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.

(clapping.) the airport it where i know to mind visions of traffic romance and excitement and gourmet can you limousine we're at san francisco inspirational airport to discover the award-winning concession that conspiracies us around the world. sfo serves are more 40 million travelers a year and a lot of the them are hungry there's many restaurant and nearly all are restaurant and cafe that's right even the airport is a diane designation. so tell me a little bit the food program at sfo and what makes this so special >> well, we have a we have food

and beverage program at sfo we trivia important the sustainable organic produce and our objective to be a nonterminal and bring in the best food of san francisco for our passengers. >> i like this it's is (inaudible) i thank my parents for bringing me here. >> this the definitely better than the la airport one thousand times better than. >> i have a double knees burger with bacon. >> i realize i'm on a diet but i'm hoping this will be good. >> it total is san francisco experience because there's so many people and nationalities in this town to come to the airport

especially everyone what have what they wanted. >> are repioneering or is this a model. >> we're definitely pioneers and in airport commemoration at least nationally if not intvrl we have many folks asking our our process and how we select our great operators. >> ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ the food option in san francisco airport are phenomenal that's if it a lot of the airports >> yeah. >> you don't have the choice. >> some airports are all about

food this is not many and this particular airport are amazing especially at the tirnl indicating and corey is my favorite i come one or two hours before my flight this is the life. >> we definitely try to use as many local grirnts as we can we use the goat cheese and we also use local vendors we use greenly produce they summarize the local soured products and the last one had 97 percent open that. >> wow. >> have you taken up anything unique or odd here. >> i've picked up a few things

in napa valley i love checking chocolates there's a lot of types of chocolate and caramel corn. >> now this is a given right there. >> i'm curious about the customer externals and how people are richmond to this collection of cities you've put together not only of san francisco food in san francisco but food across the bay area. >> this type of market with the local savors the high-end products is great. >> i know people can't believe they're in an airport i really joy people picking up things for their friends and family and wait i don't have to be shopping now we want people take the opportunity at our location.

>> how long has this been operating in san francisco and the late 18 hours it is one of the best places to get it coffee. >> we have intrrnl consumers that know of this original outlet here and come here for the coffee. >> so let's talk sandwiches. >> uh-huh. >> can you tell me how you came about naming our sandwiches from the katrero hills or 27 years i thought okay neighborhood and how do you keep it fresh you can

answer that mia anyway you want. >> our broadened is we're going not irving preserves or packaged goods we take the time to incubate our jogger art if scratch people appreciate our work here. >> so you feel like out of captured the airport atmosphere. >> this is its own the city the airline crews and the bag handlers and the frequent travels travelers and we've established relationships it feels good. >> when i get lunch or come to eat the food i feel like i'm not city.

i was kind of under the assumption you want to be done with our gifts you are down one time not true >> we have a lot of regulars we didn't think we'd find that here at the airport. >> people come in at least one a week for that the food and service and the atmosphere. >> the food is great in san francisco it's a coffee and i took an e calorie home every couple of weeks. >> i'm impressed i might come here on my own without a trip, you know, we have kids we could get a babysitter and have diner at the airport. >> this is a little bit of things for everybody there's plenty of restaurant to grab

something and go otherwise in you want to sit you can enjoy the experience of local food. >> tell me about the future food. >> we're hoping to bring newer concepts out in san francisco and what our passengers want. >> i look forward to see what your cooking up (laughter) ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ >> today we've shown you the only restaurant in san francisco from the comfortableing old stand but you don't have to be hungry sfo has changed what it is like to eat another an

airport check out our oblige at tumbler dating.com good afternoon everyone. thank you for joining us here today. i'm san francisco mayor london breed and i'm joined today by supervisor matt haney as well as the director of the department of emergency management mary ellen carol. the department of public health behavioral health director dr. hillary kunis and we are also joined by our police chief bill scott. i am here with our various leaders in san francisco to officially declare a state of emergency in the tenderloin

community of the city and county of san francisco. we know that there have been a number of challenges that have happened in this community and have persisted over the years. but if we take a step back, when this pandemic first hit san francisco, of course, we immediately in light of what we knew was inevitable declared a state of emergency to deal with the global pandemic of covid-19 and, in fact, what we saw over the last almost two years was san francisco step up, remove the bureaucratic layers and the opticals that get in the way of actually being effective and collaborating with our various city agencies and what we were able to do to deal with the pandemic was extraordinary. we are one of the densest

cities in the country and with less than 700 people who lost their lives throughout the entire pandemic, we saw one of the lowest death rates of any other major city in the u.s. and san francisco not just because we acted quickly and shut down early, it's because we had the ability to move quickly and set up our various locations including a covid command center embedded equity into our response to help deal with challenges all over the city. but the sad reality is when we look at the loss of life in the pandemic which every lost life is tragic, we had over 700 people alone die due to a drug overdose last year in san

