>> hello? yes. president laguana thank you for taking my call. this is david huie zouzounis. i want to pile out on those shout outsfor rick . he walked us through the legacy business process very supportive theentire way and i appreciate that . and executive director victor, thank you for reminding the citizens of san francisco how important small business is to our community. thank you very much. >> president: thankyou. any other colors online ? okay. seeing none, public comment is

closed. next item please. >> clerk: item 8, small office of small business annual repor . the commission will review and discuss the office of small business annual report for fiscal year 2019 20 and 2021 . presenting to today is director andrew z. >> yes. okay. so commissioners, there we go. so as rick had noted, one is we are doing a two-year annual report because the 1920 report would have been due approximately around december

of 2020. and we were in the throes of the pandemic and so again, we are getting caught up and the 2021 report is several months delay. so we're combining both years. and some places in the report you will see an aggregate of reporting data and at other points this is separatingout of the report .of the different years. all right. okay. the report covers an overview of the office. what was accomplished. we do have a specific covid

question because of the two-year overlap of the reportingperiod . and then what's ahead for the office and department and lessons learned and then a budget. so we start off the report providing an overview of the mandate and the predominant mandate that we highlight are the ones that are proposition d, proposition i, proposition . but what i've included here is also the ordinances that also guide and direct the activityof office of small business . so just a quick recap.the small business commission was established and created in 200 , proposition d established small business commission as a

charter commission and then subsequently was followed up by ordinance to determine the powers and duty of the commission . in 2007, proposition i established the office of small business and predominantly mobile business assistance center and then in 2015 the ordinance creating the legacy registry brought 2015 that also have proposition j which created thehistoric preservation fund .then 2021 the ordinance establishing the neighborhood anchor registry and then also it also included a, the neighborhood anchor business registry business grants and loans, a program that will need to be created to cover those areas still along

with the neighborhood anchor legacy. and then in 2019 our office was slated to work with the tenants for the active space to help these tenants guide them through the legislation and the zoning that allowed these tenants which is prominent predominantly for massage based businesses that were in that building were going to be evicted and supervisor ronen wrote legislation that allowed those businesses to stay 10 years so we were assigned to help those businesses through the process once the zoning circulations wentthrough at which we have done and that process is completed . i've also highlighted that the 2021 then you fund which you know, the $3 million was

allocated and we have distributed most of that. that's not assigned under article 16. which article 16 of the administrative code is everything that is either through a ballot measure or ordinances assigned to the office ofsmall business , small business commission gets listed under article in the advanced code of the municipal code the venue fund while it's been assigned to the office of smal business to administer , it is actually listed under an ordinance listed under the administrative code under article 8 funds. so, but it is the program and projectof the office of small business . then there is the organization chart. we have a small business commission which provides the

governance andoversight for the office . and i report to you, the director works to the small business commission and to the right of that you will see the policy analyst commission territory, that position works and reports to both you and i. and then in terms ofoffice operations , we have a small business commission supervisor which ismarked again , case manager is the public information officer to work with other departments and then carl hands themarketing such as social media . and then another case manager and also abe program manager

rhea aguilando and case management, simplified case management and then we have legacy business program manager richard carrillo. so those that are assigned to case manager positions are the ones that through the client services as a business assistance center. so we are now moving into the section of what was accomplished so for the small business commission he highlights there's a little more detail in the full report . you made recommendations on 40 pieces of legislation, reviewed 55 local policy initiatives and proposal. past four resolutions and reviewed two pieces of state legislation. a majority of the recommendation and proposals during this time didn't relate to the economic recovery and

did influence the outcomes of recommendations in the economic recovery task force. for the smallbusiness assistance center , for fiscal year 19 20, the first eight months wewere in our what i call normal operations pre-pandemic . what i want to highlight is excuse me, i'm providing a graph of our client services and the number of clients served starting with 1516 so you can begin to see. it's always been a pretty steady increase but this is a more escalating increase then we have had prior to 1516. and so i do want to highlight that in the first eight months, of 1920 we were 40 percent over

the year 1819 and then of course the pandemic it and it really spiked our client services. taking a look atfiscal year 1920 , so excuse me, 2021. as the pandemic, as operations began to normalize, businesses were to open back up. we're still living under covid but this businesses are able to be open andoperating . and so we consider june of 2021 coming to the end of the demarcation for the business assistance center in terms of facilitatingservices and relationship to the pandemic crisis . so all of our services have that overlay in terms of

operations particularly where we are working near new businesses. so because the 1920 fiscal year in client services was somewhat of an abnormality interms of normal operations because of the pandemic , taking a look at our client services for 2021, again to normalize i am doing a comparison of the percentage increase over 1819. and so if you see on the chart down here, we are approximately 27.5 out of 27.5 percent increase in client services over 1819. i hope that makes sense. and to note that we are providing this ever-increasing number with essentially you know, with the addition of one

other case manager with the addition of one kind of partial case manager since the opening of the office of mall business in 2008. non-english services provided. 7.89 in spanish and 4.24 in chinese. that's an average and we do see pretty consistently the top industries of the clients served are in food services, certain services and nail salons. personal services, the retail trade and professional and technical services and those are outlined in a little more detail in the annual report. so again, under ds the ac i

wanted to highlight that prior to the pandemic 40 percent of the clients we serve are in their pre-startup phase. these are businesses coming to the office of small business wanting to get information about what is thelicensing . what is the permitting requirements for them to open their business. usually so that they can then goaway and provide their business plan to figure out their financing . and then we do have 20 percent that we classify as startups which means that they areready to engage and start the licensing and permitting process . 20 percent forexisting businesses but during the pandemic , there's kind of a flip. so 64 percent of the businesses served our existing businesses, clearly that's obvious. you know with the existing

businesses that we are in, the crisis because of thepandemic that we did serve some pre-startup and start up . during that time period as well. the number of clients that we serve in relationship is closing or expanding new business or business acquisition orrelocating their business, those percentages are pretty much thesame as in our normal years of operation . and then , we also one of the things that we did do in response to covid was we increased the number of the newsletters that we sent out so in fiscal year we sent out 102. both fiscal years combined it was 159. we did google translation so that we could provide real-time information in other languages. we did google translate for our

english newsletters. not the most ideal but it was very helpful for our businesses add language needs to be able to get information about the grants, loans, health directives, things of that sor . and if they needed additional clarity they didcontact the office . we did see for the san francisco development alliance, the organization under that entity at the council of district merchants all work went a few times sections of the newsletter. you can see that for our languages that we translated, the most read was chinese. the second in spanish and we did have individuals read into gallic, russian and arabic, all the other languages we translated those into the newsletter.

again for fiscal year 20-21 200 newsletters were sent out. open rate is 28.93. that's a pretty good number. then click through 7.94.our average rate was at seven percent or .07 and then unsubscribe at 4.07 so we did receive a good deal of positive feedback for our newsletters and so proud of what our business counselors were able to push back on in addition to the high number of the increased volume of business assistance that they provided . and then i won't repeat what rick just provided you in terms

of his reportbut these are some again of the key highlights . that were accomplished in those two years. i summarized each year and then for the commission, i want to highlight the work that you did during the response. so in march ninth of 2020 the resolution urging the city, you drafted the resolution or pass a resolution excuse me urging the city to expeditiously support our small businesses. you sent a letter to the mayor and board of supervisorsurging federal relief . that needed to be advocated fo . may 13 a letter to the economic recovery task force on small-business recommendations. there were 56. a good number of those recommendations ended up in the land use recommendations ended up with proposition eight,

small business recovery act. you propose that there should be businesses should be one year of license and permit fee waivers but you didn't necessarily say a first-year free but you did articulate the need to have one year free for licensing for new businesses opening and so that is reflected in the first year free. you opine on the need for getting third-party deliveries under control. so i'm going to highly recommend that you go back to that document and take a look at it and just really mend your self for the number of recommendations that you submitted in may of 2020. just you know, two months into the pandemic that have been implemented and dealt with in

some form or fashion either through legislation or programs . and then in december you sent a follow-up letter to the mayor and board of supervisors about additional relief that was needed. and then in december resolution urging support for entertainment and nightlife which resulted in the venue fund. and then of course, the all-important survey that was done in conjunction with san francisco state university and provided with over 500 small businesses responding and provided a wealth of information understanding the impact of covid on our small businesses. then this is a highlight of kind of month by month in terms ofthe number of businesses served .so again, the highest

spike was in march and april 2020. so then the next in june we see kind of a decrease in november december when pretty much things were shut down there wasn't any more additional federal funding relief . local orstate funding relief . so there wasn't much more that could beoffered in support for businesses at that particular time . and then to the right is just you know, retract the need. of the request of assistance needed and of course the highest number of clients that contacted us were in need of financial service. of financial assistance. the second we said general guidance. this washelping businesses

navigate through the health directives . and not all businesses fit neatly in the boxes of how the health directives were issued so helping businesses understand how to apply the health directives to their business type or getting clarity from the city attorney and the department of public health in terms of you know, how the guidance applied to certainbusinesses . and then, that's also reopening guidance and then early on we had a number of businesses needing assistance on how to handle the workforce and of course real estate guidance as well. and then for additional response with our legacy business, with the legacy businesses the soccer creative group who created the logo and design created free ads in may

and june for our legacy businesses not only for us to promote us if we did our e-news letter and social media but for thebusinesses to be able to use as well . before we had access to free personal protective equipment, rick reached out to the legacy businesses and asked if they were interested in beingput on a list . so that you could have a fee to support and providing personal protective gear. we were being contacted by businesses who didn't know where to access it. they tried to go on amazon but amazon was completed so we together this personal protective list and it endedup growing . it ended up growing by businesses contacting us and wanting to be added so it wasn't just masks and hand

sanitizer but it was helping businesses also you know, build the sneeze guards and things of that sort. and then of course we had the music and entertainment venue fund that 70 grants were awarded to music and entertainment venues . and then lessons learned. this is you know, for you president laguana that we need to improve our technology to be able to communicate with small businesses quicklyand efficiently and particularly in times of emergency . and then we discovered a number of issues around business registration, vin formations with social security. that businesses were challenged in being able to applyfor

grants . when we saw this challenge, be discrepancies where businesses had opened their business here in san francisco before they really have their business plan and what have you they would register as a sole proprietor and then as they got the business open and it was working probably with a tax account they formed an llc. they would register as an llc at the state but not go back and change theirbusiness registration . so the state and federal government required those alignments that their business formation online . when we saw that this discrepancy would prevent businesses from the people to apply, the local grants remove thatrequirement . but at the state and federal level, that department needed to match and the challenge is that then to go back and change

our business registration, it would mean you would have to close out this business, restart a new business under the llc which then would trigger both re-permitting process and so we did have to deal with businesses which either did not have the financial means of redoing the permitting process or the time to complete that process if they did have the financial means to be able to access some of the funding grants that wer available. so that's just one example . there is in the report several other examples, but just the non-alignment with business formation, this is something i

think is a lesson learned for us about working to communicate with businesses and particularly businesses that are opening with a sole proprietor business registration that we know will probably need to engage in permitting once they start opening their business to make sure that gets directed.and then of course the commission has noted and we have seen that virtual attendance, the business community has increased its virtual, its presence by being able to attend board of supervisors meetings, commissionmeetings, other commissioner for meetings . by being able to attend them virtually and so hopefully we will be able to continue with that. the ability for businesses to be able to attend both in

person and virtually after the commission is able to be, is able to return to in person meetings. and then lookingahead , you will continueto provide policy recommendations for economic recovery .the economic mitigation working group that is now kind of reenacted and reactivated, so our office is working. commissioner zouzounis and kerry are working with president walton's office on the recommendations and then of course the commission will continue its work under the guidance of commissioner zouzounis around inequitable and outdated anti-loitering laws. and then also the small-business commissions

racial equity committee coming up is to work on the completion of adoption of a resolution that affirms racial equity in the sbc's department of work and expanding the capability of commission members to hear from first voices so to bring diverse voices greater into the commission'swork . and then looking ahead for the sbc legacy business that we have the neighborhood business program. the small business assistance center will be adding 2 new positions that are currently slated for 49 , it will be at the permit center to be able to assist and work with the permitting agencies and they've already established that this is a need that they are really looking forward.

