[ roll call ] >> president moran: due to ongoing covid-19 health emergency. >> clerk: any emergency orders of the governor and the mayor concerning social distancing and restrictions on teleconference this meeting is held via teleconference and televised by sfgov tv. please be aware there's a brief time lapse between the live meeting. on behalf of the commission, i

like to extend our thanks to sfgov tv staff and sfpuc staff for their assistance during this meeting. if you wish to make public comment dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d.s 146 727 7067 press pound, pound. please address your remarks to the commissions as a whole not to the individual commissioners or staff. >> president moran: thank you. before calling the next item, i will like to announce that the san francisco public utility commissions acknowledged that we are on the land located within

the historic territory. sfpuc recognizes every citizen recognizing the greater bay area continues to benefit on the use of occupation of the tribes have virtual land. next item. >> clerk: next item is item number 3, approve the minutes of

october 12, 2021. >> president moran: or there any corrections on the minutes? seeing none, please call for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment on item 3, dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 146 727 7067 to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. do we have any callers? >> we have two callers in the queue. just a second.

>> caller: commissioners, good afternoon. i'm calling you to bring your attention to the last week federal filing against the disgraced former manager. what's interesting as you read the 16-page filing, it is how contracts at the san francisco public utilities commission haw guys are sitting on have been fixed. all the lawyers are sitting in procurement. please explain how can this happen? those three lawyers are afraid they might lose their license for fixing contracts which is not only illegal and ethical and what it does, it allows only few

companies, few individuals that are connected to the county to get the work. you're sitting here doing nothing. commissioner moran when you were sitting at the p.u.c., did you know that dennis normandy who was a commissioner also, was a partner for c.p. m.? where were you? >> president moran: i don't believe those comments were pertaining to the minutes. do we have any other public comments? >> we have one more caller. >> caller: sorry, i raised my hand before the time. i'll raise my hand later during public comment.

thank you. >> there are no other callers. >> clerk: thank you public comment is closed. >> president moran: may i have a motion and second for the approval of the minutes? moved by commissioner maxwell. seconded by commissioner harrington, thank you. please call the roll. [roll call vote] you have five ayes. >> president moran: item passes. next item. >> clerk: item number 4, general public comment. members of the public who wish to make two minutes general

public comment on matters within the commissioner's jurisdiction and not on the agenda may do so by dialing (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 146 727 7067 pound pound. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. do we have any callers for general public comment? >> we have no calls in the queue. >> clerk: thank you. >> caller: i'm speaking on me own behalf. i done a site visits to the reservoirs.

the university mound -- [ indiscernible ] merced manor reservoir has no solar panels. sunset reservoir has solar fast panels on its north basin. this begs the question, are solar installed on reservoirs only result of community advocacy. san francisco has been declared an urban heat island. at a previous p.u.c. meeting -- [ indiscernible ]

>> next caller. >> caller: thank you. my name is david warner. we're lucky to have you serving at our commissioners. it was disappointing to hear that the cal epa and d.w.r. dropped negotiations for the lower san joaquin river. we have lost a key option for resolving differences with the bay-delta plan. the p.u.c. needs to take responsibility for this loss. we serve 2-point tetch million people and our governor being a former mayor. it is certain that the cal epa and d.w.r. met with governor newsom. this is a poor reflection us.

some of the questions were you as commissioners aware that the negotiations deteriorated. request not there's a transparency and oversight concern. two, how long staff known that the trba was a nonstarter? what actions was taken to make progress? three, environmentalists were not at the table. four, how far did we go to broker solution? did they meet with governor newsom? clearly, we didn't sufficiently understand the dynamics or movies of the players involved or we were just using the v.a. process to buy time. this is a loss for everyone including governor newsom but most of all for the sfpuc. they left the door open.

i will be submitting full comments for the record. thank you. >> thank you, caller. next caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: good afternoon. i'm denise, member of the center for biological diversity. i wanted to tell you that i was really surprised that even pg&e is talking about biodiversity and ecosystems. just this week, their plant talks webinar addressed the biodiversity crises that is totally wrapped around the climate crises, elevated to the same level by the united nations convention on biological diversity. now is a good time for you to

ensure that the p.u.c. is also reaching out to folks about planting, biological diversity, the biological diversity crises and now is really an opportune time. you can use your contacts as resources. reach out to folks about what everyone can do to support sharply declining population. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next caller. >> caller: thank you. i'm with -- you heard the

secretary of epa and natural resources, essentially ending you tuolumne river -- we've seen no action. one year ago it was 15%. we talked about interim actions that could improve the situation. nothing happened. as of sunday, only 45 were counted coming up up to tuolumne to respond. in the past decade did not deliver a lot of fish. it's going to be a very poor run. the n.c.o., we aunt to -- we want to see our rivers stored.

we want to make sure the sfpuc has reliable water supply. we offered to work with you on solutions. may be there's an opportunity to bring some ideas to move things along faster. last week federal judge vacated the trump era 401 rule which restricted state authority to intervene water quality issues. that was a victory for the state and environment. for the sfpuc for san francisco, that was one of the arguments in your lawsuit depended on that trump 401 rule. your lawsuit over the water quality certification. that's something you will need to look at. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. next caller. >> caller: this is david pilpel.

in addition to the discussion at the last commission meeting only vaccinating staff and the impacts that might have and perhaps will hear an update on that later, i understand that working in the office is going to be required starting soon. thus, some stuff who have been working remotely from home and elsewhere and some cases other states are going to be leaving city service very shortly. i wish them well. great work for the city for many years. it's a big loss. this requirement for people to work in the office when they can work effectively from home which unnecessary impediment. people who can work from home should be allowed to work from

home. finally, i thank and appreciate acting general manager michael carlin for his significant efforts leading the city and the staff and all kinds of things these past 11 months. which have been incredibly challenging. so thank you to him and to the rest of the staff for all their extraordinary work 24/7. as for the previous caller mentioned lisa wayne. i did not know that she was coming over from rec park. those are my comments. thank you for listening. >> last caller, you have two

minutes. >> caller: most of you have read the federal filings. it's very clear. contract fixing. in that case, it was the led light contract. what was not said in the federal filing who is the company from the east bay? that is doug persh. they asked him to put a office in san francisco so they can keep his led. commissioners, this is not a joke. fixing contracts is not a joke. three lawyers involved in it. three of them lawyers, all of did not see or hear and did

nothing except for rubber stamp. two of you dealt with these issues in the past. you are not saying a word. just assure the general public that the p.u.c. is not for the croonnies. assure the public. you're sitting on the largest public agency in san francisco. you're [ bleep ] the city. can you assure the public that this will not continue under your administration? can anybody answer me?

>> there are no other calls in the queue. >> clerk: item 4 general public comment is closed. >> president moran: next item please. >> clerk: next item 5, >> president moran: commissioner s any comments or questions about communication? commissioner harrington? >> commissioner harrington: i have item 5d, crystal springs. i read the staff letter. lot of other haven't heard the options. we got lot of letter about that. like to get clarification from

staff. this sounded like they could veto any of our decisions. which i'm sure it's not the intent. i'll be happy to hear what the real story is. >> i'm getting feedback here. the story is that it's been a long steady use that does not appear on the watershed plan. we made it clear -- they need to work with the stakeholders which is community members and cross country members. which is a large group because the issues are really not on our watershed. the issues are really neighborhood issues in terms of parking and things like that.

we told san mateo they needed to come to some kind of accommodation there. we're willing to do that now. it's really a local issue that we would not want normally get involved in. lot of people like the opportunity. but the impacts occur primarily outside the watershed. there could be a possibility that some accommodations can be reached but it's going to be a challenge. we'll see what we can do. that's kind of the position we're left in.

>> commissioner harrington: ther e are lot of other partners. i'm not sure you can satisfy all of them all the time. it seems like, there's a large number of people who are quite happy. i'm sure all kinds of things have worked out in terms of traffic control and parking, it does seem like there's a relatively small group that is pushing to not have this and would be almost impossible to satisfy if they don't want it to work. speaking from one commissioner, i do not want us to revoke that permit based solely on that. if we're going to revoke it, we come back to the commission and talk about whether we're representing everybody for just a small group. i think it's a valuable thing that happens there. like to see it continue to happen. >> very well. we will go with that. >> vice president ajami: can you explain to me how we are

involved in this? do we own that land? is it because it's part of the watershed? i don't understand what's our relationship with that. >> we are the landowners. yes. >> vice president ajami: i wanted to clarify. i agree with commissioner harrington, i add my voice that it would be good to make sure this does not end up revoking the permit contain working with the community and using that facility in a productive way. thank you. >> president moran: i have couple of questions. the permit itself, when does that expire?