francisco. we have over 600 and counting this year. when we look at the conditions on our streets, it is really unfortunate, it's sad, it's heart breaking, and i must say, what doesn't get publicized enough is the fact that not only do we say and we are a compassionate city, the amount of money that we spend on services to help people struggling with mental illness, substance use disorders, programs. our street overdose team, our wellness team. additional resources for narcan. the additional organizations that assist us with those struggling with addiction and

mental illness. the significant increase in number of behavioral health beds in our system. a mental health sf, we've done a lot of work to try and turn things around because we know that suffering from those things are not easy. it is not just about homelessness. it's about addiction. it's about the fact that there is clearly in the tenderloin community with the conditions of not just the streets, but the people living there and the people suffering that we are in a crisis and we need to respond accordingly. it's not just about our police response to make sure that when people cross that line and commit crimes, we hold them accountable. it's about getting people the help that they need and being

able to do so quickly. i've said this time and time again, if you don't know what it's like to experience an addiction and i hope to god you never find out, we have to meet people where they are. we can't wait for something to be set up. we have to move quickly. we can't wait until something goes through a layered process. we have to move quickly. too many people are dying in this city. too many people are sprawled out all over our streets. and now we have a plan to address it. a robust, aggressive plan to address it. earlier this week, i made it clear that there are going to be a number of things that this city is going to do to address

public safety and part of that is a police response. part of that is accountability. part of that is making sure that we are consistent, but the other part is being aggressive about getting people into services and support and not allowing what has happened on our streets to continue. not only the fact that people who are suffering from these things are randomly committing acts of violence towards people who are just walking down the street not to mention the number of shootings and stabbings and other things that are happening randomly in this community, but also the high number of people who are dying from fentanyl overdoses.

so leading this effort to address this emergency will be mary ellen carol and the work that we have in place after our assessment will allow us the ability through this emergency declaration to move quickly, to move fast, to change the conditions specifically of the tenderloin community. this is necessary in order to see a difference, in order to reverse some of the deaths from overdoses and the assaults and attacks and other things happening in this community. so, at this time, i want to

introduce someone who's been advocating for resources and let's be clear, this city spends more money on when people walk down the streets of san francisco, they should feel safe. they shouldn't have to see someone sticking a needle in

various part officer their body laying out on the streets and wondering what can i do to help them. they shouldn't be spit on. we have to have an honest conversation about people who suffer from mental illness and substance use disorder and that crosses a line and impacts other peoples' ability to feel safe in our city, addressing those challenges, understanding what people are suffering through and meeting them where they are. and i'd like to introduce supervisor matt haney of district 6 to say a few words. >> supervisor haney: i want to thank the mayor for her focus

for her urgency and courage in today's announcement. the tenderloin is a community of residents who want and deserve safety, who want and deserve health and who want to survive. they need help. and this is a statement of the urgency that help is on the way. our city came together over the last few years and through everything we had to confront a deadly epidemic. and because of those actions of the people who are standing up here, we save lives. and we have to do that again. the overdose epidemic is taking the lives of nearly two people a day in our city. most of those people in the tenderloin are south of market

and mostly fentanyl. and if we are going to stop the epidemic, if we are going to save lives. we are going to once again throw everything we have at it. we need resources. we need coordination. we need tracking and we need it now. we cannot wait to take action. every day that we wait, anything that is getting our way to move slower, may cost lives. and this is something that we know we can do. decades ago, there was another epidemic that we faced which was hiv and aids. and this city came together we led the way and we saved lives. and so even though this is an epidemic that's not only affecting our city and the tentder loin, it's a national

epidemic. we have to demonstrate through commitment and compassion not only looking the other way, but confronting the problem. i think if there's anything we've demonstrated over the last year and a half under mayor breed's leadership that we can absolutely do this. but it takes us treating it like the emergency and the crisis it is and that's what we're doing today. thank you, mayor breed also as a resident of the coo at the scale of the problem we're facing and you have my full support and partnership. and i want to thank chief carol and director scott and chief kunis for your partnership on it. i want to introduce the person

who is going to lead this effort through the covid-19 pandemic bringing together resources, bringing together staff. unprecedented focus and speed to confront a pandemic. we have to do it again with this deadly epidemic of drug overdose. so i want to welcome up now director caroll. >> director: thank you, mayor breed, and thank you, supervisor haney. in emergencies, people need resources immediately and not months from now. an emergency declaration allows san francisco to cut through the red tape, to obtain the contracts, the resources and the personnel that we need to address the crisis conditions in the tenderloin. we only have to look at our covid response to see how an emergency declaration allowed us to quickly lease hotels,

