers are not significant. eventually good to know which neighborhoods are getting traction. this can be another complimentary information we can gather and potentially connect to water use that they have to see if it is really impacting water use or just, you know, more feel good measure. it would be good to reny how we

get our data on this as well. >> those are great points. we do have the location information for all of the participants to date. we do look at that and try to do some analysis of how the changes in water use. as you know that can be a little challenging given that if other things are going in the household increase occupancy it may mask the savings achieved from the laundry to landscape system, particularly based on the landscape served by these systems in san francisco. we see benefit. those who do participate are very passionate about it. as i said, many will take the first step and participate in our training and informational

materials which have value beyond even if they don't go forward to install the laundry to landscape system. >> commissioner paulson. >> thank you. i didn't know we were going to talk about this this long. thanks for asking the question. i will be first one to volunteer, julie, for the outreach that you are going to be busy with. the reason i say that is because a couple weeks ago with the screwed up garage i have and this is for residential point of view in san francisco. i have been telling myself let me go get me a cistern. i was in italy one-time on an island that is where the water came from. it came down there. i was fascinated by it. i went into the place. this is what i will say. i went into the store in san francisco. they didn't have other than

small ones in line. i wanted a bigger one assuming it rains have all stuff come off the roof of my garage where the screwed up drainage system i can reconvert and put into something with hundreds of gallons in it. that is what i have been wanting to do. they gave me a piece of paper sfpuc on there. i don't think we were commissioners at the time. call this number and get $100 or $300 depending on what size you wanted. i wasn't inspired by the money. if i bought one of those suckers for $200 they would give me back $100 back or $300. i don't know if that is an incentive. you nailed it on the head. i don't know. i am doing my one person poll for any answer. it is like somebody is motivated

to take their water out of the drier or the water off their roof at least from a residential point of view to grab that kind of stuff. anyway. that was my feeling. i found out that there is not a lot of them floating around san francisco. you have to maybe go to a warehouse or from out of town the get them back here. if you want to hook it up, you can do that stuff. that being said i think it is just a motivator item whether or not it is money or something else. are we going to add one more layer of conservation to deal with so we are not out watering tomatoes from the hose but from the water we saved out of the bathtub or shower or roof of our

garage. that was just my one person kind of personal anecdote. thanks for indulging me. we are having too much fun right now. >> commissioner moran. >> one specific and one general. the general thing as we think about these issues and they sound like a good idea. anybody who tried to do this for a living would dumarket research and test marketing to see how much it is going to go. part of what i hear from the comments is that the impulse is good, technology is attractive, but we also auto treat it as something we need to market and analyze. the market to pursue there are people with economic interest in

cutting hot water use and hair salons is certainly one. to the degree that we can approach, identify and approach industries and groups that might help us expand the market as well. thank you. >> any further comment? you know i agree with everything everyone has said. i looked at the water, hot watery cycling. i have the tall victorian. when the hot water comes up maybe i don't need a shower. i am thinking that it is more than just you have to decide whether the hot water heatters in the garage or put under every sink? you need somebody to tell you that. these programs get you thinking about it. when you look into it, it is

another thing. and i also would like to know how much water could you save? if we did it and a certain kind of household, what is the savings? those things are important with the gray water, water to landscape. how much can you save? what happens with the soap? is there a special soap? does it hurt anything? these are things and questions that need answered. the programs are very intriguing. i was thinking to myself if i go to one training do i have to go to training for each and every one of them. if i go to one and get two of these can one suffice? those are questions i have that i would like to know more about. the money is such that it is not that significant but the

programs if indeed you think they are worth something could be advantageous to us. julie. >> i am happy to quickly address those questions and any that remain and follow up with. in terms of water savings. for the hot water pump program we are just launching that. that is something we want to look at. there have been a few national studies that estimate the potential for about 10 gals of household savings per day. we want to see if we can see that same trend and if it holds true locally. we do model water safes for rain -- savings for rainberrels and sisters.