>> actually, i think mr. ramirez is on the line as well. may be he can answer the detailed question like that. >> i'll be happy to. thank you, steve. the revokable permit was issued in 2002. there's no end date. it's at the discretion of the city to revoke it. there's no term to it. >> president moran: we're pursuing some revisions to the permit and it sounded like it was unrelated to the cross country course. did i get that right? >> we will update our permits. lots of things change overtame. this permit is almost 20 years old. this is just one of those permits. we started working probably over a year ago with san mateo folks.

long story short, obviously there's not agreement about the current operation and the issues associated with it. as steve said earlier, cross country course has been in place for almost 50 years, the permit was 20 years ago. it's described in our peninsula watershed management plan as an existing use. we were on a task to issue a new license with 21st century details in it. we need to make sure that existing use then is described now in that it's the same. this is not like our the p.u.c. we'll do a full e.i.r.

>> president moran: do we have unresolved issues about protecting the watershed? >> there are things that happened in the past that have not been -- i think that's the reason the issued the permit in 2002. i was not here then. it's my understanding that it was try to clear out some things that were happening at the time. we're not aware of thing that happened since then that's been problematic on the watershed. we would just put things in there to make it more clear in terms of reportings there continues to be no issue associated with this operation. we've been working with the san mateo folks on that. >> commissioner paulson: same

question. [ indiscernible ] i don't want to pile on the questions now, i think the commissioners are indicating they wanted to work through a report. which sounds like it supposed to come in january according to the memo. again, without getting into the details here, obviously you have a relationship with san mateo

>> president moran: are there events scheduled this fall? >> correct. >> president moran: i like to know when those are. i want to take a look and see what impact there is. i would add my voice saying, most of the issues are really not our issues. the watershed is protected, the use of the land is compatible from our standpoint. there's an issue between the community college and one group of neighbors that know need to figure out how to deal with. i would hate to put us in position providing one party to that debate with a veto. which is the effect of saying

we'll terminate the permit if you can't come to agreement. we need to be careful about how we modulate our position. commissioner ajami. >> vice president ajami: my son's school used to hold field days there. there was a lot of -- making sure all the car pool the kids there. i've been at an event there. lots of kids, lots of families all showing up. it's a lovely place and definitely had lots of good memories from our end. i will be very personally sad to see it not being used for such valuable purposes. it will be valuable to also have a conversation around it. i can see this might be a

traffic issue for neighbors and not like all these cars to come and go. there are works around this that we can potentially discuss with the neighborhood or somebody has to discuss it with the neighborhood. may be college of san mateo needs more access on that process. i know from our experience, this is very well communicated that they wanted to minimize the number of cars that would end up >> president moran: commissioner s, any further comments? any other items in communications? seeing none, let's open it for public comment. let me mention that there's no action item in front of the commission. we have received great deal of correspondence on this item. we are clearly aware of that. there's nothing that will happen

at this meeting that affects the outcome of that. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make two minutes comments on item number 5 communications dial (415)655-0001, meeting i.d. 146 727 7067 press star 3 to speak. do we have callers? >> there are multiple callers in the queue. >> caller: thank you commissioners. i'm calling about the cross country venue and belmont neighbor and neighbors support

youth sports. we want the kids to run. what has changed in the past 20 years is the event volume and importantly spectator volume. spectators arrive by the thousands all in cars. all converging on little venue in the middle of residential neighborhood. officials never tracked the number of spectators. we expect total of 9000 athletes plus 11,000 spectators. over the past 20 years, it evolved into a sporting entertainment venue. this is an expanded and new use operating in the middle of a residential neighborhood. the root of the problem is not the runners who we all support. it's the spectators and entertainment value.

i'm sorry the sfpuc has to deal with this. the college and city officials have ignored this expanded use and instead blame the victims, the neighbors. even driving us for pointing out the expands use and asking that regulations and contract provisions be respected. there's a clause in your contract the college is required to mitigate impacts on the neighborhood. that has not been respected. i want to thank mr. richie for engaging with neighbors and acknowledging that this is a problem for the college. thank you commissioners for listening. >> thank you. next caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: hi. i'm a resident of the neighborhood. i live around the corner from the entrance. i want to clear that the belmont

heights -- who has been argue being this, they're not official h.o.a. most of the neighbors actually weren't aware that this was being a battle that was fought. there's a little bit of traffic, may be a few a week. people are parking legally on legal public streets, driving legally on public streets. little bit of congestion to me is worth it to see all of the student athletes come out and their families support them. i think it's a beautiful area to our neighborhood. it will be heart breaking to see the course shut down because of very small minority within our

neighborhood is arguing on our behalf. they try to have mediation. i want to make sure that this h.o.a. they're not an h.o.a. they never asked the neighborhood. i'm paying member of the association. they never asked us our opinion. i e-mailed them and asked them to explain why. they never responded. may be there's a few neighbors against it, for the most part, you will find overwhelming support for this. thank you for the time. >> next caller, you have two minutes. >> caller: hi. my name is amanda stanton i'm a resident of belmont but not in the neighborhood and directly

adjacent to the course. i used the course on a regular basis. it is a course that is really important to both walkers and runners and to all the student athletes. i am really happy to hear that the public utilities commission understands that the neighborhood issues are not watershed issues. it's really important to protect the watershed. we as runners are very careful about not going off the course and following the course rules and also following when it is shut down. i would like to say on the behalf of runners up there and parents, i had three children who were running up there that it is really important that stay open. i really appreciate taking time to consider what is in your

jurisdiction and what is not. i would say that i have been up there for my kids. i walked the park. the parking was all legal. i did not see any driveways obstructed. it's very much looked like everyone who lives up there, perhaps there's more traffic than they wanted. they could all access their houses and public streets are public streets. everybody is allowed to drive in the public street and park in legal parking spots. i am very grateful to the commission to really focus on what is important and not get distracted by a small, very vocal small member of neighbors. >> thank you for your comments. next caller. you have two minutes.

>> caller: we heard earlier how important biodiversity is. ceqa is one way to protect our environment and specifically the peninsula watershed. i think we can all agree that sfpuc does not and should not try to skirt ceqa. ceqa was enacted in 1970. sfpuc had the current cross country course bill in 1971. where the current course is today, that was opened in 1971 after ceqa. no ceqa analysis was ever conducted then. then, sfpuc issued another permit that goes into perpetuity in 2002. again, no ceqa analysis was conducted. the question is, why is the sfpuc skirting the required ceqa

analysis? this is important. we can all sit here and say we care about the environment. if we aren't doing our proper due diligence to make sure our actions are not have negative impact, we can't pretend like they aren't. when you look at when this course was opened back in 1917, there were couple thousands. we had the risk use data. there were few thousand kids went unthere to run. today we have thousands and thousands of kids running. close to 20,000 kids in a year. when we're talking about the usage, we're not talking about it used as a cross country course. yes, since 1971 it was used as a cross country course. no ceqa analysis was done. we have people cutting away looping who don't know it's looping. nothing has been told to these

people. >> sorry, your time has expired. next caller. tough two minutes. >> caller: good afternoon. can you hear me? >> yes. >> caller: good afternoon, my name is jordan grimes i'm a san mateo resident and political director. i'm speaking only for myself today. i grew up here in the city of san mateo and ran cross country at aragonn high. this course remain important to current and future generations of young peninsula cross country runners. it's treasured by those who had the opportunity to run on it. i thought this issue has been put to rest like others, i was disturbed to see that the p.u.c.

is considering closing access to the course due to the objection of a hand full of homeowners afflicted with the not in my backyard attitude. i want to be clear here. the leadership of the belmont heights civic improvement association are not stakeholders. they are a small minority, unrepresentative of the public at large. i know there's no action item here. i want you to consider this as you move forward. thank you so much for your time. >> thank you for your comments. there are five more calls in the

queue. next caller. >> caller: hi, there. my name is thaddeus, i live in the city of belmont. i wanted to call in today just to say thank you to the commission for your comments earlier just about recognizing the be thoughtful about this issue. i'm calling in clear support of the cross country course staying open. like many people i run on the course as a student. i now have my kids running on the course. it's just a wonderful community resource. if you watch the report from the actual community college, would see that the community at large is just totally in favor of keeping open. it's probably not actually a problem here. it's not a watershed issue. it may not be a neighborhood issue.