hire critical staff and establish testing and vaccines. if you remember, when we did that declaration, there is a lot of questions about why we were doing a declaration so early before we even had a case in san francisco. it is because we knew the lead time that we needed and we knew how important it was to have the ability to conduct those resources. that's what it's about. this includes speeding up the establishment of a linkage center that once activated. the site will connect individuals in crisis to resources like substance use treatment, counseling, and medical care. to date, we have conducted neighborhood assessments, community stakeholder engagement. we've coordinated interventions, and helped

people in crisis connect to social services. i just want to reiterate that the emergency declaration is really about removing obstacles so that we can go in and conduct the work we need to do to help the residents of the tenderloin. our goal is to get those services coordinated as quickly as we can in order to alleviate the overall suffering that people are experiencing in the neighborhood. thank you very much. i'll turn it back to you. >> so, with that, are there any questions? >> question: the chronicle was told two months ago, if you declare it an emergency, it could practically allow -- not

practically allow, but you can do anything [inaudible] today. what does this mean in two months? >> can you go back to the first question? >> question: [inaudible] >> so the challenge we have with our conservetorship process is we wait until someone is 51/50 which is a 72-hour hold before we can implement a course of action which goes through a lengthy court process. from my perspective, it's not strong enough to be as effective as we would like it to be and i think that's why we have to use our alternative of not giving people any option when they are struggling with addiction and have challenges with mental health. we have to take them somewhere. so either that somewhere is going to be san francisco general depending on their condition or that somewhere is

going to be a location that we will set up as a result of this emergency declaration and the goal is to not let anyone stay out in the streets and not give them an option and to enforce many of our various laws that are on the books including sit lie and camping and sleeping and other things. so we're going to be a lot more aggressive with implementing existing laws on the books in order to get people off the streets and unfortunately the conservatorship does not work as effectively as is it should. >> question: and why the change in two months? if we did declare an opioid crisis that we would not be able to do anything that we're not doing now. so i'm wondering what's is changed in two months? >> what's changed is at that time we were working with the

department of public health and the city attorney's office to understand how we can get more creative on declaring a state of emergency because the problem we were having is technically under some of of 0 our various laws, it wasn't in terms of what was put forward and what was suggested, it wasn't something that technically we could use legally as a basis. so we had hunkered down, got creative and workeded with our attorneys to figure out a way. even at that time, it was a crisis. this is not something that just all of sudden happened. we were able to find a way which we needed in order to address it and so that's what we did. >> question: mayor, do you think this declaration will

save lives? >> my hope is that it will save lives. people laid out on the streets, we don't know if they're dead or alive. the ability for our street wellness teams to do checks, but most important, that person probably needs to be monitored and so part of our process is removing them from that location and moving them inside to a location where we have the kinds of folks that can monitor, that can provide resources, but more importantly, we're not here to judge. we're here to say, we're here, we're paying attention, we don't want you to die and so we're going to do everything we can to support you but we've got to they you off the streets. >> question: a public defender said that expanding police presence is going to be harmful to people who are already overpoliced and it cuts the promise you made in the wake of the george floyd murder death. what is your response to that? >> answer: it doesn't.

you see significant investments in programs including commitment to the african american community for $60 million a year ongoing. and so you tell that to the families who i met with who are in tears from the attacks and telling me that they want the police there. telling me that they call the police and they want them to show up. the families and the people who live there, has anyone from the public defender's office or anyone else had a conversation with these families who feel uncomfortable walking their kids down the street. so have the public defender give them a call and see what they want and they need to protect their lives and their children. everyone in theory can is talk about all the policies they want around no police and defund the police and all of these other things, but at the end of the day, if someone beat your kid like that 11-year-old

girl, who are you going to call to protect you? and that's the point of this. we have worked very hard in this city to turn things around with the challenges that have existed historically in the police department of san francisco and i'm very proud and confident in bill scott and his leadership and the various trainings, anti-bias trainings, the new recruits which have made the department more and more diverse and understanding of various communities, making sure that we're sensitive to the need and we're not creating these barriers to those who in the past have historically had challenges with the police. we have people who want a relationship. businesses in the tenderloin who want a relationship and treat their police officers with kindness and respect, the same with the police officers towards them. so folks can say what they want about all of this going back on your word this and that, but at the end of the day, the people

in this community are not safe and it is not fair and it's not right. and part of the response to this is definitely police officers. >> question: [ indiscernible ] >> answer: and they're deployed in the tenderloin too. but let me just be clear and the chief can talk about that. this declaration of emergency is more so about making sure that we are dealing with our public health crisis on the streets and part of it separately from that is definitely a significant increase on our police response. so, if you want, i can bring chief scott up if you have a

