loved ones. we don't want them hurt. we want them back the next day to do their work. >> there is a lot of responsibility the team members take on. they word very -- they work hard. they are proud of what they do. i am proud they are recognized. >> president moran: madam secretary please call the roll. [ roll call ] >> clerk: you have a quorum. due to the ongoing covid-19 health emergency issued by the san francisco department of public health and the emergency

orders of the governor and the mayor concerning social distancing and restrictions, this meeting is being held teleconference and televised by sfgov tv. for those watching live stream, there's a brief time lapse between the live meeting and on sfgov tv. i like to extend our thanks to sfgov tv staff for their assistance during this meeting. if you wish to make public comment, dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d., 24843445883. to raise your hand to speak press star 3. you must limit your comments to the topic of the agenda item discussed unless you're speaking under general public comment. please address your remarks to the commission as a whole not to

individual commissioners or staff. >> president moran: thank you. san francisco public utilities commission acknowledges that we are stewards unseated land located territory of tribe of federally recognized in alameda. sfpuc recognizes that every citizen continues to benefit from the use and occupation of the tribes of original lands. since before and after the san francisco public utilities founded in 1932. it's important that we not only recognize the history of tribal planned, we acknowledge that honor they have established working partnership with the

sfpuc within the many greater san francisco bay area communities today. please read the first item. >> clerk: item number 3, adopt renewed findings to continue allow remote meetings during the covid-19 emergency and direct the commission secretary to agendize similar resolution went >> president moran: commissioner s any questions or comments? please open for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment on item 3, dial (415)655-0001, meeting i.d. 24843445883. to recognize your hand to speak, press star 3.

>> we have one caller in the queue. >> clerk: this is on item number 3. are there any further callers? public comment on item 3 is closed. >> president moran: thank you. can i have a motion and second on this item? >> moved. >> second. >> president moran: all those in favor -- please call the roll call. [roll call vote]

>> clerk: you have 5 ayes. >> president moran: the item passes. next item. >> clerk: item 4. approval of the minutes of december 14, 2021. >> president moran: any comments or questions? seeing none. open public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make two minutes o on item number 4, dial (415)655-0001, meeting i.d. 24843445883, pound pound. >> there are no callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you. public comment on item 4 is

closed. >> president moran: thank you. commissioners can i have a motion and second? >> so moved. >> second. >> president moran: okay. moved and seconded to approve the minutes. roll call please. [roll call vote] >> clerk: you have five ayes. >> president moran: item passes. next item. >> clerk: item 5, general public comment. members of the public may address the commission on matters that are within the commission's jurisdiction and are not on today's agenda by dialing (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 24843445883, pound, pound. to raise your hand to speak press star 3.

do we have any callers? >> we have four callers in the queue. first caller, you have two minutes. >> caller: this is coalition for san francisco neighborhoods. i forward to the p.u.c. commission secretary a copy of the final report titled emergency firefighter water system plank study. it's posted under board of supervisors file. item number 29, was the date sunday, december 19th that was the date the p.u.c. transmitted it to the board of supervisors.

at the september 11, 2017 meeting of the capitol planning committee, during the p.u.c. presentation on agenda item 5, the issue of the orville dam came up. based on new state inspection and upgrade requirement, that the p.u.c. would need $100 million for the upgrades that an anticipated expense which had not been budgeted for and that the funds had been identified. a c.p.c. update will be useful. it's technically a dam. a 10-year capital plan lists risk assessment. i urge the p.u.c. not to waste money on this assessment but rather use the funds for

retrofit. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next caller. i have unmuted your line. you have two minutes. >> caller: good afternoon. this is peter dreckman from the tuolumne river. it provides lot useful information but doesn't directly answer key questions we've been talking about for the last couple of years. how likely is the design to occur and could the sfpuc manage the delta plan flows without risk running out of water. we don't have direct answers to those questions, but the report provides a lot of information we can extrapolate from. we're working on a response and

look forward to sharing that with you. what the study does tell us, we don't expect a big change and runoff. it's going to be little bit wetter in the country. it tells us that runoff will come earlier. that will benefit the sfpuc's entitlements. we ask you to have staff look at that. the demand, which also includes requirements plays much bigger role in climate change. real take away, we are expecting lot of change in runoff. that means all the different models we've been working on are pretty accurate. as far as demand, that's a major role affecting water supply. the report was a scenario.