there's small problematic group of people who are raising the alarm. 2 we think this is -- again, we think this is a wonderful resource for the community. >> next caller. >> caller: thank you. my name is clint freeman. i live in belmont heights. i live less than a block from the entrance to the cross country course. i can tell you that i'm not a

victim as one of the callers described us. obviously i'm calling in support of keeping the course open. the belmont heights do not represent me. i'm paying member. i do not agree with their stance on this. like you've been told by other callers, this is just one small group of very vocal residents that in my opinion, just don't have anything better to do with their time. i've been not impacted by parking, by the number of bus, by the number of people, by the number of spectators or runners. i'm three houses away. i recognize there's no action on this today. i ask that you give due consideration to what the residents are telling you, versus what the one or two members of the bhcia are telling

you. not all in agreement with one or two individuals. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. next caller. >> caller: i'm commenting on the communication item 5e. it's a nice way, it's a beautiful way to hide informal contracts that are half million work of money. public money. this is interesting. you're hiding three awards as informal. let me read to you a few things, specifically, items under chapter 6, professional service, for lighting fire fence for

t.m.i. this was approved in july 12, 2001. let me read to you a press release, eight bay area contractors charged with bribery. one of those eight, theodore mccain, this is the t.m.i. that you just approved in san francisco is charged with conspiracy to defraud the united states. that is the united states department of energy. all your lawyers that are sitting in procurement, did not see this. he became a crony just like the rest of him. why don't you put a sign on the p.u.c. anyone that's convicted

of bribery is more than welcome. we'll just give them contracts. you did not publicize this procurement. what are you made of? >> thank you for your comments. next caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: hi, my name is josh walker, i'm a resident of the belmont heights neighborhood. i'm calling in to thank the commission for all that you do and express my enthusiastic support for keeping the crystal springs cross country course open. i lived in the neighborhood for over a decade. it is a wonderful resource. i want you to know that the

belmont height civic does not speak for me. we see the cross country course as important resource for the kids in our community. so they can get out there and exercise and see how beautiful the area around us is and how it's important for them to protect that for the local community. i want top ask that it will be amazing if you can keep the crystal springs cross country open for future generations. thank you so much. >> thank you, caller. next caller. >> caller: hi, there. i want to let you know that i support keeping the cross country course open. i think we have capacity above

and beyond what currently happens. i am a member bhcia. they do not speak for me. they never asked for opinion from me or my neighbors. there are a few self-serving individuals who have you believe that have to preserve property values. they are not. they do not have the support of our community. i hate to speak to harshly, i think they should be ashamed to say they are representing the bicia. i hope you continue to allow the cross country course races to operate as a higher capacity. thank you. >> next caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: good afternoon.

i appreciate this opportunity to address regarding item 5. i'm charles stone. i serve as mayor of city of belmont, chair of the san mateo district. i serve on other organizations. i'm here in my capacity as a private citizen. i want to make it clear my views does in the represent any organization. i'm a native of san mateo and trained on this beautiful resource. the cross country course of belmont on land that you control. i'm appreciative the sfpuc, san mateo community college district and everyone who made sure that racing continues for decades. this is giving student athletes from middle school and high school to have the opportunity to run on a majestic course. i will try to be brief. which is hard for me. as you heard, the belmont height

civic improvement association is not traditional homeowners association. it's a neighborhood group. they do not speak for the neighborhood, city of belmont. they do not speak for the cross country community. my main point to you is this, the san mateo community college district did what was asked. they went and did yeoman's work to bridge the gap between various stakeholders. they wented to appoint a neutral. what they came up with a reduced schedule, even though many of us wanted a race schedule in place before the pandemic to be adhered. it was not enough for some people. i would urge you to read the e-mails that went to the community college district and watch the meeting of august 25th. it's only about half hour. it's worth your time to hear the comments. thank you for your leadership on this issue. if any of you have question,

please feel free to reach out to me. >> thank you for your comments. next caller. >> caller: david pilpel. on item 5, i was going to point to item g, the water conditions update and ask if under either this item or the report of the general manager under item 7, if you can ask richie to discuss water supply after the rain this past week, i certainly know that we got pelted as did the rest of san francisco and much of the region. i don't know what effect that has had on will have on

country's snow pack and reservoirs. it may be little too early on that. i'm sure we'll hear more about that at the meeting in two weeks. if we could hear a little bit on what the rain over the weekend has done for the situation. i appreciate hearing that. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. next caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: i'm with the tuolumne river trust. i was going to ask about any improvements to water supply. my i understanding is curtailment order was lifted prior to the storms. it would appear that sfpuc will be entitled to capture water. any updates will be great.

thank you. >> thank you, caller. last caller. i have opened your line. you have two minutes. >> caller: good afternoon. i'm a resident of belmont. i want to thank the commission for considering the issues on item 5d. i wanted to echo many callers calling in support to keep the cross country course open. i run on the course every week myself. it's beautiful. it's truly a gem of our community. i seen the meets there. so rewarding to the kids who race there. very special place. in addition to that, i wanted to echo what others said. there's a few local individuals trying to claim there's so many problems with increased use and track issues. they are claiming there's

thousands of spectators and runners and carers. we heard multiple residents in this community, it seems that the time who are opposing the use of the course are present any evidence with traffic problems and thousands of spectators and potential damage to the environment. i would think, given this will be under the jurisdiction of the belmont police department, there, the police will be called and there will be legal problems. police department has only received minuscule amount of complaints. these are just lies what some of the opposers of the course saying. we strongly urge you to grant the permit. thank you so much.

>> there are no other calls in the queue. >> clerk: thank you. public comment on item 5 is closed. >> commissioner harrington: i know we received documentation, i wonder if we can take that water supply and move it down to general manager report. at least for the future. so we have a conversation about that at the meeting. seem like important thing to talk about. >> president moran: let's do that. whale we're thinking about that, mr. richie, can you give us any update as to what happened over the weekend? >> yes. let me pull up the e-mail here that i received on this. basically, just some numbers. up cherry, we got 7.8 inches of

precipitation. that's translated into cherry which is up 27,000-acre feet and they are still rising for another day. hetchy is up 25,000-acre feet. eleanor is up 5000-acre feet. i was once told it would spill but in 2015 it didn't spill. the other thing is the inflow numbers are very high. currently it's coming in at about 10,000 cubic feet per second. we definitely benefiting from

the storm. series of storms is what it was. the largest one did turn into a category five atmospheric river. it was quite beneficial to our system. it's going to raise for another couple of days. we may see start to settle down. we got a good shot in the arm for it. >> commissioner maxwell: would like to thank all the fields. this was really unexpected to certain degree. i was coming in from the airport. of it flooded on the freeway.

i can imagine what it was throughout the city. i wanted to thank all the field crews for all your work and again, much appreciated. thank you. >> vice president ajami: i appreciate commissioner maxwell mentioning that. i also wanted to bring this up during the general america's -- manager's report. i was looking at my emergency e-mails trying to figure out, are we dealing with anything. it was heart warming to see they managed to whether the storm. i wanted to ask mr. richie, i can do this myself on the back of the envelope, it will be valuable to kind of have a percentage rather than just the amount. like 25,000-acre foot. what percentage of our reservoir. i think it's important for people to realize this one storm

is not going to solve the accumulated impact of the draft we've been experiencing. it is not going to solve our long time problem >> in the case of cherry, there's about 10% of the reservoir volume. in the case of hetchy it's probably about 8% of the volume. those numbers are rising. good round number of getting 10% of our reservoir capacity is probably about right. one of the things that we routinely sort of think of is about 6 to 7 atmospheric rivers a year is what takes care of the system. this was one, it was a bigger

one than normal. that's good. we could use another half dozen or so. >> vice president ajami: thank you. >> president moran: anything else? seeing nothing. next item please. >> clerk: item 6, bay area water supply and conservation agency update by c.e.o. sandkulla. >> thank you for having me here today. i wanted to spend some time providing some remarks. really my time, i wanted to focus on providing you some insight regarding drought allocations and the potential impact of drought agencies and

air customers. i thought this was important in light of your decision in november. three key points i will focus on. first one being that the regional water system has two plans for droughts. tier 1 and tier 2 plan that determined drought water supply allocations bawsca. san francisco retail customers and wholesale customers their share available water supply during a drought. this is set up in the water supply agreement between san francisco and the wholesale customers. the w.s.a. provides these rules in a tier 1 water shortage

allocation plan. the table on the right is actually in the contract. if you look down on the left, talkses about different levels of system wide reductions. then the share of available water supply. what you'll note is as drought increases, the sfpuc share increases as that happens. this is a function of what was the the reality in 2001 when we first developed this tier 1 plan. less so today. we'll talk about that san francisco retail customer used significantly less than the average wholesale customer. the regional water system allocations are based on water purchase prior to the drought.