question. yes. >> thank you, mayor. everything that was said today only enhances our ability to do our jobs. enforcement, we have to enforce. we have to arrest drug dealers. a lot of what people complain about are the street conditions, open air injections of whatever is being injected in peoples' arms and toes and those things have to be addressed. the other side of that is our officer has said time and time again, let's have a system where we can get the social workers involved and that's exactly what this does at the front end so we can go and do the things that the public wants us to do. arrest people that are hurting people. stop the open air drug uses. stop some of the craziness that's going on on our streets and that's what most of us came on this job to do and this only

enhances our ability to do that because our officers will work in partnership with the health department and social services so they don't have to do that. we know to treat people with dignity and respect. we came on this job to be cops and this will only enhance that and the deployment that's already been increased. and i want to echo that in my comments that the mayor said. thanks to the mayor and the support of her budget office than any other community by far year to date. all this needs to come together. we will continue to invest in the tenderloin, our officers have worked a lot of hours and they don't mind doing that, but they want good outcomes. so when we enforce, we want consequences when the evidence is there. we need to support so they're not doing social work. we understand we have to treat

people well and do the job the way we have expected. and we need the support. the emergency declaration and my professional opinion will give us that support right now. so thank you. >> question: mayor breed, you mention an intention to move people to a place they need to be monitored. can you expand on where they will be moved to? >> answer: yes. mary ellen caroll can answer that. >> yes. so we made reference to a linkage center and we will have people who are experiencing substance abuse disorder, they can link up with the department

of public health resources. they can link with community based organization resources and treatment. we can find out where they are in the housing system if they need housing and we can also meet them where they are with some basic hygiene, food. we really want people to -- this is really intended to be a warm intervention with people to engage people. i think i can tell you personally and i think a lot of people feel frustrated with the lack of intervention and the lack of ways to intervene with people who are suffering on the street. and so this is a place that we can pull people in and get them warm, get them dry. get them fed and have them connected to all of the many services and resources that the city has.

>> question: [ indiscernible ] >> answer: yes. it is voluntary. people can come in on their own. people will also be given choices. so there is a push pull. our intention is to be more pull than push, but there will be and as the chief has talked about, there may be instances where people have a choice. you know, you're doing something illegal, something that's harmful in the neighborhood in this situation. we have this option for you to go here and we're hopeful that people are going to take us up on that option as much as possible.

all right. >> president cohen: good evening everyone. looks like we made it another year. i want to welcome you all to the regularly scheduled police commission meeting for january 5th, 2022. my name is malia cohen. i'm president of the commission. we've got a full house today and a fairly full agenda. i'd like sergeant youngblood to call the roll. >> secretary: yes, ma'am. [roll call]

president cohen, you have a kor quorum. >> president cohen: can we say the pledge of allegiance. >> i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america to the republic for which it stands one nation, under god in divisible with

liberty and justice for all. >> secretary: president cohen, i believe you are muted. >> president cohen: please call the first item. >> secretary: line item one. discussion and possible action to adopt findings for the police commission to continue to meet via teleconferencing technology per assembly bill. discussion and possible action. and i just need a motion and a second. >> vice president elias: motion. >> commissioner: i'll second it. >> president cohen: thank you, commissioner byrne.

>> secretary: [roll call] >> commissioner hamasaki: yes. quick question, why did we reverse the roll order? it's very confusing. >> secretary: i'm sorry. >> commissioner hamasaki: the roll order. we've always done it by seniority and now it's reversed. >> secretary: with the two new commissioners, they become the least senior, so they are now called first when calling the roll. >> commissioner hamasaki: that's so weird. i'm used to being called first. >> president cohen: commissioner, you'll have to

pay attention. >> commissioner hamasaki: i'll do my best. >> vice president elias: new roll new year, john. >> president cohen: yes. >> secretary: [roll call] all right. you have six yeses. >> president cohen: great. thank you. passes. please call the next item. >> secretary: next line item, general public comment. at this time the public is now welcomed to address the commission for up to two minutes that do not appear on tonight's agenda. under police commission rules of order during public comment neither police or d.t.a. personnel may respond to questions by the public, but may provide a brief response. comments or opportunities to speak via public comment are available by calling (415) 655-0001 and enter access code 248266992508.

press pound twice. you may submit it also in either of the following ways. e-mail the commission at sfpd.commission@sfgov.org. if you would like to make public comment at this time, please press star three. >> caller: commissioners, my name is francisco de costa and i would like ya'll to pay attention to what i'm saying. i've mentioned many times during these virtual meetings