they're all from 16% higher than current demand at 71% higher. that's something we need to look out for. if participation were to decrease by 20%, water would reduce from 750 -- >> clerk: your time has expired. >> next caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: commissioners, if you watched the tv that is san francisco public utilities commission, you will see an ad where family gathering water from a faucet. it's from hetch hetchy water. brought this to your attention, in the area where i live, from

time to time, the water stinks. the reason is because the water is not hetch hetchy water. it starts from there. you folks know that you're not adding ground water and compromising the water. i live not very far from the university which provides water to the financial district and district 10 and so on and so forth. this is water that originates from the hetch hetchy. it's contaminated by using ground water.

you can do me a favor by taking a survey and testing 10 or 15 samples. by the way, it will be good to give us three minutes public comment. two minutes is not sufficient to express ourselves. we have three or four people giving public comment. originally, the brown act and other regulations are at least 30 minutes of public comment. don't give us two minutes and force us to say something impossible in one minute. >> next caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: good afternoon commissioners and happy new year. couple of months ago, there were couple of items that were brought to your attention in awarding contracts.

a question was asked by one of the commissioners to the attorneys sitting on the commission, what is it your risk? these contracts were awarded to l.b.e.s fully knowing they were not eligible to be l.b.e. the answer from the commission, 5-0 approved the contract, knowing it's a fraud contract. let me update what the risk is so you can understand how serious what you guys do. yesterday the united states attorneys office in los angeles and now couple more indictments in l.a. for the first time, attorneys are being indicted for two things. extortion and fixing contracts. just google it. the name of the gentleman that got indicted thomas piers.

he works for the office. they named david wright, the general manager, david alexander, the chief cyber officer. these are lawyers that you ask have a risk or not. answer is yes. fixing contracts, it doesn't matter. your reputation is on the line, public money is on the line. you should be ashamed of yourself to award these contracts and saying, it's okay. we can play the game. yeah, play the game. the department of justice will play the game with you as well. no one is untouchable. welcome to 2022. there's more on the line. >> thank you for your comments. last caller.

>> caller: thank you to the chair. i came late. not sure chair moran if you're there. i speak to you simply as ordinary user of electricity. i'm not in san francisco, right now. i am sitting here in my all electric home now enjoying benefits of 100% solar. how can we make it easier and friendly for people of san francisco to access renewable energy and to continue to work on our pricing to make the renewables the best value for the money. there are many who are price sensitive. i do continue to drive forward for electrification in san francisco. some of the greatest restaurants in the world have all electric

kitchens. i know this from making pottery years ago that if you can fire pottery in electric killn. how can we get this message out for electrification. i don't think restaurant workers should have to be breathing in the emissions that come from gas ranges and other heat producing appliances. i think we are in sync on this. i assure that when i come to speak to you, it's never adversarial but collaborative. i think you and i share the same ideas building a clean power electric system that best serves the city of san francisco. i thank you that we are in alignment on that.

appreciate it. >> one more caller has joined the queue. next caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: hi, i'm trisha gregory. i'm owner of heavy weight trucking in district 10. i want to talk about how important it is to keep community liaisons on projects such as like the biosolids to make sure small micro, l.b.e.s gets on those jobs. without them we wouldn't know what contracts are being put out. i want to reiterate how important it is to keep community liaisons on these projects. thank you.