since 2015 it is over 1500 products installed that is an estimated total savings of about 30-acre feet or 9.7 million gallons of lifetime savings of barrels and cisterns. it is not insignificant. with laundry to landscape we looked at water use at the home level. that is a little trickier. given the small areas that are irrigated by the gray water and other changes that could have occurred with household use. we can't always identify but for those who did achieve savings we saw on average about 157 gallons per month. that is a very average.

it varies from household to household. that is of great interest to us. we don't require training for all of these. we have originally did set up laundry to landscape program that did require people to comee to a workshop. we found over time we can make that easier by providing online training and resources to review on their own time. that is the direction we are moving in now. we have a great manual on use of gray water and rainwater. that is what we get out when people express interest in the rebate programs. these are terrific resources with information we are sharing for free as well as part of the program. i don't know if that gets most of your questions.

>> commissioner ajami, that was helpful. thank you. >> i have another question. totally irrelevant to these. sorry to drag this on. have you looked into showers to toilet programs? is that something that we need at state level ordinance or allow or can we do it local ordinance? i am curious because that is a much, much more significant amount of water to reviews. water to to reduce.is that somed in discussions? >> you are talking about indoor gray water use. >> i understand we have the watery use system for large buildings. i am talking about everybody

else. >> we haven't had an incentive program at the single family residential level because of the complexities there with treatment involved. i know that our routine has looked at it. they are looking at opportunities, large scale but in the course of that they have also considered it on the smaller scale. as part of the conservation team we haven't specifically looked to launch that because, again, it can be challenging enough to get folks to do the laundry to landscape which is the simplest gray water system doesn't require a permit. >> the shower to toilet system is called a bucket. a lot of people actually do that. >> it is called a bucket. >> we give away buckets for

free. [laughter] >> thank you. that was very good. all right. thank you. >> well, i want to add one time note. over the course of years of running the rain barrel and sister and laundry to landscape we looked where you completely pay for everything and do it for the customer or rebait. the reason we are doing in this direction and maybe it caught the eye of the commissioners how little it costs. it is cost-effective as a rebate program and it's can be a lot more expensive when you pay for everything. the other thing we have seen the downside is to pay for everything is that the p.u.c. is

then associated with that forever. if it doesn't work the customer follows up with us. we want people to come forward to do these efforts because they want to not because it was just so free that they figured without thinking through it i might as well do that. it is a balance. right now we want to run these as rebates to see how that works. definitely follow your thoughts on the good discussions about the outreach and making sure we do as much as we can as well as regularly thinking about barriers we might be able to simplify. >> why don't we open up to public comment. >> members of the public who

wish to comment on item 11. dial 415-655-0001. id146-287-0622-pound pound. press star 3 to speak. do we have any callers? >> there is one caller in the queue. >> you have two minutes, caller. >> david pill plow. on this i appreciate julie and paula and the rest of the conservation and planning group. good work, team. i guess today's word is bucket. let's be clear, bucket.

i would perhaps have a small information packet for customers on the various rebate programs and toilet fixture hardware and other ways to conserve when there are any inspection contacts. i don't know if we are still doing field inspections for a factor adjustment verification or turn on and turnoff or other things. i would use those limited contacts with customers as opportunity to inform people what programs exist to promote participation there. i hope trust and believe there is cord face with the excellent waste water planning staff because clearly this could have some impact not just on reducing water use but minimizing wastewater flow and green

infrastructure and conjunctive use. finally, on the resolution itself the last resolve clause has some odd formatting. maybe somebody can clean that up in the final. i was going to say on all three programs you might want to cap the total amount in the budget for all three. it sounds like you are unlikely to get participation with the 80,000 commissioner harrington referred to. with our good conversation that would be a good problem to have. that is 11. my comment applies to 12 and separate thought on 13. thanks. >> thank you for your comments. there are no more callers on the cue.