for the current drought we're in, i've been this discussions with mr. richie. that would make that fiscal year 19-20. we're looking at tier 1 allocations. this table just builds on that last table, presents the results of the tier 1 allocation for the retail and wholesale customers. require system wide reduction down on the left side for each reduction level. there's an allocation line and percent cut back line. what i want to call your attention to is the middle column a talks about san francisco retail allocation and wholesale allocation and in particular the numbers in spread. for example, under a 10% system wide water use reduction, the

san francisco retail cutback would be 5%. this reflects that shift that we saw in those shares. at 20% system wide reduction, the san francisco retail case -- allocation is 10% reduction and wholesale allocation requires 25% reduction. significantly increasing level reduction for the wholesale customers as drought conditions worsen. as i mention the, there's two plans. there's a tier 2 drought plan that hasn't been adopted by all the wholesale customers. san francisco is not a signatory to this agreement. it determines the allocation of the available regional water system supply among the

wholesale customers. it was adopted in 2001 and adopted again in 2009. the current tier 2 plan actually expired in december 2019. at that time it was anticipated that the commission would make a decision. you have not resolved that yet, at the same time, there's an interest by the wholesale customers of having a tier 2 plan. we're in the process of initiating renegotiation. until that gets done, the bawsca board is updating this on an annual basis. they will be considering action on the tier 2 plan at their upcoming meeting. the tier 2 plan allocates available regional water supply in our accordance with a formula

and rules. there's a minimum cut back requirements of 10%. there's a maximum cutback that's allowed which is equal to the bawsca average percentage cut back plus 20%. i will give you an example how that works. there's also special accommodations for east palo alto. an additional san jose and santa clara also received drought allocation. given their contractual status they are put to the bottom. their percentage cutback must be as great as the percentage cutback of any permanent

customer. the tier 2 plan with this formula and among 26 different things we're looking at, results in a range of required cutbacks among bawsca agencies. our system wide water reduction require -- under the tier 1 plan, we see san francisco retail cutback, for example under 10% system wide, 5% for retail, 14% for the average wholesale customer. the range among the wholesale customers is 10% at the bottom but 34%. you take 14% and actually add 20 to it. that's the range for the wholesale customers. going down the line for 15%, it equates to average wholesale customer cutback 20%. the range of wholesale customer cutback 10% to 40%.

the range of wholesale customer cutbacks is 10% to 45%. we are currently running the tier 2 model and finalizing the results. east palo alto continues to have the lowest cut back of all agencies in the maximum cutbacks generally apply to water district. the final tier 2 results will be provided to the p.u.c. following the november bawsca board meeting. kind of shifting now from a drought allocation to what're seeing in the service area.

this graph shows growth in residential per capita use in the region since 1975. this is the largest data set that we have. growth per capita on the top means all water use divided by all population. which is what i will continue to focus on moving forward. in both cases, you see this downward trend. obviously impact the by droughts. list a rebound. but the continued trend downward. clearly at the right, that we are at the historic low. levels of per capita both in growth and residential like we never experienced before. what i've done here is try to give a picture sense so you can understand how this average per capita shows up as per capita within a different member

districts. again, historic lows for a non-drought year. the member agency service areas are shown in the polygons. the colors are very helpful. the gold color is for districts that have a residential per capita less than 45 gallonser. capita per day. that is -- i picked that. there's a pretty good break. but it is also equivalent to what is being seen for residential per capita in 1920. not exactly but fairly close. something that's pretty important, this is a new development. the blue is for those service areas that deliver 46 to 55 gallons per capita a day. the green have 56 to 100 gallons per capita per day. we have a few and there's three

that are over 100 gallons per capita a day. this is a much broader spectrum on the lower end than we've seen historically. let me show you why. i compared for those same categories the 2012 to '13. the predrought time. to 2019. to get a sense for how has our patterns changed. hard to know if it's permanent. you have 2012 as that first gray line and then 2019 and 2020 as the second gray line. each of those buckets is going across the right. for example, in fiscal year 12-13, the average residential use across the service area was

79 gallons per person a day. it's now 63 gallons. you'll note that in the next column, were actually no agencies with per capita use. we're now up to three. the number of agencies in that next category, 46 to 55, almost doubled. similar pattern as you move your aout. the only number that didn't change is the far right number, with the number of wholesale customers greater than 100. i looked at numbers today. they didn't get out of far -- tr category, they reduced their use by 14% to 19%. significant reductions but didn't get themselves below that 100 down per capita. overall reduction in residential per capita means throughout the service area reflecting

investments by the agencies and their customers to make the permanent changes. certainly a response to the previous drought. but also a sustained low use. one thing i will note stan in st included in the residential per capita data. this is a different way. always begs the question. who are those three agencies. i tried to say, not to hide from this. this gives a representation cumulative percentage of population in the service area and the associated residential per capita consumption. from left to right, 0 to 100% accumulative percentage of population. on the left, purisma hills, this

use is associated with just .3% of the total regional service area population. or 6100 people. it would be a neighborhood most large cities. that's pretty indicative of those first two. you see this very steep decline and then very flat across the board. essentially we got 80% of the residents use all average of 65 gallons gallons per capita a day. with only 8% of service area using 90 gallons per capita a day or more. another thing that i thought of helpful about this, 32% of the service area uses less than

55 gallons per capita a day. good snapchat where sustained efficiency is showing up it's showing up in lower per capita use in the service area. one of the things that's showing up with drought is having to do with the other supply that the bawsca relies upon. you will recall in july, we talked about the investments that bawsca agency has made in other supplies to meet their needs, roughly a third of their needs in fiscal year 19-20. by the that much. these other supplies, the surface water supplies, recycled water supply, purchases from

other wholesalers, they are really investment, local agency investment that have enabled all the bawsca agencies to reduce their reliance on and use of the regional water system. that, those investments have really enabled everyone to stay within 184 supply shares. collectively with san francisco retail customers to stay below the 265. there have been important investments they have made. however, one of the things that's becoming clerks this year in particular is that the regional system supply is more critical than ever to all the agencies because there are other supplies severely impacted and in every case, more impacted. santa clara valley water

district, they expected 15% reduction. it's a greater number because of the existing -- the issues with their system. they asked all agencies in santa clara county to not just reduce ground water use. alameda county had some ongoing treatment issues for their ground water. it's limiting the use of that supply. alameda also what issues because state water project supply which they rely upon is severely limited. another one that local surface water is not available to those agencies that have historically relied upon as well. this is really impacting a very diverse swath of the member

agencies. this has lot of detail that speak about those agencies. i'm not going to go through it all. it talks about each one of them. the thing that i think is important in the third column talks about the percent of total supply. statements it can be easy to say, well, if other supplies are just a third of what the bawsca agency as a whole using, may be these supplies are a third of the agency using. for many of them it's about half of the supplies. if you could imagine, san francisco supplies being cut back by 20% to 30%. other supplies is cut back almost implement -- completely. some of them are in a significant water supply crunch. i will call, for example, the water district that really has surprised me as we had a conversation with them. they had been investing and

utilizing local surface water when it's available. fiscal year 19-20, that represented almost 44% of the water they used to meet the customer's need. that water has not been available at all. they are looking at a significant reduction through the tier 2 plan. it's those kinds of issues that are coming up with this unique very extreme dry drought that we're having. what are we doing? we're really looking at this aggressively as a region. taking action to reduce overall water uses. certainly, every since you came out with it, ever since the government came out with it, we've been supporting the need for water use reduction. increase in our communications, asking for these important water use reductions. some agencies have initiated their water shortage contingency plan. i expect that to continue and

leading up to and may be shortly after your action. we have started conservation program. new programs available for customers to achieve these reductions. the map you see here is actually on our website. early on, we found out that one of the biggest things is lot of customers don't know who their water player is by name. they know where they live. it will connect them to water supplier conservation page. they can have access to what's the condition of my water supply, what's my water supply ask of me and how do i reduce my water use. that can be found on our website at bawsca.org. just in closing, we have two drought plans. we've actually never had to implement them since they were first adopted in 2001. this is the fist time we had to

do that. i think certainly, a challenge that we're all up for, it really represents a very significant step and the wholesale customers understand and respect that. the residential per capita water use for the bawsca agency is at a historical low. what that means, our current supplies will last longer. it makes it harder to achieve that next increment. other water suppliers used by the bawsca agency is impacted by the current drought. the bawsca agency are absolutely committed to achieving the necessary reductions. it won't be easy. that's something i will continue to talk to you about as we make our way through this very difficult time. with that, that concludes my remarks. >> president moran: thank you, nicole. any comments or questions for nicole?

commissioner ajami? >> vice president ajami: thank you so much for your presentation. i appreciate it how you tried on slice and dice the consumption data in so many different ways. i appreciated seeing especially how people have switched from category to category because that's ta demonstrates how some of the changes are having some permanent impacts, some temporary changes. i'm assuming looking at long-term change you can see that has been definitely downward and much of it has been staying. i was not definitely surprised by the maker water users. it's valuable to see they have reduced their water use from what it used to be to what it is now. definitely, regardless of the population, i do understand these are larger losses, density

areas. i wanted to acknowledge that. i appreciated this presentation. it was great. >> thank you very much. >> president moran: any other comments? as always nicole, thank you. great presentation. there's been a couple of conversations about how we deal with some of the -- how you react to a drought. that's a different thought process than taking more

aspirational view. i think that this drought may get us that direction. thank you for giving us those comments. if there's no other comments, please open up for public comment. >> clerk: emergencies of the member who wish to make public comment on item 6 for bawsca update. dial (415)655-0001 meeting i.d. 146 727 7067 so raise your hand to speak, press star 3. do we have any callers? >> there are two callers in the queue.