>> clerk: general public comment is closed. >> president moran: thank you to the callers. next item please. >> clerk: item 6, communications. >> president moran: is there any comments or questions on any of the items included in the communications? seeing none, please open up for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make public comment on item 6, dial (415)655-0001, meeting i.d. 24843445883, pound pound. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3.

do we have any callers? >> we have one caller in the queue. go ahead, you have two minutes. >> caller: commissioners, regarding the communication log, we had lot of problems and challenges with it. i pointed it out to the secretary of the commission regarding those challenges. i don't think that should be the case. this has been going on for quite a few times. it's more than an isolated case. communication is really important. also what i'm trying to understand, why would you for the first time log in articles from the newspaper about the corruption san francisco and being selective about it? correct me if i'm wrong, that log is coming in from your own

staff. it is not coming in from the outside. why are your staff hand picking what article they want to put in? that's really important, there are more articles that are more damaging. specifically willie brown that have ripped the state upside down. the last commercial that i heard regarding r.d.g., are you kidding me? r.d.g. only have few companies. they sit on the l.b.e. commission just to make sure that only ones that don't qualify get qualified and get work. i've never got a single e-mail from r.d.g. i want to see the look on your ice when that company get indicted by the feds. shame on you!

>> thank you for your comments. >> clerk: public comment on item 6 is closed. >> president moran: thank you. next item please. >> clerk: next item is 7, report of the general manager. mr. herrera? >> thank you. item 7a will be drought conditions update. >> good afternoon commissioners. steve richie assistant general manager for water. i will provide the drought update which includes results from the last week of december storms which were very significant. this shows the storage in our system, which is looking good. given the amount of rainfall we've had.

hetch hetchy is actually 28% above where it was last year at this time. eleanor is 209% above last year. there was definitely a big inflow and looking at just yesterday's information, hetch hetchy reservoir is up further than right there now. it's about 280,000-acre feet. the other california reservoirs, up in the north state orville.

this is the drought monitor as of december 30, 2021. the most recent drought monitor map, basically has shaved off that red area of extreme drought down below the san joaquin river. given the word severe and extreme, i'm not sure that gives me that much comfort. they both sound pretty bad. it's better than it was. we'll see some data on that now. hetch hetchy precipitation, we definitely got precipitation there towards end of december. it's now the starting to flatten out. here you see the snow pack. you can see 2017 is the dashed orange line there, which is our second wettest year on record. you can see that at least as of this reading, we were ahead of

2017. right now, with the most recent results of the snow pack from the snow pillows index, we're sitting on top of the curve for 2017. you can see also we got a bump up in water available to the city from that end of december set of storms. you can see that it's actually 126,000-acre feet that is now what we call water available to the city. which is water that we have the right to actually utilize. if we're trying to fill our system, we should get about 600,000-acre feet figure. given the amount of snow pack if things work out right, we could very well come close to filling our system this year.

the upcountry precipitation index, shows we had big december there. basically almost double the average precipitation for december. the bay area precipitation is average. the year to date total now, 19.e average annual total. just a quick note, this slides shows we have .04 inches in january. that's about three quarters an inch now. we had additional storm come in january that gave us a little

boost. local precipitation is really quite high. lot of that precipitation did end up in the peninsula watershed. we've had some issues out there in terms of couple of road failures and things like that and highway 92 west. this is the national precipitation forecast for the period january 3 through januar. the most recent look shows both current week of january 11-19 and subsequently pretty dry.

given the amount of precipitation that we had and given that it's the holiday period? we got down to last week of year, delivery of about 132 million gallons per day. again, this is the low period for the year as always. this is just looking at how we've been doing or water use production compared to fiscal year '19, '20. the reduction in san francisco has been almost 15% for wholesale customers. i will point out that the san francisco reduction probably is due as much to economic conditions than to actual

conservation measures. i think we should see that number actually probably come down as recovery curves to the extent it does occur. our wholesale customer now the commission taking action on declaring water emergency. we have now corresponded back-and-forth with the wholesale customers about what their obligations are relative to water use reduction in the coming months. >> do a quick reminder for me customer and wholesale customer? >> san francisco customers are the retail customers of san francisco. the folks who live and work in san francisco, plus we call our suburban customers, customers outside of san francisco. the wholesale customers are the 26 customers outside of san

francisco, the cities and water districts that we provide water to outside of san francisco. >> residential is not included in this? >> for the wholesale customers, that's the water that we deliver to them. which is used for combination of residential and commercial uses. in san francisco it's a combination of residential and commercial. one last note, the curtailment continues to be suspended because of the wet conditions. since october 19th, they've been suspended. we will see how that may change in this dry period coming ahead. at least for now, we're able to actually take advantage of water bank and other things. our planning for the future is little bit fuzzy given what we are not certain about relative to curtailments and how it will affect snow mount runoff.