>> public comment is closed. thank you. may i have motion and second to approve item 11, please. >> move. >> second. >> moved and seconded. >> roll call. >> president maxwell. >> aye. >> vice president moran. >> aye. >> commissioner paulson. >> aye. >> commissioner harrington. >> aye. >> commissioner ajami. >> aye. >> five ayes. thank you. next will you call items 12 and 13 together, please. >> item 12. approve the program rules for and authorize the general manager to implement the laundry to landscape gray water program. 13. approve program rules and authorize general manager to

implement a new hot watery circulating pump program. commissioner. any questions? >> i think we are good. if you think of something we can go back. let's open up to public comment. >> members of the public who wish to combine four minutes of public comment on items 12 and 13 dial 415-655-0001. id146-287-0622-pound pound. press star 3 to speak. >> any callers, mr. moderator? >> there is one caller in the queue. >> hello, your line is open. you have four minutes. >> guess who.

david pill plow. i need 10 seconds in addition to comments about capping amount on this item, the program rules are formatted differently and somebody might want a more consistent approach to program rules, guidelines and checklist so all three programs have the same rules if they differ slightly. that is all. good luck. thanks. >> comments? >> there are no more callers in the queue. >> public items on 12 and 13 are closed. >> thank you. may i get a motion and second to approve items 12 and 13. >> i will move. >> second. >> it is moved seconded. roll call vote on items 12 and 13. [please stand by]

. >> the sfpuc previously used this parking lot for staging for the recycled water project under an agreement with the zoological society. that agreement terminated in february of this year, and they're now allowing use of this property for the west side pump station project, 32,000 feet of space within the overflow parking lot for a total of five years, at a cost of $25,000 a month, with a total cost of 1.2 million.

-- per car or 50 days per year. estimated lost revenue was calculated based on the direct cost of parking as well as the instrumental operating revenues from lost patronage due to the lost parking. delays in approving this project would potentially delay the project while we look at other potential solutions. >> thank you so much for your presentation. i have a question regarding the loss of operational value just

because i used to take my kids to the zoo, and sometimes the parking lot is full, and you have to park on sloat or other streets, so i'm wondering for sure if there's no for parking on this. i'm not trying to nickel and dime this, it just strikes me that we are calculating that part of the cost. >> sure. this is a very unique space station. we anticipated this question, obviously, and we pushed back and questioned it ourselves. we pushed back on the original figure that had been presented by the zoo. they actually hired a consultant, and they're called rs&f consultants,, inc. --

consultants, inc. , so a thought of thought went into the analysis they provided, and it was something we did not agree with the bottom line figure, but we did agree with the analysis that we negotiated, and we worked with the zoo. the partner agency, we'll rely on their coordination and cooperation for future projects that we have in the area, so like we said, we didn't necessarily want to nickel and dime them, but we were interested in looking at the bottom line and the interest of the rate fares. >> thank you. >> commissioner harrington. >> thanks so much, and i'm very impressed with the process that you went to come up with the price. i'm also hoping that the zoo will know that there will be a

sustainable revenue stream because who knows with covid, that they would have people coming there, and if we can help folks with that, it's wonderful. thank you. >> of course. it's convenient for them. i don't think you can argue that fact. >> good. any further questions or comments? thank you for your presentation, and it was good seeing you. why don't we open this up for public comment? >> clerk: members of the public who wish to provide public comment on item 14, call 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 146-287-0622, pound, pound. raise your hand, press star, three. mr. moderator, do we have any callers? >> operator: madam secretary, there is one caller in the queue.

hello, caller. your line is unmuted. you have two minutes to comment. >> david pillpel. last time today, i promise. so the recreation department still owns the subject property. i was a little surprised that the agreement was with the zoological society, but if that's the approach that was used before, that's the license with the r.p.d. consent form that's in there, if that does the trick, then so be it. in this case, i guess i'm slightly less concerned about the money. it could be more, it could be less. i guess it's reasonable. i agree with commissioner harrington's comments that having a predictable revenue stream for the zoo is worthwhile for everyone concerned, and at the end of the day, p.u.c. needs the land for staging for the west side pump station upgrade project, so there you go. those with my thoughts.