they're looking forward to having the presence of the office of small business at the permit center for providing that support and as we provide holistic assistance, that will be coming up in a year. then legacy business, continue with the plaque installation. so i think in the future you're going to need to sort of work in support of budgeting wise to see if we can escalate the number of plaques being installed for the upcoming years because at the rate we're going it will take many years so but that is a budgeting component . so that all of our legacy businesses that are able to have a plaque on the exterior of their building are able to do so and then of course the neighborhood anchor and there

is one full-time fte that rick has identified that will be soon coming on with the program and then the neighborhood anchoring business program is to hire the one fte and implement a program director, future director katie can will be overseeing and implementing. and just high-level budget for each year first of all overhead so personnel does include salary andbenefits . the overhead bus pay our operational expenses. the legacy business program i did not include carryforward but in this particular budget that's rick so he provided you with that detailed information and then just taking a look at the total for the department budget. you can see that in fiscal year

19-20 was 5 million 2400 and that was the 500,000 was through and out back by the board of supervisors assistance grant and with that , thank you for your indulgence and time for this report. and the presentation and i wil , i'm happy to take any questions, clarifyingquestions you may have . that was a lot. you're doing quitea bit . >> it's a lot to see all in on place like that . we have collectively done a lot but very much with your

guidance. do wehave any questions ? carrie, could you do me the kind favor of sending both the annual report and the legacy business annual report to myself and the other commissioners? we can spend some more time analyzing this and thinking about this. seeing no comment, is there any public commenters on the line? >> clerk: there is nobody on the line.>> president: the mind reels. there's just so much going on and so much to absorb and i particularly agree with all your comments on opportunities going forward.

particularly asyou know improving our communication . so with that, next item please. >> clerk: item of small-business updates, this is a discussion item is entered by director dick-endrizzi. >> okay. i will provide thatin just a moment . commissioners, i just want to make sure before you as we go through the transition of director for me to katie kane just provide you with our budget update for fiscal year 2022. our fiscal years are july 1

through june 30. so i've broken thisout in a little more detail but currently , what our budget allocation is for personnel is wehave the director position . we have the 4 sec staff and as i noted we technically just have three and we have a public service training he who ... helps with business but then more simplifies business counseling. we have the legacy business program manager and fund a person in the small business development center, a past fte in small business development center to provide thattechnical

assistance for legacy businesses .then that total budget is 1,258,000 195. then in addition, what's being added this year. the staff is going to grow as the programs grow but to the two additional sba staff for the permit center the one legacy business person that rickhas spoken of . and then the one neighborhood anchoring business program staff fte that's assigned. so that is an additional $651,988. the total personnel that's budgeted for this fiscal year is 1,000,910. 910,183.

and then our overhead has gone up a little bit from the previous years so that's159,522 . our operational expenses, i've broken this out and pulled in some of the legacy business and anchorbusiness programs expenses under operating . so to summarize our briefing we budget for this year 47,875 to be able to ensure that the small business community has access to the meetings by sfgov.org. general operating expensesare at 52,938 . the legacy business it's sort of annual operating expensesis 20,400 . that's definitelyallocated every year . then this year we have an additional legacy business marketing which is part of the

budget for this year but it's not part of the budget annually. that's the 75,500 that rick highlighted. the neighborhood anchoring business, there is a one time budget that's been budgeted as part of the ad back in 80,000 to work on marketing and to conduct a survey of the neighborhood anchoring businesses once that program is up and going and then annually the neighborhood anchoring business is going to receive a $25,000 allocation as part of its annual sort of operational and programmatic support. and then for the legacy business grant program and the known carryforward or for this fiscal year at 1,000,500 thousand 400. so this now increases the overall budget for the office at 3,000,678 thousand 596.

and then i did want to show you now what the organizational chart looks like . so over here to the right i have removed the public service division, this was a temporary position. the person who occupied that position has moved on to another job so this was a temporary position , this position will not carryforward for right now. so what you do see is we have our current three business case managers. we have the two additionalcase managers or permit center . we have rick of the legacy business program and then the new position for to support the legacy business program.

and then the neighborhood anchoring assistance program manager so just to provide you with a visual in terms of how the office will be structured once everybody willbe hired. so once everybody is hired . and with that i'm happy to take any questions that you may have with regard to the budget this year. again, this is not for you to approve. it's to give you an idea so that you know what's ahead for the new director and some of the program focus that she will be experiencing asshe comes on at the first of the year .>> do we have anyquestions ? do we have any public comment? >> we do not. >> seeing on public comment is closed. next item. >> clerk: item 10, resolution

number 005-2021, sbc disabled access credit expansion act of 2021. this is a discussion and action item. the discussion may take action on a resolution requesting the board of supervisors to adopt a resolution that urges congress to pass the disabled access credit expansion act of 2021. presenting today is director david grayson. >> thank you carrie. this is resolution is urging the board of supervisors to adopt a resolution to urge all federal elected to take action on the disabled tax credit. and for your information, when the board of supervisors adopts the resolution . it is essentially and it is forwarded either to our state or federal electives. it essentially is the city saying we want you tosupport this measure and take action on

it and ensure it gets passed . so that's why we are urging the board of supervisors to draft and adopt a resolution. this this tax credit extension so apparently the taxcredit right now is 10,000 , approximately 10,000 but you can take up to 50 percent of 10,000 so that's $5000. this will increase the tax credit to ... and i amrealizing i am forgetting the full number . >> i believe it's a ceiling of 10,500 for the credits. >> 20,000 or the new act is for both the senate. let me bring up the resolution and i really apologize commissioners were not having my notes that are prepared . >> but it is essentially

doubling the available tax credit amount. and which is you know, something that is really important particularly since we are now as we all know there have been a good deal of you know, ada lawsuits. this will substantially help businesses to be able to offset the cost of remediating the barriers . and it does but i guess one thing i failed to say is that currently if you businesses that have $1 million or less in revenue are able to take advantage of thecurrent tax credit . and that tax credit hasn't

changed since 1998. that dollar amount. so this will now the businesses to $2.5 million in revenue. you can take advantage of the tax credit. and it increases the tax credi , the total tax credit it increases the total if you have expenses up to 20,500 you can take a credit on 50percent so that's now 10,250 . you can take a tax credit on you know, $10,250 worth of expenses should you have over 10,000 so to speak. half of what that is. and then there is an additional tax deduction at 15,000.

that dollar amount isnot being adjusted. but essentially , with those two things combined, if you did have a $20,000 expenditure for over, you can combine both the tax credit and the deduction. i know i'm not explaining that too clearly. so what again, this is something that has been needed for along time . i understand tax credits are beneficial overtaxed adoptions. and so again, this is benefiting small businesses. so there now that have a revenue of 2.5 million and increasing the tax credit from 10,000.

from $10,000 worth of eligible expenses $5000 worth of tax credits to $20,500 worth of eligible expenses or 10,215 in tax credits. i'll leave it at that. so i just am not continuing to make things confusing and if we need a little bit more clarity let me know. >> i've got just fine commissioners any questions ? is there any publiccomment ? >> no one's online.>> do we have a motion? >> motion to approve this resolution for the tax credit, disabled tax credit. >> moved by commissioner adams,

seconded by president laguana. [roll call vote] motion passes unanimously . >> president: great. next itemplease . >> item 11 approval of meeting minutes >> president: any questions or amendments ? is there any public comment? >> clerk: there is no one on the line. >> president: i moved to accept theminutes . >> i will second. >> moved by president laguana, seconded by commissioner

dickerson . i willcall the role . [roll call vote] >> clerk: motion passes unanimously. >> president: next item please. >> item 12, general public comment. this is a discussion item which allows members of the public to comment on items within a small business commission's jurisdiction butnot on today's calendar and suggest new agenda

items for future consideration . >> president: arethere any colors on the queue? >> clerk: we have no colors on the queue . >> president: next item. >> clerk: directors report, update and report on the office of small business and small business assistance center, department programs policy and legislative matters and announcements regarding small business activities. this is a discussion item . >> caller: this is my last and final directors report to you. so i'm going to start off with some legislative updates items that have passed through the board of supervisors that you have heard is the waiver on the fee banners, public works code for the temporary tree occupancy for sidewalks during the holiday season . the update on the regulations forthe cannabis code .the

supervisors passed requests for creating the 10 a for the sheriff's department and then the temporary suspension of the cannabis tax. that was extended another year or so passed the board of supervisors and then the business and awning marquis. you heard that legislation a couple of monthsago . that passed and as noted today with the massage establishment zoning controls, its original legislation you heard a couple of months ago , that also passed the board of supervisors on its first reading. so all of those should accept for probably the fee waiver for the banner and for the public works and temporarysuspension , those will for 30 days after

the mayor signs so most of those will take effect in january . and then in january for you, things for you to look forward to interms of legislation is the graffiti abatement . lifting the suspension of the issuance of the certain violations and reinstating collection of certain fees and fines that will come before you andthen also , supervisor peskin is proposing additional amendments to the third-party delivery services. that will be coming before you. and then while this was referred to the commission but we are not hearing or you will not be hearing its the domestic workers access paid sick leave through the portable system that will likely be scheduled

in january. that's before the commission but has reached the committee. so other items legislatively that i also want to kind of bring to your attention policy wise attended the council merchants legislation committee meeting this morning. and so one of the key items that they talked about was the unpermitted individual spending on sidewalks. so food wise and merchandise wise. and some of this has gotten out of control because of a state legislation so we should all be reminded that we actually do have a permitting process for food vendors but they there are entities that do take advantage by doing nonregulated food

parts in the evening. when we don't have an enforcement. the key thing about the sb 946 that has affected the food vending is it does prior recruitment to respond to non-permitted vending in the public right-of-way fc 946 now prohibits that. so we don't have adequate enforcement from either public works for department of public health to deal withmonitoring as permitted food vending . so we used to have a permit called the peddlers permit that was under the police department and since sb 946 prevented any kind of permitting and enforcement by thepolice

department , we currently don't have a permitting process for merchandise goods. in the public right-of-way in the city except for the court and the court recently created its own preventing structure . for both well, the permitting structure for doing vending on the sidewalk and the courts domain. so the council of district merchants noted in many commercial districts that there's an uptick in the merchandise component of the being sold on the sidewalk and of course the frustration of the unpermitted food vendors. so i'm just bringing this to your attention because it was quite a bit of discussion something that is going to be i think important for them in the

next year in 2022 to look at these direct. i know that the supervisor is asked made mention of this and the mayor of course is very aware of that so that's also something to take a look at in the mayor's office as well. this may be something that comes before you maybe something that our office or the office of small business is askedto participate in and work on coming in 2022 . and then just to follow-up for the legacy business program alluded to it. we would have a five-year report based on opposition j on the effects of the historic preservation grants on preserving our legacy businesses. that was to have taken place during fiscal year i think

2021. and but because of the pandemic that wasn't able to take place. the controller's officeis working on it . and had hoped to have it completed by the end of this calendar year but it's taking a little more time sothat is something for you to , that you will receive probably in the first quarter of 2022. where for the third quarter of the fiscal year but just know that the controller's office is working on that five-year report that is required by proposition j. and then as i noted earlier the tax are going up. rick will be sending you pictures andupdates . there's a total of 11, rick?