that's the update on the drought conditions. be happy to answer any questions. >> president moran: thank you. vice president ajami. >> vice president ajami: i have couple of questions. you mentioned about water sales about 139 during month of december. i'm wondering how much it was last year? >> it's the second to the last slide. >> vice president ajami: i'm assuming because of the pandemic, not much travel happened. >> this is for the last week. these are weekly numbers. it was 132 for this year. this slide does not have 2020 on

it. give me about 30 seconds i can dig that up if you like. >> vice president ajami: you can report it back. i'm curious to see how that look like last year. some of this still impacted by the pandemic. some of it is impacted by around water conservation. i'm trying to see if you can peel these off from each other. one comment i have is, it was interesting for me looking at your snow pack data, we have managed to hit every record in the past 10 years. the lowest, the highest.

which is quite interesting. >> the highest was in 1983. >> i thought you said -- >> second highest in 2017. >> vice president ajami: okay. i thought you said it was the highest. my mistake. one last comment i have is, in your last slide, i do understand you're trying to reduce water use production on the 2019 and 2020 water year. i'm wondering if you can look at how it changed between 2020 and 2021 versus this year. just because lot of this mandatory water use restrictions. i'm wondering how if you have any facts how -- how water use has been impacted.

>> you talked about economics and conservation being factors and weather conditions. i think that's something to be considered. in the 1920 fiscal year, early 2020 calendar year before the pandemic started, we had extremely high water usage in the month of february, because it was so dry and warm. each year has its own characteristics that make it challenging to figure out what the data mean from year-to-year. we selected the 1920 fiscal year as a good base year from which to look for what kind of reduction we can get down to a lower level.

we saw reduction off 19/20. i think that's what led us to that as way to make sure we're achieving overall demand whether we're achieving a particular percent. >> vice president ajami: it will be interesting to see some of the actions that we have taken in the fiscal year 21-22. how they have impacted water use compared to fiscal year 20/21. >> we can report back on that. >> vice president ajami: thank you. thank you so much for the presentation.

>> president moran: commissioner harrington? >> commissioner harrington: than k you for the report. couple of questions. obviously it looks great. we have uncertainties and curtailments. we have adopted a drought surcharge to kick in a few months. do you see any scenario where we withdraw those kinds of things? is there a no go date to make that kind of decision? >> the declaration of the water shortage emergency automatically triggered that there will be drought surcharge. the direction that the commission gave was to put it in effect starting april 1st. it would stay in effect until the commission were to eliminate their drought.

this is our first experience with doing it. it would be in situations. they did not list right away because they still had -- it was created on the revenue side. they let the drought surcharge extend beyond end of the drought. they made a policy decision that they need to recover the revenue hole. they didn't recover it completely. that's the analysis commission might be faced if it gets wet going ahead. >> commissioner harrington: does it make sense to be calendaring something first meeting in march

or the last meeting in february or something to reconsider? it's on auto pilot at this point? >> it's on auto pilot for communication on that front. i think as we move forward, we'll get in the period where we're looking ahead to next year's water supply. >> commissioner harrington: seco nd question, i thought you agreed that we might be able so start putting some environmental measures into this report.

>> we have that under way now. i'm hopeful that we'll have something for the january 25th meeting if not january 25th, certainly in the first meeting in february. that gives a bigger picture than just a single number. i think that's appropriate and that's what the staff thinks is appropriate. i was looking at draft to that earlier today. >> commissioner harrington: than ks so much. >> president moran: if i add on the surcharge. the fact that it is not in place now and it's anticipated to commence being put in place on april 1st, if it turns out that by april 1st it's looking pretty wet and looking like a good year, we at least, if we're

anticipating imposing it anyway, we need to communicate why that is. the optics of that are pretty high. >> commissioner, moran. we hear you. what steve and i will focus on, this is obviously an evolving situation. we'll see how things go. we will certainly get back to you to talk about that in a broader sense so you can make a policy call. we will keep you updated and i

hear what your request is. >> vice president ajami: on this topic, major looking into how we put this surcharges in place. for example, we have been promoting or trying to get people to use less water, via wholesaler has been impacted by the reduction in water use. the revenue loss. i wonder if there's something that needs to be put in place. right now, for example, by april, hopefully it will be a wet year. we haven't -- if we lift the mandatory surcharge, we have

promoted conservation last year, earlier this year. that was the revenue loss that we never recovered. what's the timeline that's worth having the discussion on? >> president moran: any other questions or comments? please open this for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment on item 7a, the drought conditions update, dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 24843445883, pound pound.