>> caller: commissioners. i want to know about the millions and millions of gallons of water used by the computer firms. we talk about an area. you don't mention the computer companies and other companies that utilize a lot of water.

clean drinking water. not recycled water. so they can pat each other on the back. we have a drought. we also need you to be aware of critical data. you can go on that side and read stuff that is b.s. large companies must not given as much water as they have been taking in the past. one way to test it by bringing it down to 40%. then you commissioners will be

singing the blues. >> thank you for your comments. next caller. >> caller: this is david pilpel again. i appreciate hearing from nicole sandkulla. i often learn from her. i learned more nuances about the water supply agreement and the allocation arrangements. i guess at this point, i am interested in what's happening in two weeks. as in particular, going forward, we discuss not just drought restrictions and demand reductions but what else is being done on the supply side.

kind of the intersection between the supply and demand. whether it's fixture, retrofit, desalination, ground water use, recycled -- all the various supply and demand alternative to make the system. [please stand by]

-- one thing the memo doesn't capture in terms of the legislative matters we receive numerous requests that require us to drop everything and respond immediately. the most recent example of the storm the past week required an all hands on deck and we briefed our various levels of resource for constituents and responded to questions and in issues in

real time. because my time is brief i wanted to highlight two top priorities we've been work on. they are infrastructure funding and rate payer and these are critical elements of our broader affordability strategy and with covid continuing to dominate the agenda at all levels it continues to present a window of opportunity for us on both issues. so on infrastructure, at the federal level we've been working closely with our congressional delegation to elevate our agency funding priorities on a whole range of issues as everything we worked on and i think top level has been pushing for the utility sector to receive as much funding as possible given the many priorities being negotiated. at the state level, we've been working to shape the infrastructure spending criteria and appropriations discussion as it's been working over the

course of the state budget negotiations. there was some preliminary funds allocated at the state level but very high level and the punch line is both negotiations at the state and federal level are ongoing. we continue to actively advocate for both programs and criteria that can benefit the various projects. one outcome i can highlight is we worked with senator feinstein to secure the army corps water infrastructure financing program. it's the only federal funding program explicitly available for dam repair. this funding was included in last year's federal appropriations bill and while the program is yet to launch, the army corps expects to issue up to $950 million in low-interest loans for dam repair in the first round of funding. in relief, we have led a

cross-sector coalition of california stakeholders to secure the first ever funding source for water waste and water assistance totalling over $1.1 billion nationwide and over $100 million is coming to california to benefit low-income customers with utility debt during covid. these funds are particularly critical given the prop 8 restrictions on using rate payer dollars for assisting programs and the problems the customers are facing due to the pandemic. we're continuing to actively advocate at the federal level for more assistance and create assistance similar to the low income low energy program. at the state level there was a large budget surplus. it created a timely opportunity

for us this year to advocate for additional rate payer relief which was critical since the federal funds only addressed a portion of the $8 million across the water water sector. for months we worked in coalition with many partners and thrilled to report this collective effort secured nearly $2 billion for rate payer relief in the state budget and it was $993.5 million for energy rate payers and $985 million water and waste water rate payers. we were particularly instrumental in ensuring the budget budget packet reflect the priorities including one the broad distribution of funds to ensure rate payers in every region including low-income customers that have relatively high median incomes would receive some of the benefit. two, ensuring the inclusion of

waste water customers and three, securing dedicated funding for customers on the energy side that included both publicly on electric utilities and so both partners could benefit and so this state funding is available specifically for arrearages acured between march and 2020 and june 2021. the specific allocations are still pending but as of today i understand we anticipate to receive full funding for our eligible water arrearages that's about $3.8 million that fell during the march 2020 to june 2021 period and part partial funding for the waste water and power arrearages this is all developing in real time and i'm sure there'll be updates

forthcoming but wanted to share what we know as of today and as it goes from advocacy to implement, there's many staff across the agency working hard to draw down these dollars but in particular i wanted to shout out isabell hain and aaron franks for collaborate the effort. in summary it's been a busy and productive team and i'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. thank you. >> thank you for the presentation. that was very valuable. i'm glad to hear you are having constructive discussions around receiving some of the water rate assistance money becoming available at the federal level.

i just want to highlight something. maybe i mentioned it another time too, but one of the issues the program has had from its inception is we don't meter water at residential scale at every building and unit and why there's been trouble using the low-income assistance program for energy to streamline fund allocation to residents who are already filed for getting assistance. so i think just highlighting the importance of thinking about better metering, better data gathering, making sure that i know when we are it's a law in california that multi-family

residentials need to have individual meters at the unit level but it is an important discussion to have when you're thinking about retrofitting old building because we have to get to the level of 100% metering people for various reasons one is the specific one that helps us to jump to get the money to people and reducing the cost of administrating these resources. so thank you so much for covering a wide variety of things and i appreciated work with your team last year i've been here. always a pleasure. >> thank you. commissioner paulson. >> thank you for that report. that was very conclusive in terms of all the different

topics that you deal with on the different levels. what would be your general assessment. obviously -- [audio digitizing]. >> you're audio is cutting out a bit. >> i muted your video. you should be able to speak now. >> oh, i see what you're saying. um, i'm sorry. can you hear is the >> yes. >> thank you. so again i thank you for your good old review of all the agencies and the levels of government that you're working on especially for funding and wondering on a 10,000 foot level

how well we are doing for our share of all this federal stuff in terms of coming to this particular agency. i know we'll see it in the actual budgets and whatever but between the infrastructure stuff and the retrofitting and the rate payer stuff, i mean when it all gets divvied up do you feel comfortable we're getting our share of what we're getting? i guess that's the question. >> do you want to take the first stab at this? >> yeah. commissioner, it's a great question. first off, we've been focussing on being eligible for all the programs and that's the most significant thing we can do. second, we've been successful in getting low interest loans from the federal government and even in the past administration and particular to do that particularly for our waste water program and we're getting our

fair share for our customers as well and we were just talking today how we're going implement that and maybe continue that program looking at people that can't afford to pay and how we can help them going in the future as well. there are things along those lines and we're going to the commission in the future as well. maybe if you want to add anything else, please do so. >> i'll add that we know there's programs that work well for us like michael mentioned and top line is always continuing to advocate for reauthorization of the programs for as much as funding as possible we can get in the infrastructure and budget reconciliation negotiation ongoing federal appropriation bills. but also, it's been helpful in playing programs that don't work well either and can potentially alter the guidance language or

advocate for priority of use that would be beneficial for our projects so the army corps which is essentially a program of revolving low-interesting program that was authorized back in like 2014 with the original epa program but never received funding and that's something our staff said this would be helpful and again the only federal funding program available for dam repair for us is $1 billion plus and you can imagine what that is across the state and country. we're able to start highlighting the need nor funding and we wanted to demonstrate it works well and scale it up. we're using this moment to advocate on all of our priorities that fit into this window of opportunity right now. again, the programs are work well and we're saying great,

let's build more support and funding for those and also if we have the opportunity to improve some of the over programs that exist or potentially create new ones obviously that is high on our priority list too. >> any other comments or questions? seeing none, madame secretary, please open public comment. >> the public who wishes to make comment on item 7a dial 1-415-655-0001 meeting i.d. 146 727 7067 pound, pound and to speak press star 3.

>> do we have any callers? >> we have one caller in the queue. caller, i have unmuted your line. >> this is first acting general manager comment on the asset p.u.c. workers. no doubt we have some very good workers. how is the system tested. how are our minerals test? how many real time tests were done on what we call our affluence?

when we set aside money to operate our clean water pipes and our sewer pipes, up to now, we don't have the data on how many of those pipes have been replaced. the arbitrary talk in general talk in general terms and that's good but if sewage goes down the street and impacts our people and we don't mention that and this time around we have a lot of the manholes full with raw sewage because we have a dual system and in a dual system the sewage is only treated when it reaches the treatment plant and you know as i do, we don't have

several other treatment plant before it's reaches the main treatment plan. and we don't talk in a manner the way other people talk. >> thank you, caller. your time has expired. madame secretary there's no other comments in the queue. >> public comment is closed. >> thank you. that concludes my report for this session. thank you. >> >> mr. harrington. >> this is his last meeting as acting general manager and wanted to thank him for his work and last year you took on and

actively managed the place and we're better for it. i want to completely appreciate your ability and willingness to work with us. i understand the p.u.c. commission is a bit of a pain and can grisle at policy instruction and you welcomed it. the work shops and even your willingness and ability to engage with us and other stakeholders and make it a better place hopefully because of these discussions and hope we've been somewhat helpful. it's unusual and very nice to see that you were so willing to do that and an appreciate it. i look forward to your continuance service and thank you so much, michael. >> thank you, commissioner harrington. by the way, it's all of us and

we and a team and seeing what they can do and step up so thank you for the kind words but i want to extend to all my colleagues. >> yep. >> commissioner. >> i also wanted to mention how much i appreciated working with you during this period and it's definitely a great working relationship. i could see how much leadership you were putting on the table for what was going on and all the chaos that was going on around us. i think you sort of took the ship and made sure everybody is working seamlessly and not

focussing on the work in hand rather than all the noise outside and that was very needed and important so i really appreciate that. and i do actually very much look forward to working with you as you transition. >> thank you, commissioner ajami. by the way, it was great meeting you the other day. >> they were like what he wasn't as popular in the younger generations but i appreciated this interest and enthusiasm on the topic. we always need more leaders to push the frontier and make water a popular topic and i think he uses his star power to make this happen and an appreciated that.