17, sorry.and so they are being all in one so i think once rick will completed you will get pictures out to you and the list ofbusinesses that where the plaques are installed . and then some updates as the mayor did announce that stephanie covina was nominated to sf mta board of directors. and she worked with their action group. i guess this is well, she is nominated. she's nominating the board of supervisors able, they are able for the sf mta board of directors either to approve or not approve the mayor's nomination to the sf mta board of directors so the mayor made

that announcement and stephanie will need to go before the board of supervisors to finalize this appointment. but i think that this is for small business needs a good appointment that the mayor has made. and then you may have already received the announcement from last week that the mayor will be introducing legislation to provide businesses with additionaltime . to do the safety and accessibilitychanges to shared spaces . as always , that extension in time to make the x testability changes does not prevent somebody from being sued or having a non-acceptableshared space . it's just is providing the time for them to be able to make those changes but as always, with the federal ada it's

anytime you are doing any sort of bill or tenant improvement in real-time, based on accessibility requirements still are in place for you to do. so i just want to make sure there isn't any confusion should it happen because there are businesses that are receiving lawsuits for noncompliant shared spaces. so that just because the city is expending that time does not mean that they are not. they're still held accountable for being noncompliant. let me know if there's any questions on that. and then for the osb business counselingservices , due to some staffing shortages which i will elaborate for you not tonight but we are going to the closing the business assistance

center for in person services until mid-february and we will still be providing it through email and phone the appointments will be made for businesses that may need extensive counseling and this was done in consultation so a consultant bothof your future director , anything that's in the surface and how best to manage the situation so we all came to the conclusion that first 60 days we will beclosing for in person services . and then i want you to be aware that i will be working with your future director katie pan. we will be spending time together to help provide as smooth a transition as possible on the operations of the operant office and so that had

radically. i'm very appreciative of both of you approving the recommendations for katie to be the next director and the mayor appointing her to be able to have the opportunity totry to make the transition as smooth as possible . and then i think you did ask the question. we do not know yet. we haven't had an affirmative. there has been some discussion about returning to in person commission meetings at least four commissioners to be in person . sometime in januarybut we haven't received an affirmative on that . kerry will as soon as that takes place or as soon as it's determined kerry will be notified but i will be training carry on how to conduct and run the commission meetings in

person so we will be having a training session before my departure. so hopefully that won't be too long from now that you will be able to convene and be able to conduct your meetings in room 400 and kerry will be trained and no pickups. there will be no pickups for you lastly i wanted to share some observations from my time in england . so interestinglyenough , they do not have as strong of a mas mandate . they do have a very good vaccination rate but not as strong of a mask mandate so very interesting to, i wore my mass. but in shopping and definitely dining, people are not walking

into the businesses with a mask on. so it's interesting, but then on the other hand the national health service makes it very easy for tests as well. so i was in birmingham in the central part of the city and they had a thing called the christmas market and there was the nhs passing out free covid tests. it's just an interesting observation in terms of how their sort of handling and managing consumer confidence and getting out and engaging the businesses and activities so i think they recently did have a significant search in the new virus. but also, there was not as many vacancies as we have here.

and then one other thing that i've already mentioned to commissioner zouzounis that when i was in london staying in an area called back mri in the southeast london and on the high street, the commercial spaces are pretty big and pretty large and they just had this very organic but we've created and their new director katie kang created the zoning definition for retail so they just have these very organic flex retail commercial spaces that you might have a little bit of produce outfront and then a phone, business and then a hair salon in theback . and i all were busy, all were active so it just kind of just

sort of hit me that one, the flex retail is something that is not being utilized. and to the degree it can and we probably could have or organic activity with multiple businessesbeing in one space . and not to be too afraid to be over having to define what spaces go together. or what types of businesses go together but like you know the flex retail does not allow for food-based businesses but or at least more like open food-based businesses so it does allow for a limited restaurants and other things but so is just a very

interesting one and it was interesting to see how lively the streets and businesses work. so you know, kind of my parting words to the board of supervisors is we really made this huge catapult with proper age and our small business recovery act . in making things more simplified and nimble and my goodness, far more simplified and nimble and being able to open the business and now the first year free that wasn't there in the economic crisis of 2009 and 2010 when the office of small business first opened. so you know, just for i reminded them that there are other factors that come into play with his mrs. feeling confident.

about opening which is needing to ensure that there is enough of a customer base that's going to becoming in and doing business with you once you open . that's sensitive customer confidence as we see the pandemic kind of goup and down . rent as it necessarily fully come downeither . so just to give things time to find marinate in a way. like business ideas to marinate and you know, the knowing that we have a far more flexible and nimble promoting structure than we did in 2009 10 and the last economic crisis and businesses we are thinking creatively. so we need to allow that time for the creation i know the first year free has a limited one year time i think we will

begin to see some very interesting businesses and business ideas coming forward but we also need to ensure that how do we build that bridge to making people feel more confident about getting out and really engaging with our businesses and being inside of our businesses, not just on the outside of our businesses. so anyway, i'll just kind of leave it atthat . and thank you. happy to take any questions. >> commissioners, any questions west and mark. >> i have a quick question. director, thank youfor all your reports tonight . for flexible retail, i got an inquiry from a gallery owner that they're having trouble

staying in business and i thought what retail would be a goodoption for them to look into . what's the best way to refer people to seeing what's feasible for flexible retail? >> i would say even though we're shortstaffed it might still be refer them to osb or they could go osb. i think the things that to think about one is that it is a youth type so it might be a change of youth if they have to gothrough to be able to allow the flex retail . and it sort of do they have an idea of other businesses that they want to share their space with because to go through that change of youth you might want

to ensure that they're going to gothrough it . you do have other business ideas that but once established and you can establish it more narrowly if i recall correctly for more expensive. and if you establish it more expensive, businesses cancome and go . if your primary kind of. so i think even for the planning department and essentially even for some of the other regulatory agencies because we haven't really utilized it and seen it it will bea learning process for all agencies . >> but planning would be the first stop to see what needs changing. >> yes.

i mean, because we have it be still have to establish the location as a flex retail location so you would have to do a change of views. >> like, there's no uses that are already in line with that. itwould be a new use every time . >> once you establish that location and again , we still need to verify that the location will still work for flex use but once it's established , i think if i recall i can't this definitively because no one's really used it and accessed it. since was put in place or to my

knowledge at least through osd but i think that you could establish it was more narrow parameters or more broad parameters and you and i can talk the talk off-line in terms of you can make it broader so once this establishes flex use then you can have if you want to bring in like a little cafi thing or coffee thing and a clothing store but then the coffee thing wants to grow and become its ownbusiness you can bring something else in . as long as it's within the allowable uses within flex retail businesses can come and go in that space without having to go back to the planning department for approved use. >> that's helpful, thank you. >> president: anyother commissioner questions or

comments ? is there any public comment? >> clerk: there is no public comment. >> president: public comment is closed. next item. >>. >> clerk: item 14, commission discussion and business, allowing commissioners to report on recent small busines activities, make announcements of interest to the community and make inquiries of staff. allows commissioners to introduce newagenda items for future consideration this is a discussion item . >> president: are there any commissioner comments or questions or new business ? vice president zouzounis . >> thank you. i attended or was invited to an event put on by sons ofblack wall street and bsf filipino chamber of commerce . i think it's so amazing that merchants are still working

together like this . it is something that's directly inline with what our racial equity committee wants to support . they're inviting each other to sit on their advisory boards for different projects and its great president and collaboration so i just wanted to give them props for that and that was the main thing i had right now. i will give more updates on our racial equity committee goals as they come but we are creating some great policies, policy goals for our commissio . >> president: very good to hear. is there anything else or was that it? okay. commissioner adams.

>> thank you everybody again for your kind words. to let you know i represented the small business commission on december 4, saturday in the sunset merchants association. they actually had this cool thing. they had members of the council of district merchants and some others. we did up holiday lighting in the neighborhood and the inner sunsetwas rocking . i was so happy. so the cities starting to come back to life and we need to support these people that's it . >> president: thank you. commissioner ortiz-cartegena. >> this saturday it was the shop on 49... [inaudible] it

was amazing. it had food, cultural aspects of the community. it was a big turnout but most of all it was a boost to the law-enforcement district court ours. it was jumping with music and people started walking around the neighborhood so i guess we want to do a shout out to quattro and marianne thompson. it was really really fun and just what we need in our commercial corridor or . >> president: i was taking my son to get his booster shot and you pulled up right across the street from me i believe. i didn't see you but it was quite a party scene. lots of loud music and i was

jealous. i was saying to thekids we should be out over there . commissioner huie. >> i wanted to share i will be hosting a workshop in the richmond district on tuesday to just kind of i guess share information about ada issues to address the ada lawsuits we've had in the neighborhood and we have few resources coming for a little panel discussion. i'm hoping that we can get a nice little model down for future workshops so we can expand some of these workshops to other groups. my hope is that we can encourage our small business community to start thinking about how to make their businesses more accessible and

more welcoming to all people. so i think i'm excited to see what kind of feedback the community members will give and what types of questions they will have and things like that. looking forward to more workshops like this and looking forward to more conversations that are really positive. and moving towards moreprogress . >> president: commissioner dickerson . >> i have the privilege, we were invited to ... can you hear me? >> president: yes sorry. i was invited as an honorary number of the san francisco chamber of commerce we were invited to their mixer thatthey

had at asia sf . that was my first experience a asia sf . and we had a blast. it was ... i'm so many. any opportunity i get to meet new businesses but i was able to meet ... it was interesting, it was like a puzzle where i'm meeting these people and next they're telling me these businesses they are vice president of these banks but they were the most genuine authentic people that i met . and then we were ableto see some of the performers. i don't know if you all have been hsf .i had a blast and we've made a lot of connections and look forward to being back with that community again but i went on to capacities as a small business owner and then representing the commission this small business commission

for us so it was exciting.>> thank you. is there any other commissioner comments or questions western mark any public comment.>> no public comment. >> i am getting some interference from catherine in thebackground . it looks so comfortable andnice . next itemplease . >> item 15, adjournment. this is an action item. >> i would like to move to adjourn. and recognition and in the appreciation of commissioner dooley, commissioner adams and director dick and tracy, thank you so much for allyour work and your dedication . >> thank you. >> i think i need asecond .