do we have any callers? >> we have three callers in the queue. >> caller: this is david pilpel. good afternoon. on item 7a., i'm wondering if this standing item could be submitted later in the week before the commission meetings so it can capture the most recent drought monitor that's issued early thursday mornings. i know that may be tough for --

it would then if we look at last thursday's drought monitor rather than week and a half ago. it could be like the last item submitted. may be that's too hard. to commissioner harrington's question, which was entirely pertinent. i would ask customer service how much lead time they're going to need for no go question on the april 1 rate surcharge. i'm sure there's advance work on ccnb. you don't want to impose surcharge and then modify it and have to issue a credits or refunds to customers. although, that may happen anyway. it's not just a question for water but for customer service.

i would just note that the reduction in water use also results in less wastewater use in the city, hurting revenues and rates. i'm concerned about that. >> next caller, you have two minutes. >> caller: thank you. you saw in the update that the sfpuc picked up 126,000-acre feet of water from the tuolumne this year. this doesn't including the snow

mount. there's 65% of the median april 1st know measure. we're doing really well early in the season. we're closing in on our annual demand of 219,000-acre feet. that's based on 195 m.g.d. demand. we might figure we need 185,000-acre feet from the tuolumne to get us through this year. obviously there's a deficit from the past couple of years. just an average year will bring us back up to full storage. we already asked over one million acre feet in storage. which is enough water to last four and a half years. i think it's time to acknowledge that and not be paranoid about not running out of water.

an average year, we're still picking up enough water to last two years. precipitation goes up, we see a much greater gain in entitlements than loss. the drought model shows that in the worst drought on record -- [ indiscernible ] >> clerk: your time has expired. >> next caller.

your line has been muted. >> caller: commissioners, i wanted to pay attention on the drought. who will speak for the salmon? who was there first? we seem to be concerned about the human beings and that may be be. where are we adding so many wholesalers? what was in the original act? how many amendments have been made? one of you commissioners generally stated about environmental issues. we want to know what san francisco public utilities do to help the salmon in the tuolumne

river? we want to know why has there been more -- [ indiscernible ] i would say that's a question. we need to focus on the salmon at all times. we need to find out the cumulative impacts on the salmon. this is a mandate. it should be mandatory.

>> clerk: thank you. public comment on item 7a is closed. >> item 7b is the results of recent competitive sales of wastewater and power revenue bonds. >> good afternoon members of the commissioner. this is rich morales, p.u.c. capital finance director. back on october 26th, when i came before you to present the item asking for approval of the wastewater bonds i told you that i would return at a later date to present the results of the sales. i combined that presentation resulted in the power bond sales that you approved on

november 9th. this is my presentation to you on the results of the wastewater bond, wastewater notes athe power bond sales. you approved the sales of wastewater revenue bonds and wastewater revenue notes. both transactions were sold on a competitive basis in mid-november. the wastewater bond and notes have bond ratings by moodies which is a strong rating. then you approved the sale of power revenue bonds which sold in december. the power bonds were offered on a competitive basis. the power bond had their ratings for double a by s&p and double a for fitch rating. market conditions were stable at the time of each of the sales. strong demand and aggressive bidding and interest rate at that time continue to be at a historical low levels.

i finally like to add, each transaction offered a green series. given the strong bidding that we received, these were all successful transactions from the sfpuc. following slides i will provide specific results from these transactions. let's start with the wastewater revenue bonds. wastewater bonds sold in two series, approximately $297 million. series a sold on november 16th. we received eight underwriter bids. b bonds sold on november 16th.