>> commissioner paulson. i thought i saw your hand up. commissioner maxwell. >> michael, i don't think could have gotten through this presidency as well without you and it's been a rough year. it could have been rougher and we did things we hadn't done before and were right there all the time. let's talk to the people in modesto and we did and you made things happen. i want to thank you so much for all you made happen and we appreciate it and look forward to working with you and thank you for your leadership. >> thank you, commissioner maxwell. it's great working with you during your presidency as well.

you were a guiding hand to me. >> this has been a year of a lot of crazy and you were able to focus on the job and keep your head down and do it and keep the organization going at the same time. you've been probably the quickest person to remind us it's not you, it's the whole organization in any event that's appreciated by the organization and appreciate and recognized by the commission as well. thanks for what you've done over the past year. >> thank you, commissioner. i appreciate it.

>> next is new commission business. >> i have item of new business. i've given the secretary a resolution on calendar the intent of the resolution is to create a record of the commissioner's priorities as we start a new chapter with a new general manager. it seems that was a useful and perhaps important thing for us to do. i did drafting on that and what we tried to do was capture the sense of the commission. we wanted to capture the sense of the commission and incorporate comments that basically this commission has made in the last year and tried to put them into a form that

represents as clear a statement as what our priorities are. i think we got close. we probably made some mistakes. when we consider the item formally at the next meeting we'll have a chance to make sure everybody's interest incorporated there as well and i look forward to doing that. it will be sent out as i matter of course and the commissioner secretary can provide that as well. that's all the new business i have. >> if you can get some update on the voluntary agreement and what happens with that and more details. it's a question for michael or

we can have it for the next meeting. >> we'll schedule something. >> thank you so much. >> any other new business or comments? commissioner paulson. >> president moran, i'm looking forward to the great idea of putting together a priority of statement for us moving forward. we're all going to be hopefully just seamlessly continuing to work on things with even more focus than we have already been processed on and if you can send me a copy of that as soon as you have the documents take a look at it before the next meeting

because if there's anything else we after discussion tweak it if we need to. >> if there's no further comment, madame secretary if you'd like to open public comment. >> members of public comment who want to comment on item 8, new commission business call 1-415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 146 727 7067, pound, pound. to raise your hand to speak press star 3. >> we have one caller in the queue.

>> i'm commenting on the comments regarding michael. michael, i am impressed by the level and number of ass kissing i just heard about yourself. they're patting you on the back for a lousy back and the reason it's lousy for one simple reason. you took the initiative on your own without anybody twisting your arm to promote [indiscernible] on christmas eve. you thought nobody would see it. i got the e-mail you sent to the p.u.c. through one of my contacts in less than 10 minutes. now, [indiscernible] and dwayne jones and the other hopefully soon to

be arrested that sits on the board of supervisors, that's a little clowns that sit in their own little sphere and according to masut and people have heard them how they fix contracts and limit who can get the notification of the contracts and i quote on behalf of masut you promoted i decide which anything nigger i put on the contracts. this is you, michael and this is the p.u.c. these are the clowns ruining the city for years and years. so i do want to congratulate you. i hope you never show your fucking face again in the city. >> you manage to violate every request we made for civil discourse and a for one do not

appreciate that. [please stand by] . . .

>> caller: there are few people that profited. when another somebody said something, the commissioner used the f-word. i'm saying this because there's only so much of nonsense any person can tolerate. there is utter corruption still

going on when it comes to the bidding of the contracts. what are we going to do? from the contract monitoring division from your contracting division -- [ indiscernible ] >> there are no other callers in the queue. actually, sorry. there's one more caller. >> caller: my name is dave warner. i was offended by the two callers ago and didn't want to discussions on mr. carlin on that way. i've been a critic mr. carlin, i found him to be responsive and i would appreciation for certain stakeholderrer meetings that his team support for that and the work his staff does.

i would echo the commissioners and say, thank you so much for being the acting manager and thank you for your service. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. that call queue is now clear. >> clerk: thank you. public comment on item 8 is closed. >> president moran: before you call the next item, last -- meeting there was some discussion, merits on clarifications to what our process will be about taking items off calendar. we'll discuss that among ourselves and with the city attorney. we don't want to limit -- we want to make sure that it's focused on the issues that are in front of us. what we'll be doing, we will not take items off consent calendar.

somebody wants to remove an item from the consent calendar, they can request it at the meeting and address those items once they are pulled off the calendar. that's by way of clarification and with that, call the next consent calendar. >> clerk: item number 9, consent >> president moran: commissioner s, any items you like removed from the consent calendar? seeing none, if you would open this up for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make public comment on the consent calendar, dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d.

146 727 7067 pound, pound. to raise your hand to speak press star 3. do we have any callers? >> there are two callers in the queue. >> caller: contract 396, to increase the contract by 50% through the forecasted project planning phase. michael carlin, august 17, 2021, quarterly report, age 2, fifth bullet point. i'm quoting here. the project completed the embarkment and analysis and coordination for review.

in addition the analysis was as completed. seven years in planning and you're asking for another 50% increase for the contract on the planning phase. not design, not even construction. here's the other interesting thing. on the same report, michael carlin reported the following, on page 16, the contract have already exceeded the $3 million limit by $3.32 million. executed contract for $3 million in august, two months ago, it's already exceeded. now they're coming back to the commission to give me some more money. i can't see the diameter pile on highway 101. seven years in planning. you know how long it took to

plan the landing on the moon? four years. it's just public money. michael carlin wants it. just give it to them. when does this stop? corruption, giving contracts -- by the way, you are -- i'm willing to bet any one of you commissioners for million dollar cash there's to office -- [ indiscernible ] >> your time is expired. next caller. >> caller: hello. commissioners, we are going to

-- through really difficult times. not so much with the sfpuc but because of the pandemic. if we had some people i think, we would have lot of the infrastructure and the community benefit in a more realistic manner. the gentleman who spoke earlier, spoke about a contract. somebody makes change orders and you just agree with the change orders. is it draw that the sewer system improvement project started with

$6 billion? do you think any one of you give a damn if it goes up to 20 billion dollars? i'm just asking you. there are some people who are following the projects diligently. i have not. i am the director of environmental justice advocacy. i been for 40 years. i got a track record. i know what a good -- i know the good people on the commission. i talk to them. i know who are whatever. i avoid them like the plague. thank you very much. >> thank you. next caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: this is david pilpel. this is my last comment for

today. i have nothing of substance on the consent calendar. i did want to acknowledge the president discussion about handling of the consent calendar if the future. i support that change so that a member of the public remember the commission will be able to pull an item from the consent calendar at this time on the agenda for subsequent discussion discussion. as much as i'm supportive the public's right comments, i think that the public should exercise discretion in how they formulate their comments. i'm troubled by previous speaker and the manner in which some of their comments have been made. i would encourage the deputy city attorney to take the five paragraphs on page 159 of the

good government guide that relate to public comment on consent calendar and the content of public comment generally. those five paragraphs and perhaps exert those memo to discuss those issues about consent calendar and the content of public comment. it might inform us going forward on these matters. i take this very seriously. thank you for listening. >> thank you for your comments. >> clerk: public comment on item 9 is closed. >> president moran: there are no items removed from the consent calendar. may i have a motion and a second for the consent calendar? motioned by commissioner paulson and seconded by commissioner

maxwell. any discussion? please call the roll. [roll call vote] you have five ayes. >> president moran: next item please. >> clerk: next item is item 10, discussion and possible action to authorize up to $390 million of the 2021 series ab wastewater revenue notes and to the issuance of up to $380 million of the series 2021ab wastewater revenue bond. >> good afternoon, i'm rich morales manager of the p.u.c.

i want to provide presentation on two transactions both for the wastewater enterprise. interesting enough, one of them relates to the low cost lithium that michael carlin alluded to earlier. i'm asking you to consider the approval that particular transaction, $390 million of the 2021 series ab wastewater revenue bonds. i will provide an overview for the transactions. 2021 sears ab revenue notes. it will be sold in two subseries. series a will provide funding during construction from a portion of the wastewater water enterprise, ssip project.

associated b note were provided through portions of the ssip. that will provide low cost long-term financing with portions of both of these projects. p.u.c. primarily provides long-term financing through the issuance of revenue bonds which pays off commercial paper and

provides low cost short-term funding during project construction. with the simultaneous execution in june 2020 of -- [ indiscernible ] p.u.c. has an opportunity to issue a series of revenue notes that funds these projects through their long construction periods. under current market conditions the note can be issued at interest rates ranging from .5% to .75% depending on maturity of the notes. the notes will be paid off which begins to accrue interest of 1.45%.