>> i believe youneed to read the closing announcements . >> don't you have to say please showthe slide first ? >> please chose slide. >> we will end with a reminder the small business commission is the official public forum to voice your opinions and concerns about policies that affect the economic vitality of small businesses in san francisco and the end of the office of small business is the best place to get answers about doingbusiness in san francisco during the local emergency. if you need assistance with small business matters continue to reach out to the office of small business . and i think we can just go straight to the rollcall. >> commissioner adams.[roll call vote].

>>. [roll call vote] motion passes and the meeting is adjourned 6:50 4 pm. >> president: thank you everybody. >> have a great holiday.

>> president moran: please call the roll. [ roll call ] you have a quorum. >> president moran: thank you. before calling the first item, i like to announce that the san francisco public utilities commission acknowledges that storage of unseated lands located in the territory. sfpuc recognizes every citizen residing within the greater bay area continues to benefit from the use and occupation of the

waccamaw land. it's important that we we not only recognize the history of the tribal lands but also we acknowledge and honor the fact that the people of the established working partnership with the sfpuc and members within the many greater san francisco bay area communities today. please read the first item. >> clerk: before i read the first item, i like to announce due to ongoing covid-19 health emergency and given public health recommendation any emergency order that the governor and mayor restrictions on teleconference. this meeting is televised via

conference for those watching, there's a brief time lapse between live meeting and when it's viewed on sfgov tv. i like to extend our thanks to sfgov tv staff and sfpuc i.t. staff for their assistance during this meeting. if you wish to make public comment, dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 146 290 6991 please note that you must limit your comments to topic of agenda item being discussed. we ask that the public comment be made in civil and public manner. please address to your remarks to the commission as a whole. first item, adopt renewed

findings under state urgency legislation to continue allow remote meetings for the next 30 >> president moran: commissioner s any comments or discussion? seeing none, please open up for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make two minutes on public comment on item 3, dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 146 290 6991 to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. >> we have one caller in the queue. first caller, go ahead. hello

caller? the caller has lowered their hand. >> clerk: public comment on item 3 is closed. >> president moran: any additional comments from commissioners? may i have a motion and a second? moved and seconded. roll call please. [roll call vote] you have five ayes.

>> president moran: the item passes. thank you. next item please. >> clerk: next item 4, approval of the minutes of november 23, 2021. >> president moran: any additional corrections on the minutes? seeing none, please open up for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make two minutes on public comment on item 3, dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 146 290 6991 to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. do we have any callers. >> there are no callers for the minutes. >> clerk: public comment is closed. >> president moran: any further discussion?

seeing none, motion and a second? motioned and seconded. roll call please. [roll call vote] you have five ayes. >> president moran: motion adopted. next item please. >> clerk: item 5, general public comment. members of the public who may address the commission on matters within the commission's jurisdiction and not on today's agenda by dialing (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 146 290 6991 to raise your hand to speak, press star 3.

do we have any callers? >> there are four callers in the queue. caller number one. >> caller: i'm speaking on my own behalf. when voters passed the municipal bond in 2002, where they have voted for it if they knew at the end of the the program that the water quality will be worse. there are those who believe that voters would have rejected bond. in 1930s the all was used for drinking water. despite this, as part of the p.u.c.'s water diversification

program, hetch hetchy water has not been pretreated. blended water remains controversial. even without factorying in the possibility of salt water intrusion into the west side base aquifer. there was staff who stated that the p.u.c. is an ecochamber. i strongly urge the commission to revisit the blended water issue. thank you. >> next caller? >> caller: good afternoon president moran and commissioners, this is peter drekmeier for the tuolumne river trust. it's been three years since the

state water board adopted the bay-delta water control plan. it's been more than a year since you launched a series of fixed workshops focused on the tuolumne river. we have learned a lot of issues. some materials have been posted. you need a log-in. i'm hoping we can get a report on that. we haven't seen any action and couple of years ago, we pointed out that the sfpuc can

contribute its share of flow. i think there was interest from some of you on that. staff said, we could feed to -- need to get an agreement with the irrigation district. looks like we're going to lose another year. thank you. the tuolumne has nearly 500 salmons. stanislaus smaller river, historically fewer salmon has 11 times that many. why? 40% impaired flow in average year from the stanislaus, 21 on the tuolumne. please have the conversation about the design drought, your first meeting in january. thank you. >> thank you, caller. next caller.

>> caller: this is david pilpel. on item 5 general public comment, i wanted to take a moment as i mentioned couple of previous meetings to recognize those departing or retiring employees at the end of the year for their public service over many years. although we talk a lot about planning policy, infrastructure and operations, i can't emphasize enough the employees who do the work, day in and day out 24-7, delivering the water power and sewer services for the public. i wanted to take a moment to recognize them. thanks for listening. >> thank you. last caller, i have unmuted your

line. >> caller: commissioners, i have a number of things to bring to your attention. first thing is i appreciate very much when you open up the meeting and pay your respects to the muwakma maloney, it's important that you pronounce the name correctly. i did bring to the attention of the higher-ups about the death of a security officer 80 years old.

i was an immigrant. i thank the management to pay attention to safety issues. 80-year-oldman patrolling, car hit him and he died. let's make amends. finally, i was reading this report from the san francisco environment on climate change, i would like to the san francisco public utilities commission to give us real data on the leaking pipes. if you address the leaking pipes and millions of gallons leaking, we can conserve lot of water. thank you very much.

>> thank you. the queue is clear. >> clerk: item 5 general public comment is closed. >> president moran: thank you. commissioner harrington? >> commissioner harrington: can somebody information about someone dying on our property? what that is about? >> commissioner harrington, this was a contractor who did not die on our property. security contractor who was off property immediately adjacent to our property that was hit by a car and passed away.

>> commissioner harrington: than k you. >> that happened about ten days ago. >> president moran: couple of items that came up -- the vulnerability study have been posted. if that's the case, other commissioners and i would like to have that link and made to the available. i believe we have scheduled a discussion of the design drought for early next year. i don't believe it's the first meeting. dennis, can you tell us what the schedule is for that? >> we'll get that to you, yes. >> president moran: thank you. commissioners, any other

comments? public comments is closed. next item please. >> clerk: item 6, >> president moran: commissioner s any questions or discussion on communications? commissioner harrington? >> commissioner harrington: on item 6d, lot of work gose into alternative water supply. we spent lot of time doing the report it tend to be 58 pages. at least half or more seem to be duplicate. it will be great if we can figure out some way to give executive summary or front page like we've been doing with other reports that can point out what the highlights are and what the new things are so we can

concentrate on those. that will be very helpful. >> okay, it will be done, commissioner. >> president moran: vice president ajami. >> vice president ajami: i think it's valuable. i want to thank the staff for your hard work to make this happen. >> president moran: thank you. any other comments? i have comment on the alternative water supply program. there's a lot of material in

there. i know there was some attempt to highlight literally to put in bold things that have changed. we need a better version of that. i would like, no later than the next quarter to schedule as a regular agenda item so we can have extended discussion on it, i think there's a lot of issues we need to discuss. couple of things that are on my mind. one is, i'm not sure that the program is ambitious enough by its own terms. it sets an objective of meeting that include the delta plan. there was all of the identified projects in the plan we don't meet that level.

by its own terms, it fails to meet objectives. it results in the circumstance where every identified program is something that we would assume we would do because we have no other options. i think we need to have more options so we can have a discussion about what are the characteristics of these supplies that we value? do we need to lesson our dependents the tuolumne? do we need to have a water supply that has a different wet year, dry year characteristic. it's kind of like balancing your investment portfolio between stocks and bonds. right now we don't have enough choices that we can make that decision. going in the other direction, the balancing of it seems to be driven by demand projections. we had some discussion that we may need to reorient our

thinking away from demand projections and to more active approach instead and setting demand targets. it's a more active approach. we seek to drive demands to some different level. those are examples of kinds of things i have in mind. i think there's more material there. it's a very -- it's a long and rich report. i think the staff has developed that over time. each one gets better. i think it's high time that we have a discussion at the commission level about the contents and the assumptions behind that. >> vice president ajami: i want to go back to your comment on demand projection versus demand target. may be we don't want to have a demand target. we have to have a better and more accurate projections which is more grounded into the

drivers of demand. for example, one thing that is quick to impact demand is all sort of water cycle programs that are going online in various scales. eventually, that will change water demand portfolio. it is important to account for that, for example. in addition to the conservation efficiency programs that we have putting in place. i would say may be not having a target but having a better projections would be a more sort of strategic path forward. >> president moran: commissioner

paulson? >> commissioner paulson: again, i do want to say that i'm very proud that i sit on a commission that has the amount of talent on it when it comes to actual policy issues that we're talking about. i want to make sure that i know that i'm sitting on a commission, not a think tank. i'm going to reiterate the pieces of intelligence that come from the tremendous staff that we have. in terms of the alternate water supplies athe resources. we are getting better and better reports and it's really important. i'm sitting here as a commissioner who's making decisions on policy and advice is always important. i want to make sure that i'm

clear about the distinction between sitting on a commission versus the ivory tower. thank you. >> commissioner harrington: i'm hearing lot of good suggestions. may be some time in january come back with a plan for three months out or six months out, the design drought, the river, flooding and resilience in the city. there's so many meaty topics. it will give us an idea when to be there. that might be helpful. >> i've already given direction as we've gotten in this first month about scheduling out, getting in advance thing. i can give you heads up on from big policy discussions. we're going to be scheduling

that in a forward-thinking way come 2022. >> president moran: also helpful to identify the decisions in flow from that. there are some. so we can -- discussion with a purpose. that should be part of our thinking as we look to the first part of the coming year. anything else on communications? seeing none, please open this for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make two minute on public comment on item 6, communications, dial (415)655-0001, meeting i.d. 146 290 6991 to raise your hand to speak, press star 3.