if you look at the aggregate weighted average cost of the bond, this is the counts, the t.i.c. was 3.03%. weighted average y.t.c. was 1.65%. this metric is lower than the t.i.c metrics yieldly to call. true interest cost was higher and held for full 30-year maturity. turning to the wastewater revenue notes, they were sold in two series on november 18th, couple of days after the bonds were sold. as mentioned when i presented this item to you on october 26th, wastewater notes will be paid off with

disbursements that will provide low cost, long-term financing. the aggregate of the wastewater notes is $347 million. series b also offer green notes maturity of five years. ten bids were received, lowest bid from citigroup. this resulted in 0.77%. finally we showed results of the power revenue bonds both offered for sale on december 8th.

sears a had a maturity of 30 years, with low winning bid coming from -- series b had a final maturity of 30 years, it received a bid coming from r.b.c. capital markets 2.75%. this resulted in aggregate cost of the power bond of 2.63% and yield to call of 1.48%. this concludes my presentation. i'm happy to take any questions. thank you. >> president moran: commissioner harrington? >> commissioner harrington: good rates. all that kind of stuff. i was particularly struck, the green bonds versus non-green bonds. does it really matter? here, it clearly seems to have

matter. am i misreading that? >> all of the questions and all the assumptions -- we think green series did matter. hard to say in a competitive sale. underwriters don't necessarily in a competitive sale, they don't target green bond sale investors. other factors were involved. each series had different amounts. with the bond, that series was considerably larger than series b bond. there was structuring

consideration between series. all of those were factors in determining the differential and the t.i.c. series. i would urge you to look at the final aggregate t.i.c. of each transaction. that's really what matters. that's truly the cost of money involved in each of these transactions. having green is great. >> commissioner harrington: it will be great if it works out if it was two identical. one green and one not green. really test to makes the difference. >> we did about a year ago. we did a negotiated new money sale for the water enterprise and we sold -- negotiated sale

will be the underwriter. we sold two series side-by-side. identical structure, pretty much the same side and we were able to quantify that the green series outperformed non-green series by three bases points. we can point to the fact that we work with the underwriter in achieving that result. that was a very important dynamic for us. every bases point matters. >> commissioner harrington: than k you. >> vice president ajami: one of those cases, may be it was the

power bonds. i think you had the same bidder winning both bids, both the green and the non-green bid. there wasn't much of a comparison between the two. >> well, it just so happens the capital market won both series. they came in with the most aggressive bidding. i think there were a number of factors. not necessarily the green series being a factor. it was size and structuring of the series and all those different considerations. i would urge you to look at the aggregate t.i.c.

in the case of power, we got phenomenal results, 3% long-term 30-year money. that's pretty darn good. >> vice president ajami: it was interesting to me that the number of bidders didn't matter, did not change either going from having grown bonds versus federal bond. >> they just trying to win the bid. they trying to put in the lowest bid. >> president moran: thank you. >> can i do a follow-up on that? i was going to ask the ask thing. there's no disincentive on the grown side -- green side? is that a myth?

>> no, it's small sample size. i think it's an evolving market. the green market is evolving. i do believe that there are enough investors out there who now have dedicated green or sustainable bond funds that will look to buy a green series. they'll bid up demand for that. i think having green series will benefit us in the future. we can measure it better. >> president moran: thank you. any other questions or comments? please open up for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make two minutes

public comment on item 7b, results of recent competitive sales of wastewater and power revenue bonds dial (415)655-0001, meeting i.d. 24843445883. to raise your hand to speak press star 3. >> there is one caller in the queue. first caller, i've unmuted your line. >> caller: this is david pilpel again. one quick question if someone can put it to the staff, without going back to the november calendar item, i'm wondering what the staff projection was for the bond and note interest rates? how they kind of compare at that

level? i was trying to think off the top of my head what the impact of these interest costs are over the life of the bonds and notes and how that impacts the revenues and ultimately the coverage ratios and things like that. i assume, the numbers do look very competitive. i don't know what staff has already projected and how that plays out in the financial plans. regardless of the answer there, i wanted to take a moment to thank rich morales for all of his great work over the years. i understand that he, too, is leaving. i'm sad about that. i wanted to say publicly, he's done a great job managing the debt portfolio. thanks. >> thank you for your comments.