thank you very much. i hope i can participate on friday. thanks. >> operator: thank you for your comments. madam secretary, there are no more callers in the queue. >> clerk: public comment on item 14 is closed. >> thank you. then may i have a motion and a second to approve item 14? >> so moved. >> all right. >> second. >> been moved and seconded. roll call. [roll call] >> clerk: five ayes. >> thank you. madam clerk, will you read the next items to be heard in closed session and then call for public comment? >> clerk: the following items will be heard in closed session: item 17, conference with legal counsel, pursuant to california government code section 54965.1 d-d 1 and san

francisco administrative code section 67.10-d-1, san joaquin tributaries authority versus california state water resources control board, conference with legal counsel, pursuant to california government code section 54965.9-d-1 and san francisco administrative code section 67.10-d-1, and existing litigation, san joaquin tributaries authority,et al, versus california state water resources control board. members of the public who wish to provide public comment, dial

415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 146-287-0622, pound, pound. press star, three to enter the queue. mr. moderator, do we have any callers in the queue? >> operator: madam secretary, there are no callers in the queue. >> okay. may we have a motion is it a second? >> so moved. >> second. >> may we have a roll call. [roll call] >> clerk: and you have five ayes. >> all right. thank you. then we will go into closed

session, and we will -- we'll go into closed session, and then, when everybody's in there, we will have a break for ten from the meeting and excused at 4:53. the next item is item 20, motion regarding whether to disclose the discussions during closed session pursuant to san francisco administrative code section 67.12-a. >> so moved. >> i have a motion. may i have a second? >> second. >> roll call vote. [roll call] >> clerk: you have four ayes. >> thank you. madam secretary, is there any further business before the commission?

>> clerk: no, madam president. that concludes your business for today. >> thank you. then this meeting is adjourned. thank you. thank you, colleagues.

>> candlestick park known also as the stick was an outdoor stadium for sports and entertainment. built between 1958 to 1960, it was located in the bayview hunters point where it was home to the san francisco giants and 49ers. the last event held was a concert in late 2014. it was demolished in 2015. mlb team the san francisco giants played at candlestick from 1960-1999. fans came to see players such a willie mays and barry bonds, over 38 seasons in the open ballpark. an upper deck expansion was added in the 1970s. there are two world series played at the stick in 1962 and

in 198 9. during the 1989 world series against the oakland as they were shook by an earthquake. candlestick's enclosure had minor damages from the quake but its design saved thousands of lives. nfl team the san francisco 49ers played at candlestick from feign 71-2013. it was home to five-time super bowl champion teams and hall of fame players by joe montana, jerry rice and steve jones. in 1982, the game-winning touchdown pass from joe montana to dwight clark was known as "the catch." leading the niners to their first super bowl. the 49ers hosted eight n.f.c. championship games including the 2001 season that ended with a loss to the new york giants. in 201, the last event held at

candlestick park was a concert by paul mccartney who played with the beatles in 1966, the stadium's first concert. demolition of the stick began in late 2014 and it was completed in september 2015. the giants had moved to pacific rail park in 2000 while the 49ers moved to santa clara in 2014. with structural claims and numerous name changes, many have passed through and will remember candlestick park as home to the legendary athletes and entertainment. these memorable moments will live on in a place called the stick. (♪♪♪)

i'm nicole and lindsey, i like the fresh air. when we sign up, it's always so gratifying. we want to be here. so i'm very excite ied to be here today. >> your volunteerism is appreciated most definitely. >> last year we were able to do

6,000 hours volunteering. without that we can't survive. volunteering is really important because we can't do this. it's important to understand and a concept of learning how to take care of this park. we have almost a 160 acres in the district 10 area. >> it's fun to come out here. >> we have a park. it's better to take some of the stuff off the fences so people can look at the park. >> the street, every time, our

friends. >> i think everybody should give back. we are very fortunate. we are successful with the company and it's time to give back. it's a great place for us. the weather is nice. no rain. beautiful san francisco. >> it's a great way to be able to have fun and give back and walk away with a great feeling. for more opportunities we have volunteering every single day of the week. get in touch with the parks and recreation center so come

. >> chairman: welcome. the meeting