>> there are three callers in the queue. >> caller: hello given this is peter drekmeier tuolumne river trust. i notice it has demands for fiscal year 2020 and 2021 which is lower than last year. very positive. water supply development water report coming up has it 193. they are pretty close, not quite matched. i wanted to note in the alternative water supply program

report, there's talk about ground water banking. it says, feasibility study is an option including in the tuolumne river voluntary agreement. the progress on the potential water supply option will depend on the negotiations of voluntary agreement. which makes it sound conditional. if the voluntary agreement is adopted, then there will be a look at ground water banking. it seems to me the real priority has a lot of potential and regardless, sfpuc should look into that. the comment deadline on the ground water sustainability for the modesto turlock subbasin is tomorrow the 15th. i don't know if san francisco p.u.c. has commented. that would be a great opportunity to express interest and collaboration. thank you, i appreciate the 30

second warning. that's helpful. we pay 100 times more for water than farmers in stanislaus county. thank you. >> next caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: this is david pilpel again. are we still on item 6? >> clerk: yes. >> caller: okay. the phone bridge connection dropped for a few minutes. i missed some of the commissioner discussion. i'm not sure who to alert when that happens. i had a brief comment in relation to item 6b, the contract advertisement report. that jogged my interest in a

narrative report or presentation on p.u.c.'s real estate issues in the southeast corner of the city including 1550 evans, future use of the newcombe property. i think there's a lot happening there. i'm sorry, bayview plaza. there's lots over there. it will be useful to have narrative report and presentation on where all of those property issues are going and what the current thinking is on that. i would encourage you to ask for that or schedule that as some point. >> thank you.

there are in other callers in the queue. >> clerk: in response to mr. pilpel, the phone bridge briefly dropped. we brought that back up quickly. we were aware of that. thank you for bringing that to our attention. >> president moran: next item please. >> clerk: item 7 the water supply development report. >> good afternoon, this is steve ritchie assistant general management for water. this is the water supply development report. this is a report we produce annually. the primary issue of this report status of making san jose santa clara permanent customers. first is a bit of background. san jose and santa clara

requested to become temporary customers around 1970. the rest of the customers were well established already. there was litigation in the mid-'70s that resulted in settlement in the mid-'80s. san jose and santa clara were not included within the supply assurance at that time as they were temporary customers. that was an opportunity where they would have been made permanent but they were not. fast forward, the 2009 water supply agreement provided for san francisco to make a decision regarding permanent status for san jose and santa clara by 2018 or to issue a conditional 10-year notice of interruption or reduction in supply of water to the cities. we've been introducing the annual water supply development

report since then. as noted, we continue to recommend that no such notice be given to them because demands are low enough. it's not an issue. the 2018 amendments to the water supply agreement extended this date to 2028 because of the decision was not ripe in 2018. for the last year or so, we have been meeting with staff with two cities. with that i'll be happy to answer any additional questions. >> president moran: thank you, any questions for steve before we go on to the presentations? seeing none. steve, you can introduce each of the presenters.

>> the first gary welling, relating city of santa clara. take it away. >> thank you. please bring up my presentation. i want to talk a bit about city of santa clara. little bit of background. our city is 130,000 population daytime population is about 250,000. we've been sfpuc customer since

1974. we appreciate the collaboration and coordination with sfpuc and bawsca. we have three important connections two from sfpuc and one from valley water. recycled water is an important component. we're proud of our system that we have and number of users that we put together on this. we offset about 90%.

we have city code that requires the use of recycled water for new development. we are in the process of updating that new development to define uses and also retrofitting opportunities. we have industrial cooling, number of data centers, 15 in number in the pipeline. we also have our own power utility in santa clara.

50% of our city parks are irrigated in recycled water. city conservation outreach, we're one of the cities to declare drought in july 12, 2021. we implemented water shortage plan. our residential is 58.9 for november it was 52.4. october numbers, we had 15.9% compared to 2009 as of november, we're 20.3 reduction. about 27% reduction for november compared with 2013. we issued water smart reports to residential customers. we have save our water drought conservation tool landscape

ordinance implemented in 2016. we're in the process of updating that.

we continues collaboration that's been really nice to see with sfpuc staff and with commitment to make santa clara a customer. that's all i have. i appreciate the time. i'm available for any questions. thank you. >> president moran: thank you very much. commissioners, any questions for gary? >> next speaker is from the city of san jose. he was charge in water resourcers if the city of san jose. please proceed. >> thank you. my video has been stopped.

good afternoon president moran and commissioners. i'm deputy director water resource division with the city of san jose. i'm responsible for both south bay water recycling and san jose municipal water system. this map portrays where all the water retailers serving san jose and few of the surrounding cities. in blue municipal water systems including north san jose. that really cool animation there, the purpose of that and this supplied is -- this slide is to demonstrate that it's relatively small compared to the whole. when we're talking about

collaborating with sfpuc, we're talking about this small and very parent of our san jose community. to provide water to north san jose, constructed by san francisco, with continuous water service delivery sense. as water agencies we have many shared interest that you can see a few listed here. providing a space and reliable water supply but also there's others such as affordability, supporting the environment, adapting to change in climate and its impact on water for people and social equity.

we have several other programs that you may find interesting. we have few of them here listed. one society -- one is south bay water recycle. our annual water delivery on recycled side is 13,000-acre feet a year. in north san jose the area where we purchased water and serve our customers from san francisco about 1100 acres a year. or about 20% of our water usage in that area. recycled quarter in north san jose will continue to be an important water supply component for us.

due to small scale, they are often deemed cost prohibitive. our intent here is to look at harnessing some of the alternate water supplies. one of the prohibiting factors has been what you do do with this water once you collect it. we have the advantage of a regional, distribution system south bay water recycling to take advantage of these non-portable supplies.

another one we're doing is welo update. the goal is to decrease water usage, support the transition nightive landscape, reduce urban heat island effect, increase energy and support carbon sequestering. we're expecting to bring forward recommendation to our council in the march time frame. next year. last, water conservation, water conservation and will continue to be an extremely important components for us going forward. currently we have two day a week watering limit in variety of outreach, to support continued flux -- production portable water. as a water retailer, a total of all our service area, our total

retailer gcpd is in in the 70s. north san jose area is very low. some of the reasons for that are both the outreach and the community involvement on conserving water but also the majority of the residential units there are multifamily and mobile home parks. we're kind of short on time. san jose has a climate change resiliency program called climate smart san jose. one of the identifiable ways reducing greenhouse gas emission and to conserve water. our goal to reduce residential gcpd by the year 2030. that will be a city wide objective. we are encouraged by your progress made over the past year in evaluating water supply projects. we'll continue to collaborate with your staff on permanent water supplies and when you're

reviewing the water supply development report, we ask that the commission consider expediting affordable, equitable water supply and include us as you go in our. thank you for the opportunity to speak today. we are their to answer any questions. >> president moran: thank you both for your presentations. commissioner, any questions? i have a couple. the amount of water that is currently being provided to the customers, that is how much?

>> the current demands is something less than 4.5 m.g.d. that was the original request. we've been working around the demands of 9 total. the combined is closer to 5. >> president moran: that's amount of water that's been growing overtime but providing almost 50 years? >> yes. >> president moran: what actually changes if they were to be granted permanent status? >> well, the one issue is the supply assurance which i think they like the regional water system, they are not part of the

supply assurance that would have to be agreed to by the rest of the customers. than will be a challenge. we're looking at are there alternative supplies that can be provided that san jose and santa clara would pay for, in particular in dry years. we talked about different possibilities with the two entities and some version of recycled water. >> president moran: in termingss -- in terms of the water budget, i think nothing would change to that water budget if they were to be made permanent? >> currently it would not. i have to throw in this minor anecdote, when we first started

to meet with the cities, was two days after the state water board released its october 2016 draft as a bay-delta plan. it put a big question mark on the first meeting. gary may have attended that meeting with santa clara. we thought we were playing in one forum, now we have to shift gears little bit. that's been bit of uncertainty hanging out there. >> president moran: as i read the memo that was distributed, stated that the goal is meeting the 184 interim supply limitation and developing additional water sprays that will allow the interruptible customers to become permanent.

i guess in the alternate water supply report, it talked about how the planning phase was intended to conclude by it was end of june next year. which was in time for any work to be done around making the interoperable's permanent. in order for us to consider making the interoperables permanent, do we have in mind the amount of water that needs to be identified in order to make that feasible? >> from the get go, we have been working towards the 9 million gals per day. both santa clara and san jose based on future projections were

looking at larger numbers than that. that does raise the question what we started to raise in the last version in the alternative water supply report. we should plan for actual demands while -- excuse me, we should build for actual demands while we're planning for our obligations and 184, at this point, falls in the obligation category. there we face the question of how real is that in light of the various other issues we have to deal with out there and supply for santa clara and san jose will be independent of the regional water system supply.

>> president moran: that gets to my question. the memo talks about the supply assurance of 184 plus 9 additional supply for the interoperables that comes up to 193 m.g.d. it seems there's a disconnect there. if we have an objective of reaching a supply of 193m.g.d. before we can make them permanent, demand is so much less than that, there seems there's a disconnect. i'm wondering, did i get that wrong or what is your thinking about that? >> that is something that we've

started to come to grips with. harking back to why the 2018 date was originally chosen here was the projections at that time were that the total system demand would be 265 m.g.d. which did not play out. when we extended the date for 10 years, it was knowing that there was not immediate pressure to meet all those demands and it gave us time to think through those kind of questions about where are we here. frankly, i think that's a conundrum to deal with if we have the supply assurance of 184 million gallons a day and demands is not there and how we deal with that issue.

>> president moran: the idea building facilities when we have unused capacity and the existing system will seem to present the ceqa problem. i would hope that doesn't -- that's not the subjective or the thresholds we're trying to clear >> i think it's the building for real demands and planning for obligations. i think all of the customers, not just the commission and san francisco customers but all the customers don't want us to over build if the demands aren't really there. that kind of puts a new light on what does the supply assurance means relative to all the supplies. there's also balance the with

the rhna numbers. >> vice president ajami: thank you for all your questions. a follow-up to that, i want to thank gary and jeff for their presentations. follow-up to that, steve, would be are there any other opportunities that they can create some form of trading or formal trading with some of the existing customers that have not been using their whole entire obligation or the amount of water being obligated to provide them. is there a way that they can collaborative other supplies together? are there other alternatives in this process? >> developing additional water supplies is something has been

contemplated. i think the issue of the supply assurance that individual supply guarantees can be traded among people. that can be traded among people who have the 184. outside the 184 would require all the customers to agree they will be added to the supply assurance. >> vice president ajami: if it's two different utilities, that

should work? >> if it's talking about a different supply, if it's talking about within the 184, it has to be something else. some of the projects we're looking at involves other wholesale customers. those are for additional supplies. those could fit in the possibility of making something work. you get into the question who's paying for it. >> vice president ajami: obvious ly, you are facing multiple challenges when it's our obligation based on the issues you're having at the state board, statewide discussions you're having. the second is obligation towards different, the wholesale customer and then also our alternative water supply

portfolio that you're looking into. i wonder if this is something that can be done in a more creative way that can provide resources for some of the utilities that don't have the resources to invest in some solution locally and potentially they can transfer some of those additional supplies. >> once you get into reducing i.s.g.s and individual supply guarantees, i think that's where you get into the issues of everybody needing to agree with

it. if it's something outside of that, i think there's some creative opportunity there that we would consider. >> vice president ajami: even though it might be more complicated from the policy perspective and little bit messier, it might be smoother path forward. >> it might ultimately be. none of these decisions will be easy. i think that's the supply assurances kind of core thing that we have to deal with or not deal with. think that's a big question. getting all customers to agree

on something does prove challenging from time to time. >> vice president ajami: thank you. >> commissioner harrington: stev e, i don't envy you. [ laughter ] we kick the can down the road. it really was all those different issues about current customers. i'm glad that we're trying to deal with this now. i'm a little confused on the amount we trying to solve for. we originally said we worked with nine million gallons forever. then you said 5m.g.d.

the 9 m.g.d. was the beginning of the discussion. both san jose and santa clara requested additional supply assurance of their own for future planning purposes. santa clara was relatively small. san jose is relatively large. combined it's potentially up to 15 million gallons per day if all of their future needs could be met. we signed up for 9 that we hadn't signed up more beyond that.