without the wifia loan, they will issue revenue bonds amount of $1.2 billion. today market revenue bonds have interest rate of quarter percent. considerably higher than the 1.45 wifia loan agreements. by using issuing notes, p.u.c. can maintain capacity in the wastewater program to fund other portions of the wastewater program. i like to adhere couple of things. p.u.c. does not have much experience this issuing notes,

this is a commonly used instrument utilized by municipal educations to provide funding of their projects. the other point i like to make, series of the notes will be issued as green notes. few years ago all at projects was independently served by qualifying green bond designation. p.u.c. is a recognized leader in issuance of green bonds. biosolids and headworks are part of the ssip. this transaction was included in the fiscal 2021-2022 capital plan. i like to provide an overview of the other transactions through

series ab wastewater revenue bonds. this transaction will provide long-term revenue bonds in financing for a portion of the wastewater capital program. the 2021ab wastewater revenue bond not to exceed $380 million. this series will be designated as green bonds if the reason i mentioned in the prior slide. the proceeds of the bonds will refund us ending commercial paper to fund the wastewater capital program. this transaction was included as part of the capital plan that i presented to you on october 12th. i will touch upon the structure of the notes. notes are expected to have

three-year maturity. they will be issued on tax-exempt basis and the notes will fund capital interest. the structure of the bond will be very similar to the notes except the maturity will be 30 years since this transaction will provide long-term financing. the notes and bonds will be sold around the same time likely to be separated by one or two days. which is one of the transaction

documents you are being asked to approve. the notes and bonds are expected to be sold on a competitive basis to bid on each transaction that provides the lowest cost on each transaction. should you approve the transactions, we expect to open bids in november with closing both transactions at the end of november. the preliminary p.o. determines the notes and -- notes and bonds. the initial notice sale set forth the terms and parameters to bid on each transaction. finally, the continuing disclosure certificate was in the p.o.s. this certificate outlines the

p.u.c. ongoing disclosure and requirement to determine the notes and the bonds. in keeping with the commissioners ongoing bond disclosure training, the following certain key disclosure questions and answers associated with these transactions. in your staff report, we include administer complete q&a of disclosure. in the interest of time, i will not read all of these. they are there in front of you. i would ask you to read these as well as the q&a that's in the staff report. recommended commission action. we're asking you today to authorize -- [ indiscernible ] $390 million of the 2021 series aab wastewater revenue notes. up to $380 million the series ab

wastewater revenue bonds. that's part of the action you will approve in the document. you will be authorizing the general manager to sell the notes and bonds on either note or fiduciary base. the plan is to sell on competitive basis. that is actually my final slide. at this point, i'm happy it take any questions you may have. >> president moran: i have asked staff to keep presentations 10 minute or less. that came in 9: 44. [ laughter ] >> i was not looking at the clock. thank you.

>> commissioner maxwell: thank you. you mentioned that the notes, the low cost short-term that we're going to do is relatively common. uncommon to us. why is that? uncommon to the p.u.c., why is that? >> typically, we do our interim funding of our construction programs. all of the enterprises. by issuing commercial paper. which is another form of very low coast interim funding. we haven't had a need to issue notes. we want to issue the notes because they are large projects. we want to -- interest rates are very low. it can be taken out with the higher cost with the wifia loans. the most important reason is to maintain capacity and commercial paper program. which is about $750 million. we want to maintain paper

program or other projects. you know the wastewater capital program is large -- [ indiscernible ] this is a way of maintaining capacity through those projects that are not going to be ultimately funded with a long-term wifia loans. i hop that answered your question. >> commissioner maxwell: yes, thank you. >> president moran: commissioner ajami? >> vice president ajami: thank you for your presentation. i was wondering if you can walk us through why headworks will be under the green category? >> few years ago, we worked with an independent green bond certified lending base called climate bond initiative, at that time we presented to c.b.i. all the projects in the ssip.

headworks was in, ssip. c.b.i. if you look at all the projects, they determined that these projects do provide green benefits. we have actually done green bond financing in the past for ssip. this is another occasion where we will be providing financing in case of the notes. headworks are in the ssip. >> vice president ajami: have you seen -- i had before i joined the commission, i was in conversation with the staff about the gren intends that we had issued before. i wondering have you seen a

difference, interest purchasing green bonds versus regular bonds. >> yes. that's a very good question. it's a commonly asked question. at the beginning of our experience, i say three or four years ago, there was really no interest rate between issuing our bonds that was certified as green and issuing bonds that were not certified as green. we were doing it. we felt we were doing the right thing. every the last couple of years, our experience has gotten better. where there was been one or three bases points in improvement in issuing green bond. the -- real reimbursment, theree

are will the more investors. you have more demands that will decrease the interest rate. we're looking to attract more investors. we've actually been successful in attracting bond investors who are -- all they want are green bonds. they never purchased these bonds before that. we're attracting new investors as well. >> vice president ajami: you're tracking these numbers. it's not just because there's a slight higher rate of return. it's the interest in the talk in the category these are falling under. it would be really valuable to -- as you're tracking these, to

have not add to the list you're doling with t will be good to have some information, data provided to us how as you're issuing these bonds, how many more people are seeing in this process. the value of trying to get more green projects or sustainable projects into the portfolio and doing more to make sure you're addressing climate, water and some other environmental issues, you're dealing with. it's sort of valuable for us as an agency -- the value of the investment, so much higher that we can do more to add additional layers to other projects.

to make them green. it would be very good to have it better -- maybe you already have it. it will be good to see more information on this as you're issuing these bonds and on the previous green bond versus regular bond. >> we're happy come back and we do the bond sale. and at the same time, we can give you our past experience with issuing green bonds. we are recognized leader both nationally and internationally of green bond issuance. i would be remised if i didn't get a shot out to michael brown and my staff. he's passionate about this. spends lot of time working on this. really helped evolve this market for us.

>> vice president ajami: i second that. i did with michael before i joined p.u.c. he was very helpful and knowledgeable. i'm glad that he have for the staff. i'm glad he's moving, leading this effort. that's really great to hear. >> thank you. he continues to do the good work. he continues to make us a leader. >> vice president ajami: thank you. >> president moran: commissioner harrington? >> commissioner harrington: than k you. thanks for that last conversation. i do lot of work in this area. people say what's the green bond and why should i bother. the response is usually, the marketing issue. money isn't different.

it's a marketing issue. people say do you have proof that a green bond gets you a better rate. huge difference, not so much may be. with lot of investors has trillions of dollars in investors, they are actively looking for things that are green. this is builds from here. it will be nice to hear about those things. >> when we started issuing green bonds several years ago, there were very few bond investors. i'm talking about the large traditional bonds, like the vanguards and fidelity and blackrock who had designated green bond funds. since then they have designated

gren bond funds. these are large funds. they have lot of money to play with to invest. they can only purchase green bonds, hopeful in this case, will attract green note buyers. that market has evolved on the investor side, it's evolving on the agency side. we're very pleased. it's benefiting both of us. >> commissioner harrington: i'm happy to see how you're using commercial paper and note and bonds when it's appropriate to certain kinds of avenues to get money and good rates. i have two questions. i know that we tend to do the resolutions as kind of boilerplate. and though you're planning doing a competitive sale, you always put in the competitive or negotiate it. i'm not a fan of negotiated

sales. do we need to keep putting this wording in? is there a problem if we take out the authority of negotiated sale? >> let me try to answer your question by explaining why it is there. we still want to move forward with our bond sales. it may behoove us to change tracks. may be easier to deal an underwriter. does that happen often? no. i never seen it happen. can happen. we allow ourselves that

flexibility. if you take out that language, you can remove that level of flexibility, it's something we've done in the past on competitive sales. >> commissioner harrington: thin k about it for next time. this one, if you choose to switch from competitive to negotiated, please alert us on the commission. very bond we issued, negotiated sale. we did it because was it first time in decades that the p.u.c. ever issued any debt. it made since to do it. we are so past that now. we are such an active player. it seems highly unlikely we'll need to negotiate. other questions was on your true

interest cost, the i think the amounts that you used is something like a 3.3% rate. that was a pro forma that we throw in that number? >> that may have been for the bonds. that was just a pro forma that our municipal advisors ran. >> commissioner harrington: we'r e going to be 1.8 or 1.9? >> no. we'll be high than that for the bonds. anywhere between 2.75 and 3. for the bonds. the notes interest costs will be well below 1%. it will be close to half percent for the notes. >> commissioner harrington: i'm looking at double a rated and triple-a rated bonds t comes in lower than that.