>> i think we need to do more work on what do we do when there's this large gap between current demand and the 184. i think there needs to be a clear statement as to how we view that. that's not going to be easy to come up with that, there are lots of different ways to look at that. in terms of what i would consider some very promising

opportunities, would have to do with potentially directing and reuse projects which have their own set of issues that make them a bit challenging particularly on the direct front. there are no recollection -- regulations now. those will be attractive options. it's breaking new ground. valley water is pushing in that direction. we are pushing in that direction various ways. those projects should not be viewed as a slam dunk. certainly, i think in california, we have to be serious about that. i think that's something that's important to consider. we need to -- i'll be doing this with projects that san jose and santa clara would find it affordable.

those are some of the issues that are there. >> president moran: let me ask them both, if they have any additional comments? >> i appreciate the discussion.

great discussion, very good comments. we would like to have the ability to transfer within the 184. i appreciate the discussion, time and attention being paid to this. much appreciate it. thank you. >> thank you for the time and discussion. everything that mr. ritchie mentioned that we're aware of and the challenges that you face. we look forward to working with you as you go through this. we though there's not an issue conversation. there's lot of different aspects together as we go through it. looking forward to further collaboration. >> president moran: thank you. without any further discussion by the commission, why don't we

open up for public comment. i would expect bawsca will have some comments as well. they are the other party to this has a great deal of interest as well. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make two minutes public comment on item 7, water supply development report, dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 146 290 6991 to raise your hand to speak press star 3. do we have any callers? >> there's one caller in the

queue. >> caller: i've been with the coalition san francisco neighborhoods. give the water to the salmon, not the silicon valley growth machine. i strongly oppose making san jose and santa clara water customers. humans need to share water with nature. >> thank you for your comments. there are no other callers with their hands raised. >> clerk: thank you. public comment on item 7 is closed. >> president moran: commissioner harrington? >> commissioner harrington: it's interesting that we don't go away. the first contract was negotiated by andy and the current contract -- we just keep

coming back to the same topics. >> president moran: it would be good to bring this to a conclusion. while we're both still alive. it does strike me one of these problems where i think if we were talking about water supply, there are answers that you can get to pretty quickly. i would like to see that move more quickly.

with that, madam, please call the next item. >> clerk: next order of business is item 8, report of the general manager. mr. herrera. >> thank you madam secretary. first item is presentation california community power long duration storage procurement. presented by assistant general manager. >> thank you and general manager herrera. i have provided all with a briefing packet and powerpoint presentation. i will not go through every slide. i intend to meet the time requirement. this is just an informational item. we are expecting to come back to

you with an action item. this is a complex transaction. it's the first time we've done this. we thought it was tim to warm up --time to warm you up to the topic. the california p.u.c. has mandated that all low serving entities procure certain levels of resources and certain types of resources. under cleanpowersf program we are required to bring resources on to the grid. we participated with the j.p.a. california community power to request a bid from that type of resource. which we are happy to say cp power is poised to receive.

that the tumbleweed project. once the j.p.a. approves the project, we'll return to your approval. that's likely in january or february. we sinned cp -- we joined cp back in april. we have a requirement by california p.u.c. they've directed us to procure 15.5 megawatts of long duration storage. if we failed to comply with that procurement order, we will face significant costs. the tumbleweed project will need

more than half of our long duration storage for procurement observation. we intend to pursue dimensional procurement both with the j.p.a.cp power and issuing our own request for offer. next slide, it describes the objectives for this request for offer. i want to highlight for you that this long duration storage is the technology that allows us to integrate our renewables and support for reliability on the bridge. it will help us to share the risk and meet our regulatory requirements. long duration storage is

eight-hour storage location. drawer j.p.a. collaboration, we also placed conditions on the project to address workforce. lot of stuff we can do when we procure. similarly, making sure that the project meets environmental permitting requirement of the local authority.

we'll be bringing those three documents to you to sign them and then we proceed on to the board for approval. we're anticipating that in the january, february time frame. slide 14 please. this helps put that transaction into context. we have nine contracts today. long-term contracts that is, ten years or more, 658 meg megawatts

clean energy capacity. to support that commitment, we have an annual power supply budgets of $235 million a year. tumbleweed project, would be $3 million to $4 million of that. total cost over the 15-year pier, 45 to $65 million. with that, i'm happy to take any questions you may have. i have my time here to assist if there's anything that we need to help with. >> president moran: commissioner max quell? >> commissioner maxwell: thank you for your work. i have a question and a concern.

it says workforce, encourages local labor and apprenticeship program. i think that's problematic. then you have environmental injustice requires developers to test requires. then environmental project must. when it comes to labor, encourage. i think we can do better than that. >> i appreciate the guidance. and the feedback. i do want to say that we have to recognize that not every local community has the particular skills and trades that are needed for a project like this. just like the sfpuc brought in skilled trade for projects we

do. i imagine that this new technology being brought to bear on the market may require some workforce that's not necessarily local. >> commissioner maxwell: they never will, if we don't make them. that will always be the excuse. it's been the excuse forever. there's words that we can say, requires when available that is a requirement when they can be met or something to that. just encourage, then we're never saying that this is that's important to us. we have to be leaders. yes, you're right, it may be difficult but if we don't ever make it an important -- they will never make that happen. we've seen that. that's historic. have to do little bit more to encourage you to do the right thing. >> i hear your sentiments.

this will be the storage contract we sign. >> commissioner maxwell: that's why it's important we do it right the first time. >> thank you for your comment. >> commissioner maxwell: thank you for your comments. however, i like to see some working on the language that does more than encourage. we've had this battle. it's been really pulling teeth all along with the power industry. i'm not going to take it okay. i appreciate your comment. i want to see something else, something different before i sign on it it. >> ultimately you will, but not today. thank you. >> commissioner maxwell, i hear the sentiment. we'll be working with staff to

see what the art of the possible is on the language without compromising the substance of the program. >> commissioner maxwell: thank >> commissioner harrington: also , thank you for all the work on this. i view this as an insurance policy when something goes wrong. we will not be taking advantage of this unless something else goes out. >> it's more akin to additional source. many of our renewable resources are very dependent on when the wind blows, sun shine. we need to have resources that can help address those periods of the day where when the wind and solar resources are available. it helps us meet the requirements on the grid for the shoulder hours.

>> part of the reason why the state is mandated like cleanpowersf is to support the grid. we'll be using it, our share of the project to help with balance the resources that barbara was referring to. one other point about the benefits of this effort is by participating as a group, we have the opportunity to participate in larger projects that are more cost effective.

>> vice president ajami: i was wondering, may be either -- thank you for the presentation. really great. i was wondering may be this goes back to what michael was saying. if this is a collective, what happens -- you all have the same problem of sun doesn't shine at the same time and all the places. is there a priority in the system who gets the electrons when this happens? how do we make sure we get what we need when we need it? >> i can address that. very good question. we will be working through -- one of the agreements that barbara had on that slide that

showed the structure of this partnership is an operating agreement. that operating agreement will form a committee of the participants that will in ongoing basis provide updated direction to operate the plant. the plant will be operated based on market signals. wholesale market prices. you'll use the market to really determine when that electricity that's stored is most valuable. that all applies not to just our operate payers, the idea is to maximize the value of the resource to all participant rate payers and sort of secondarily

we'll be looking into how do we use this resource to shape our own portfolios? as you're getting to here, it's complex when you have multiple participants with different power supplies. >> vice president ajami: do we have a power agreement with them? >> the agreement will be between cc power, the joint powers agency and battery storage operator and owner. then the participants will enter into an agreement with cc power and j.p.a.

the power purchase agreement will be between the j.p.a. and the developer. >> vice president ajami: it's listed on that slide. not as a power purchase agreement but storage agreement. >> vice president ajami: i remember, michael, is this related to what you presented to us may be a month ago or two months ago on the storage procurement as well? is this a totally different project? we did have another item that was a battery-driven item. >> this is a different project.

it was amending an existing agreement add batteries to a solar project that we were purchasing the energy from. in this case, we're really joining forces to purchase the services and products of a standalone battery system that is what we would call utility scale connected to the transmission system. it's supporting the grid. it's helping grid balance, all of the additional renewable energy that we're seeing come online within california. that's why the california p.u.c. is mandating entities like cleanpowersf do this. >> vice president ajami: i thought this was the follow on what the discussion we had couple of months ago.

thank you for the clarification. >> president moran: other questions or comments? seeing none, please open this for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wishes to make two minutes on public comment on 8a, dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 146 290 6991 this is item 8a.

>> there is one caller in the queue. >> caller: this is david pilpel again. i have no objection to this proposal. i appreciate barbara, michael and others who may have worked on this. i did want to raise a concern when i saw number 10 on the various technology types. all of which , well, have various environmental impact from greater than others. they are all different. this has the effect of, we get the power or access to the power. but the environmental impact of the operation of this thing would be in the county and presumably the battery storage thing would use resources and

create waste ultimately. i heard recently about the issues with lithium and nickel mining and all kinds of thing. the question really is are we moving the problem elsewhere so we can continue to have power for our current and future residents. ultimately, i'm asking who has the ceqa responsibility for this facility? is it us? is it consortium? is it curran county? i'm wondering about what that means for the environment. again, keep pleading. thanks. >> the call queue is clear. >> clerk: thank you public comment on item 8a is closed.

>> 8b a drought conditions update from water. steve ritchie. >> i did get a text from nicole from bawsca, who is out on medical leave. she wanted to make sure that was not due to lack of interest of topic discussed today. i want to give a brief drought update. this is dated december 6th. every monday i get an up date on where we are relative our water supply and other conditions. this is the one in the packet i will verbally update. level of historics has not

changed because this particular out country area has been seeing more snow than actual rainfall. the brown area keeps getting smaller but the red area is not really changing. i guess it's coal comfort that we're in extreme drought rather than exceptional drought. this shows hetchy participation. it doesn't show update on this. if we go to the next slide, the

snow pack, you i can see the red line is below the historic median with the snow that we've gotten so far from the storm. definitely it is above the median line as we get there to the middle of the month. we do still expect some more to come this week and the next. water available to the city. we have not seen any immediately. we are already above where we were last year. it's not a big number yet. if we can retain some of this snow pack, we could get fair amount of water available to the city this year. you'll see on the right-hand side, the year to date total was

seven quarter inches. these last couple of days moved us up to 30% of the annual total. more to come. we've got about 11 total so far this year. we see more storms coming. next slide please. we have not updated the bay area precipitation. anyone was paying close attention, highway 92 on the coast was closed yesterday. one of the creeks in the watershed basically decided to use highway 92 as path to take all the water.

this shows the natural precipitation forecast and brighter colors means precipitation. you can see that upper box this week, you can see there's lots of orange and red colors there in california. then you see next week, starting today and moving into next wednesday, lot of bright colors over the period of time. we expect to see more precipitation over the next couple of days. clear on friday and then into the week but then more precipitation probably will be getting closer around the 22nd towards christmas. it's not over yet. here total deliveries. we had that big drop on the green line there. that first atmospheric river. then, demand and rebounded little bit recently.

it's now up to about 159 millio. it's definitely back above 2015 levels and close to 2019 levels. definitely below 2015 levels. curtailment have ongoing basis been suspended going forward. they continue to be suspended as of yesterday. i fully expect they will be suspended probably through end of the month. the big question curtailments if we keep a snow pack, how this le be viewed during the snow melt. i'm happy to answer any

questions on the current conditions. >> vice president ajami: that was great. i want to note that right after the previous drought, the demand bounced back. this is how people react to different precipitation events. >> president moran: thank you. seeing no other comments. please open up for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to public comment on

8b, dial (415)655-0001, meeting i.d., 146 -- 146 290 6991 do we have any callers in the queue? >> we have a caller in queue. go ahead. >> caller: hi, i'm from palo alto. i'm the one who provided the tuolumne update. this last weekend, i was lucky enough to be in the valley. walking across one of the bridges of the merced river. i look down and didn't see any fish. if i was at a place in tuolumne,

how long would i have to wait to see one. i did a calculation, there are 21 days between the prior fish passing chart and yesterday's update. during that time, according to fish bio, 215 salmon passed by. if i assume salmon only moved during the day, that means one salmon would pass by on average, every 70 minutes. of course the point of fish passage chart and any story is to try to make the situation to help tuolumne feel more real. thanks commissioner harrington that fish passage be reported if water supply updates.

thanks so much. >> there was another caller. the call queue is clear. >> clerk: public comment on item 8b is closed. >> 8c is an emergency fire fighting water system update. >> good afternoon commissioners. i'm here to provide quick update on the emergency fire fighting water system.

the board of supervisors with file number 191029 request that the p.u.c. develop a citywide plan that relates to two items. both expanding the pipeline and making sure that these pipelines are build with the appropriate water to meet the high pressure fire fighting demands of the fire department. p.u.c. took the lead on that. as a note, the resolution also requested city administrator's office, mayor's budget office, the board and budget legislative analyze geobonds to fund this work.

in this map, let me walk everybody through it. the gray pipeline in northeastern side of the with pipelines in the east and southeast. are the existing emergency fire fighting water system pipeline. i like to draw your attention to the pipeline in red. those pipelines are funded. they are currently under construction and they are funded by the 2020 bond and passed by the voters of san francisco. the black pipelines also on the west side that connect to the red ones. complete what we call the westside project.

those are unfunded. additionally, what the citywide plan really looks at are the green and blue pipelines which have been drawn in here. it what would bring high pressure water systems to the areas in the sea where it's lacking. you can see districts 7, 10 and 11, if those a are familiar, really in the south-southeast parts of the city, you'll see the large majority of where we are proposing to install additional higher pipelines. those are unfunded. to ensure that both existing pipeline, the pipeline funding currently under construction, we need to make sure that the pipeline have enough water for fire fighting at a high pressure. on this slide, you'll see the

blue water sources are primary water sources that feed in the system. comes from twin peaks and summit. those are the primary sources that feeds in the existing pipeline. we have two backup sea water pump stations also in blue. lake merced is funded to be connected. those blue ones are funded or existing. they are already on the books. in order to fill the remaining pipelines, we have proposing

connect additional water sources both from sunset reservoir, college reservoir. we proposed increasing the capacity of the existing sea water pump stations, ps1 and ps2 as well as adding conventional sea water pump station in the southeast area. this is just to ensure there are adequate water supply to meet the fire fighting high pressure need. when we look at the estimated cost of this expansion in $2021, it comes up to approximately $1.6 billion. this excludes the previously funned phase one west side project that i discussed. includes the red pipeline and connecting lake merced. in terms of a realistic

timeline, in terms of when it can be implemented, the system couldn't be built all today. the board ask us to look at a 15-year planning horizon. we looked at a 15-year horizon for completing this project with escalation, the dollar amount is estimating to be closer to $2.6 billion. if we looked at 25-year construction period closer to $3.3 billion. this is assuming 4% annual escalation. what the b.l.a. will be looking at if this program was to move forward, how will they face off the general obligation blond i'm happy to take any questions that >> president moran: commissioner

s any questions? >> commissioner harrington: than k you, john. as you know, i'm not a fan of this whole project. once again, i'll ask the question, do you know if i any other place or country in the that has something like this? >> great question. vancouver has a significantly smaller system. that is a separate high pressure system. the system that is most like ours actually, we model the west side system off of it is in japan. japan has a similar seismic challenges that san francisco faces. they have strengthened their backbone of portable water line

to serve two purposes. you have to strengthen that red line and black line. those are actually going to be table to carry portable water, 99.99% of the time. if there is a large seismic event, there happens to be a fire on west side that needs to be fought, we can isolate that line and pump the pressure up to provide high pressure fire fighting until the fire is out. we can drop the line, do any cleaning of the pipeline that's needed and flush the line to ensure it's safe and turn it back over to regular drinking water use. that's what tokyo and japan uses. those the most similar. >> commissioner harrington: i realize there's religious fervour, we all seem to go along with it.

i kind of lost faith in this when i was told it will would never happen for a variety of reasons. one reason was if, you don't use the system, the water degrades within the pipes and there could be problems with that. the firefighters wouldn't put up with it. they basically threaten that if we put water into the system, they would tell people that we're spraying feces on side of people building when they are putting out fires. that seem to have killed all the the discussion that we had about using this in san francisco. we end up not being able to do

it as non-portable. it will keep rolling down the street as if this is the requirement. but i don't think it is. every time we have this conversation, it doesn't go very far. i do think, may be the p.u.c. should say, this doesn't make sense. if the p.u.c. believes that.

that's my belief. not sure what the p.u.c. believes. >> president moran: vice president ajami? >> vice president ajami: thank you for your presentation. may be follow on what ed was saying, we have had this conversation. i always wondered, is there any information or data available on the failures of our fire fighting system. that would have been solved if we would have had such a sophisticated system set up? it's valuable to look at this and say, we have 50% failure in the system. we are trying to turn that into

20%. that extra 30% is worth all the money we are spending. are we doing this because we want to do this? i don't think i have an answer to that. the second thing i want to say is, i think to commissioner harrington's comments about alternative water supply as a source, i see that a lot more valuable part. because we are developing alternative water supply. the money we are spending is going -- i understand the pipeline is not going to be connected to alternative water supply. there's a little bit of multi-benefit efforts may be rather than this single lar system. those are my two comments.

>> president moran: i will underline something that commissioner harrington talked about the decision basically not to use non-portable water there's the issue raised about where are we building a separate system that would put portable water in there and the complications is waste. i think it's the fact is, that's what we're doing now all over the city.

anything else? please open this up for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make two minute of public ecomment on 8c, dial phone. meeting i.d. 146 290 6991 to raise your hand to speak press star 3. >> we have one caller. >> caller: at the november 18th neating of the board of supervisors, government audit oversight committee, the committee conducted a follow-up

hearing on the civil grand jury report. supervisor mar stated that he would not support granting lake merced for fire fighting. in other words he would oppose it. each page is marked, document is preliminary/incomplete. figures 2-2 and 2-3 indicates error. the same is true of the tables in section 2-1 in section 3 planning methodology. section 7, improvement cost and section 8, conclusions and recommendations are missing.

section c, feasibility section has used current system and distributed the stations. it doesn't study ocean pump station south of the facility. in conclusion, it's a similar study where presented to another commission or to the board of supervisors, would it be well received or seen just as embarrassing. thank you. >> another caller has joined. caller, go ahead. >> caller: this is david pilpel again. i think eileen has been waiting long time to make those comments. on this, if and when expansion of the system is chosen, i think manning and construction should

be coordinated with other projects, p.u.c. water, power and sewer projects, department of technology, telecom cable and other city and non-city projects along the corridors. while public interest here may be somewhat low, the audience -- [ indiscernible ] i would suggest a small public workshop on this where perhaps, we could discuss which other staff what are the pros and cons of doing this at whatever cost. i take commissioner harrington's comments very seriously. i suggest the discussion in that workshop or before the commission at some point or board of supervisors somewhere about the risk to the city

during an earthquake, fire or other emergency.

>> caller: i'm katie miller. i will provide a very brief update on the status of the water system improvement program for the first quarter of fiscal year '21, '22. i like to share the quarterly updates for two reasons. staff has been working long hours in great detail to provide the c.i.p. budget submittal you will review in january. as we shared with you during the september 28th meeting the quarterly reports will be provided. the quarterly reports with these revisions for the hetch hetchy water enterprise and sewer system improvement program will be presented to you in van. -- january, we decided to make

these revisions for the water supply improvement program report for several reasons. this report has stayed in the same format for the past 15 years. second, the wsip report provides better performance than the other program previous report. third the wsip is almost complete. i will give you a quick update. these pie charts shows programs are 99% complete. this cost summary table shows the status of the seven active projects that are remaining that are reported in such -- this has

low activity during the quarter. this low spending is because for the remaining active projects are very close to being closed out. one is just starting. two have yet to be issued. construction mobilization was initiated for the alameda recapture project. for phase one of the regional ground water storage recovery project, the water operations and project team successfully completed seven week operational testing for four wells. thesis are the wells that will be focused on for steady operations in the near future for the drought. the phase 2a project is under

various improvements with advertised on september 27th. progress was made to obtain permit prior to advertising the phase 2b contractor if the san francisco main well and pipelines that will connect to cal water systems. the next three projects are in some state of closeout. >> president moran: any questions? i see no questions. thank you very much. general manager, herrera, is that end of your report?