>> you will get the best deal that's being offered on that day. we will get you a result of the sale after the fact. >> commissioner maxwell: you mentioned a market dislocation. i think that's what you said. what is that? >> that is if there's some an event, a war or stock market crashes what happened in 2008, that caused a market dislocation. you want to be prepared to be flexible if need be. we're not expecting that over the next two weeks. >> vice president ajami: clarify on the rates. the reason the rates on the notes are lower because this

year? am i sort of missing that >> that happens to be the interest rate in today's note market given maturity on the note. the reason we're doing the notes, we can interim fund -- we have two choices. we can issue commercial paper which i explained why we don't want to do that. we can disperse on the wifia loan and the second you disperse on the wifia loan, interest starts to accrue. we can issue these notes, which says market is considerably lower than the wifia loan rate. we can issue these notes. the epa in the loan agreement allows you to do that. we done have to disperse on the wifia loans until one year after the biosolids project completion. that's another six years from

now. the best plan is while notes are cheaper than 1.45%, issuing notes until we funded both projects and then at that point, disperse on the wifia loan, pay off the notes and now you got a long-term financing 1.45%. >> vice president ajami: then you have revenue coming in that will pay off the wifia? >> we have revenue. yes. >> vice president ajami: you are having revenue on the facility? >> well, it's system -- facilities are now functioning at that point. total see these -- they want to see these projects constructed and built and then at that

point, you can disperse on the loan. >> commissioner ajami if i can provide an additional answer. i think your question was may be why the revenue bonds and the note have different interest rates. it's because the term of the note is much shorter than the term of the bond.

it's a few years versus 30. like an adjustable -- short-term mortgage. you can think of what mr. morales describing think of the commitment we have as a hedge against future interest rate changes. he did nice job describing how we try to capitalize interest at very low rates so we don't pay interrex during -- interest during construction. when the facility becomes useful, it's folded in the rate base. it's one of the points you were making. >> vice president ajami: yes, thank you so much. >> president moran: any other questions? seeing none, open this for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public

who wish to make two minutes comment on item 10, dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 146 727 7067 to raise your hand to speak press star 3. do you have any callers? >> i do have one caller in the queue. >> caller: right now, on the leading nation favoring climate change for green bonds. we have the project that started

with $6 billion debt. it's not going to be $12 billion. while those who are investing or marketing opportunities, are you paying attention that right now when it comes to the digesters, they are not on track? when it comes to biosolids that are not on track. it's true. we have facilities and it's true that we have restore the water. we keep on wasting our resources. it's nauseating when huge

contractors that you allow them to change orders and then as you're in a fantasy world to talk about this bond. it's going to come to bite us in the butt, sooner not later. we have to get people attention what is happening in china and what china is doing to say alibaba and people in china. that will affect us whether we like it or not. >> the call queue is clear. >> clerk: public comment on item 10 is closed.

>> president moran: any other questions or comments? seeing none. if i can a motion and a second? >> i'll move. >> president moran: moved by maxwell and seconded by harrington. call the roll. [roll call vote] you have five ayes. >> president moran: thank you. the item passes. call the items for closed session. >> clerk: following item will be heard during closed session. item number 13, conference with legal counsel pursuant to

california government code san francisco administrative code section 67.10d1, existing litigation san joaquin, water resources control board. members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment on items 13 to be heard during closed session. dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 146 727 7067 pound, pound. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. this is for item number 13 closed session. do we have any callers? >> we have two in the queue.

>> caller: you are going into closed session. in the past we had couple of workshops where whatever you're going to discuss, we discussed it in the workshop. the solution. i hope that you will be fair as i say, often, who will speak for the salmon? we were very lucky we got more than 12 inches of rain. we have lot of snow right now. we have a good sign that should lead us to rivers that need it

for the sake of the salmon. thank you very much. >> thank you. next caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: good afternoon commissioners, i will speak about our recent announcement from the california secretary of environmental protection and natural resources for voluntary agreement to preview the bay -- approve the -- the bawsca and water use is at continued risk from the bay-delta plan. requiring rationing up to 50%. bawsca water users say that would be unacceptable. bawsca urges your commission to address that matter while bawsca has intervened in your litigation against the state board of the bay delta plan.

resolution of this issue is a better solution. you and your staff have the technical credentials and responsibility to do so. fortunatelythe sfpuc and irrigation district developed the tuolumne river agreement. 350 members drive low tech economy. california state senators and assembly members -- bawsca will work with allies and your

commission to resolve water supply issues. i ask the state board to analyze this promptly to part of the adopt the bay-delta plan. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. the call queue is clear. >> clerk: thank you. public comment on item to be heard during closed session is closed. >> president moran: can i have a motion to serve attorney-client privilege? moved by maxwell and secondly by ajami. roll call please. >> clerk: on motion to exert attorney-client privilege. [roll call vote]

you have five ayes. >> president moran: we will go into closed session. >> clerk: thank you, please stand by. >> stand by for>> president mora motion to disclose the discussion in the closed session. >> so moved. >> second. [ indiscernible ] roll call please. >> clerk: a motion not to disclose discussions. [roll call vote] you have five ayes.

>> president moran: all right. is there any other business before this commission? >> clerk: no mr. president. this concludes business for today. >> president moran: we are adjourned.

a city like no other, san francisco has been a beacon of hope, and an ally towards lgbtq equal rights. [♪♪] >> known as the gay capital of america, san francisco has been at the forefront fighting gay civil rights for decades becoming a bedrock for the historical firsts. the first city with the first openly gay bar. the first pride parade. the first city to legalize gay marriage. the first place of the iconic gay pride flag.

established to help cancel policy, programses, and initiatives to support trans and lgbtq communities in san francisco. >> we've created an opportunity to have a seat at the table. where trans can be part of city government and create more civic engagement through our trans advisory committee which advises our office and the mayor's office. we've also worked to really address where there's gaps across services to see where we can address things like housing and homelessness, low income, access to small businesses and employment and education. so we really worked across the board as well as meeting overall policies. >> among the priorities, the office of transgender

initiatives also works locally to track lgbtq across the country. >> especially our young trans kids and students. so we do a lot of work to make sure we're addressing and naming those anti-trans policies and doing what we can to combat them. >> trans communities often have not been included at the policy levels at really any level whether that's local government, state government. we've always had to fend for ourselves and figure out how to care for our own communities. so an office like this can really show and become a model for the country on how to really help make sure that our entire community is served by the city and that we all get opportunities to participate because, in the end, our entire community is stronger. >> the pandemic underscored many of the inequities they

experienced on a daily basis. nonetheless, this health crisis also highlighted the strength in the lgbtq and trans community. >> several of our team members were deployed as part of the work at the covid command center and they did incredit able work there both in terms of navigation and shelter-in-place hotels to other team members who led equity and lgbtq inclusion work to make sure we had pop-up testing and information sites across the city as well as making sure that data collection was happening. we had statewide legislation that required that we collected information on sexual orientation and our team worked so closely with d.p.h. to make sure those questions were included at testing site but also throughout the whole network of care. part of the work i've had a privilege to be apart of was to

work with o.t.i. and a community organization to work together to create a coalition that met monthly to make sure we worked together and coordinated as much as we could to lgbtq communities in the city. >> partnering with community organizations is key to the success of this office ensuring lgbtq and gender nonconforming people have access to a wide range of services and places to go where they will be respected. o.t.i.'s trans advisory committee is committed to being that voice. >> the transgender advisory counsel is a group of amazing community leaders here in san francisco. i think we all come from all walks of life, very diverse, different backgrounds, different expertises, and i think it's just an amazing group of people that have a vision to make san francisco a true liberated city for

transgender folks. >> being apart of the grou allows us to provide more information on the ground. we're allowed to get. and prior to the pandemic, there's always been an issue around language barriers and education access and workforce development. now, of course, the city has been more invested in to make sure our community is thriving and making sure we are mobilizing. >> all of the supervisors along with mayor london breed know that there's still a lot to be done and like i said before, i'm just so happy to live in a city where they see trans folks and recognize us of human beings and know that we deserve to live with dignity and

respect just like everybody else. >> being part of the trans initiative has been just a great privilege for me and i feel so lucky to have been able to serve for it for so far over three years. it's the only office of its kind and i think it's a big opportunity for us to show the country or the world about things we can do when we really put a focus on transgender issues and transgender communities. and when you put transgender people in leadership positions. >> thank you, claire. and i just want to say to claire farly who is the leader of the office of transgender initiatives, she has really taken that role to a whole other level and is currently a grand marshal for this year's s.f. prize. so congratulations, claire. >> my dream is to really look at where we want san francisco to be in the future. how can we have a place where we have transliberation,

quality, and inclusion, and equity across san francisco? and so when i look five years from now, ten years from now, i want us to make sure that we're continuing to lead the country in being the best that we can be. not only are we working to make sure we have jobs and equal opportunity and pathways to education, employment, and advancement, but we're making sure we're taking care of our most impacted communities, our trans communities of color, trans women of color, and black trans women. and we're making sure we're addressing the barriers of the access to health care and mental health services and we're supporting our seniors who've done the work and really be able to age in place and have access to the services and resources they deserve. so there's so much more work to do, but we're really proud of the work that we've done so far. [♪♪]

>> the hon. london breed: this is the first event held in city hall since the pandemic, and we are