>> clerk: would like to for me to open for public comment? >> president moran: yes. >> clerk: members of the public who likes to make two minutes on 8d, dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. you 146 290 6991 >> the call queue is clear. >> clerk: public comment on 8d is closed. >> president moran: mr. herrera? >> one item as commission is aware, the controllers office on december 9th issued its

performance audit of sfpuc's social impact partnership program. while that item is up for discussion today, i wanted to alert the commission that we will be prepared to discuss the report at our january 11, 2022 meeting and steps going forward. that concludes my report. >> president moran: do we need public comment on that? >> clerk: yes. members of the public who wish to take two minutes of public comment on item 8e, dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 146 290 6991 to raise your hand to speak, press star 3.

do we have any callers? >> there are no calls in the queue at this moment. >> clerk: public comment on item 8e is closed. >> president moran: next item is a new commission business. do any commissioners have new business? seeing none, next item please. >> clerk: item 10, the consent >> president moran: commissioner

s any requests or items on the consent calendar? seeing none. please open the consent calendar for public comment. members of the public who wish to take two minutes of publi comment dial (415)655-0001, meeting i.d. 146 290 6991 to raise your hand to speak press star 3. do we have any callers? >> we have two callers in the queue. >> caller: i'm calling for coalition san francisco

neighborhood speaking on my own behalf. urging that the commissioners sever item 10e. this report is similar to other staff reports and it has no photo. in the description of the scope of the section, bullet point number 6 states providing above ground pipe segment between the codable and non-codable pipes to be installed during major fire events. why would the p.u.c. wait until a major fire event to do this installation? modification number one, unlike charges group together, the 20,361 charge includes the survey and the modification to control the panel. there's no explanation why the p.u.c. distribution division doesn't include this

modification request in the original contract. the reason for the increase 240 calendar days is for public hearing. since there were number of rescheduling, could the project have been designed to obtain the tree. in the result of inaction section, it states a delay or denial of proving the request will result this project being further delayed posing continue risk of the city's ability to provide events, fire suppression capabilities. the westside has been waiting to honor its commitment to bringing it out to the west side. >> thank you, next caller. you have two minutes.

>> caller: this is david pilpel. last time today. i have no issues with the consent calendar. i support all of the item. i support the balance of the calendar. i want to thank you for listening and enjoy the rest of the year. hope to talk you again next year. thank you for all your continuing good work. thanks. >> the call queue is clear. >> clerk: thank you, public comment on item 10, the consent calendar is closed. >> president moran: may be we can address her concerns with item c. it -- can we respond to those at this time

>> clerk: i will defer to the city attorney. ms. bregman? >> the consent calendar to take a vote on the whole consent calendar? is that the question? >> president moran: the question is, we received comments about the item requested to be severed. can staff now respond to those comments without actually severing the item? >> yes, the staff -- it's entirely up to the chair whether you pull the item off consent and have separate vote. the matter can be included as part of the consent calendar as long as public comment is recognized for the consent calendar and the vote taken.

>> president moran: let me ask staff to respond. >> good afternoon, howard fong, manager of the product management burl. the question was asked regarding why was this structure not connected full-time. what we are trying to do is connect a potable water system from our summit reservoir system to connect to a non-potable efws, awss system existing by delbrook. to be able to have a direct connection, we can only do it through a section of pipe that we have to insert. we can only insert that during

an emergency. it is a domestic drinking water source that we're connecting it from. that is the reason why there's structure needed to be installed. it had to be above ground. we're located corner of clarendon avenue. we have to do public process of processing. the notices takes several months. we're asking for additional time address those delays due to that >> president moran: commissioner s any questions for mr. fong? any desire to sever item c.

can i have a motion and second for the consent calendar as a whole? >> so moved. >> second. moran thank you, roll call please. [roll call vote] you have five ayes. >> president moran: the consent calendar is adopted. next item please. >> clerk: next item 11, authorize the general manager to execute memorandum of understanding for amount not to exceed $9695 with the duration of 58 months.

presented by ritchie. >> good afternoon. this is a routine item that we do several of these agreements in different places throughout the water system to engage in monitoring. it is 58-month agreement to continue maintaining that stream gauge on pilarcitos street. >> president moran: please open public comment.

>> clerk: members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment on item 11 dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 146 290 6991 to raise your hand to speak press star. do we have any callers? >> there are no callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you public comment on item 11 is closed. >> president moran: thank you. >> so moved.

>> second. >> president moran: roll call please. [roll call vote] you have five ayes. >> president moran: item passes. item 12 please. >> clerk: item 12. authorize the general manager to execute amendment number two on memorandum of agreement to extend the terms of the agreement by 15 months until march 31, 2023 with no change in the contract amount to include marin municipal water district to participate collaboratively to develop the bay area shared water access program. >> this is an extension of the memorandum of agreement for the

bay area regional reliability partnership which includes alameda county water district, bawsca, contra costa water district. this is a cooperative effort among these the bay area water agencies, looking for opportunities where we can share facilities and supplies to increase overall regional reliability. some of the things we've been looking at are transfers. delta supplies between agencies in different ways around the system. in particular, we're also adding in marin municipal. marin municipal has been talking to us originally but decided not. with their situation on in the the drought where they have been affected. they will be looking at the possibility of establishing a

pipeline about different ways water can move to assist them under emergency conditions. we recommend that we continue this partnership for a bit longer. it has proved useful in terms of discussions. i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> president moran: questions for mr. ritchie? the intent is to provide a facility that can be used in time of drought. it makes me wonder whether there are opportunities here to actually speed up the real world

-- the ability to do may be emergency approvals. >> the work is about making normal conditions. you end up with a lot more complex system when you find that both the state and federal water projects are delivering less to their customers and very frankly in the emergency conditions once you step outside of the project structure. when i say the project structure, central valley project, they can be creative within each of those structures. it's harder to get it across those structures. that's where some of the difficulties lie. in this case, marin municipal coming in this way, is looking to see if there's a way that

newell their situation, water can be moved basically to east bay mud where east bay mud can move water to them that is not project water. we actually have been involved in several discussions about other ways to use the plumbing that can make that work. working within the relative constraints of project and state water project rules.

>> caller: you heard one constituent citizen say, in the best part of our city, there's missing water. this is also happening in other areas. three weeks ago, when i opened the faucet, the water was stinking. i made some calls.

i was told that ground water was added. why don't you inform us before you do this? we need to do needs assessment the quality of water that is being transferred. we are ready for some liability issues. you heard the concern that part of the water was not even treated. i don't know, when i open the faucet that that water was treated or not. let us fine tune things in our own category first before we pick up transfers like this. thank you very much. >> thank you, caller.

there are no other callers. >> clerk: thank you, public comment on item 12 is closed. >> president moran: i have a motion and a second? >> so moved. >> i'll second. >> president moran: roll call please. [roll call vote] >> clerk: you have five ayes. >> president moran: next item please. >> clerk: item 13. approve the terms and conditions and authorize the general manager to execute and enter into three spratt purchase and sales agreement with oakridge ranch estates smolinski, arroyo hondo ranch smolinski and mount

day ranch estates -- associated with the acquisition in the amount not to exceed $200,000. must be presented by dent general manager -- carlin. >> i will say this, three sides, this sfpuc land on the east bay park district. there's no development that occurred on these sites. i will be glad to answer any

questions. >> commissioner maxwell: how much do we own in that watershed? alameda? >> in the alameda watershed we own about 38,000 acres. this is adding 653 acres to that 38,000 that we already own. >> commissioner maxwell: what's the approximate value? >> i'm going to give you very approximate value. if you were to take the value that we're paying for land right now in the alameda watershed, take the existing purchase, taking a low end of our pay is $12,000 per acre. if you take the 38,000 acres the land value that we have now is $456 million. if you wanted to take the high

end, $16,000 per acre. >> commissioner maxwell: are we up in the market, down in the market, middle of the market? >> this is an interesting approach that has been in private holdings for a long period of time. we pretty much -- they approached us. this is very mutually agreeable situation we're in where these properties, there's not a lot of value to them in the long run. the market is good right now. >> commissioner maxwell: thank you. >> commissioner harrington: i'm glad we're buying this. i love that map it shows the hodgepodge of historic squares in there. the idea of what's on our side,

do we let park users come on some of these properties? >> we do have an agreement with east bay regional park district that they will manage some of the park district. they will take care some other things. we have that existing in this watershed. we can show you a map of what properties they do lease and which ones they don't. >> commissioner harrington: do you think this will open up additional hiking trails? >> that's to be determined. yes, we can be in discussion. >> president moran: commissioner paulson would like to see that map. any other comments or questions? please open this for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public

who wish to make two minutes on item 13, dial (415)655-0001, meeting i.d. 146 290 6991 to raise your hand to speak press star 3. do we have any callers? >> there are no callers in the queue. >> clerk: public comment on item 13 is closed. >> president moran: any other questions? roll call please. [roll call vote] you have five ayes.

>> president moran: that passes. next item please. >> clerk: next item is closed session. i will read the closed session calling public comment on those item. next item is public comment on closed session. following items will be heard during closed session. item 16, conference with legal counsel, regarding the existing litigation in the matter of initial orders and imposing water rights in sacramento, on water rights numbers f002635, s

s01379 and s018735. san joaquin trib stories versus state water resources control board versus the california state resources control board. members of the public who wish to make public comment dial (415)655-0001, meeting i.d. 146 290 6991 to raise your hand to speak press star 3. >> there are no callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you.

public comment for items to be heard during close session is closed. >> president moran: may i have a motion to assert attorney-client privilege? >> so moved. to not disclose. >> president moran: move to assert. >> i did that last time. >> president moran: do i have a second? roll call please. [roll call vote]. >> clerk: you have five ayes. >> president moran: the motion passes. i will go into closed session.

. >> can i have a motion on whether to disclose motions that are in closed session? >> move not to disclose. >> i'll second. >> moved and seconded not to disclose. roll call vote, please. [roll call] >> clerk: you have five ayes. >> the item passes. is there any other business before the commission? >> clerk: no other business, but i would like to announce that the sfpuc regular meeting for december 28 has been cancelled, so i wish everybody a happy holiday. >> thank you, and yes, happy holiday. >> happy holidays. >> happy holidays to everyone.

>> yeah. >> stay safe and healthy. >> we'll be meeting again in january. it promises to be a big and exciting year. get your new year's resolutions ready. >> enjoy your holidays, everybody. enjoy your holidays and be safe. >> yes. 2022, here we come. >> okay. >> bye, everyone. >> when i open up the paper every day, i'm just amazed at

how many different environmental issues keep popping up. when i think about what planet i want to leave for my children and other generations, i think about what kind of contribution i can make on a personal level to the environment. >> it was really easy to sign up for the program. i just went online to cleanpowersf.org, i signed up and then started getting pieces in the mail letting me know i was going switch over and poof it happened. now when i want to pay my bill, i go to pg&e and i don't see any difference in paying now. if you're a family on the budget, if you sign up for the regular green program, it's not going to change your bill at all. you can sign up online or call. you'll have the peace of mind knowing you're doing your part in your household to help the environment.

>> president honda will be the presiding officer tonight. also the president and city attorney who will provide us any needed legal advice at this evening. i the board's executive director. we will be joined by representatives from the city department that will be presenting before the board this evening. they are representing the planning department. the board meeting guidelines are as follows. we request you turn off or silence all phones and electronic devices so they won't disturb the proceedings. people are given seven minutes to