the call queue is clear. >> clerk: thank you. public comment on item 7b is closed. >> madam secretary and commissioners, item 7 is the hetch hetchy quarterly campaign improvement program quarterly report. i will take an item out of order and move item 7e up to that section. it's the performance audit of sfpuc social impact partnership program report of the office of the controller city services auditor, audits division. the reason i'm taking this out of order is because i'm presenting this myself. i am not going to be able to stay the whole commission meeting today. i let commissioner moran know this. we decided to take this item out of order.

i'll be presenting and be prepared to answer any questions. good afternoon commissioners. on december 9, 2021, the office of controller published a public integrity performance audit of the sfpuc social impact partnership program entitled "significant changes are needed to design and control san francisco public utilities commission social impact program" we forwarded this to you. beginning in march 2021, the controller office engaged in independent third party consulting firm. i want to thank the p.u.c. staff

for all the collaboration and coordination on this. social impact program was designed provide an avenue for contractors competing for certainly types for sfpuc contracts. from the beginning, the program was intended to be voluntary on the part of the participants. there were three main findings to the highlight. one, the program lacks sufficient internal controls related to solicitation, commitment monitoring and contract closeouts. two, the framework set up to oversee and manage the program lacks transparency and proper procedures and three, the contracts made, there's a lack of confidence that the city and

its residents getting the best value in a proposed commitment. in sum, the audit found problems with the administration of the program and noted that mature rules and regulations should be enacted and approved by this commission and the board of supervisors. the audit did not find any wrong doing on the part of any particular individuals or companies and did not recommend shutting this program down. by the same token, i understand commissioners, audits are good as they go. this was about procedures. we should also be concerned about outcomes. before we get to what i'm going to do to if in response to the audit. i want you to know that we have an information dashboard that i've asked our staff to look at in anticipation of this meeting going forward. at least initially, our review

shows there were no outliers in terms of companies or entities that received disproportionate amount of funds or time. we continued that refer and -- review. what we have done to date, when the audit was issued, i immediately did three things. first, i committed to continuing the program so that companies doing business with the sfpuc can continue to build connections and have positive impact on communities and residents in our service areas or areas impacted by our work. that work is critical and nothing in the audit suggested otherwise. second, the audit identified sevens recommendations. i ask staff to work to ensure

all seven will be implemented in 2022. third, i directed staff to work with the city attorneys office to implement what we could immediately and to work together to send a recommendation to me so i can come back to the commission and if approved, go to the board of supervisors to ensure clarity, transparency and fairness in the program. as a result, we immediately inserted notices in our r.f.p.s that we'll be including details for the solicitation via the upcoming amendments. this ensures our project will not slow down and they will continue to have partnership opportunities for the contractors. also give us time to work with the city attorneys office to make the necessary changes. we have given the city attorneys office material that will make clear the program is voluntary. it consist of bonus points. no one at the p.u.c. can have any say to where the money is to be directed.

we have excluded from the new contract, terms that expressly allowed the previous assistant general manager to direct where funds will go. those days are over. we're moving forward to ensure that nobody at the p.u.c. and nobody in any selection panel can benefit from the program or direct contractors commitments. staff have contacted all firms participating in the program to ensure they provide all required reports and documentation to the p.u.c. asap. that documentation will be made public. staff is creating templates to ensure communications about the requirements of the program for

review by the city attorney office and then by me. staff updated the conflict of interest for the panelists reviewing proposals by review. staff working to develop comprehensive, clear and policy to be reviewed by the city attorney office. i intend to bring a revised program to the commission for approval. strengthening proactive communication with firms to ensure full delivery of commitments including more frequent and explicit communications.

working with the city attorneys office to incorporate remedies and liquidated damages and contract along to hold firms accountable for meeting contractual obligations to follow through. finally, engaging with the consultants in the p.u.c. i.t. department to approve data assistance and strengthening -- [ indiscernible ] in closing the p.u.c. will continue to be a strong institution, good neighbor and community member in a responsible steward of rate payer resources. we will improve the program ensure it meets the high level of standards, transparency and accountability that i demand of all our programs.

commissioners, i take the audit findings and recommendations seriously. we will continue to direct staff to work together with city attorney's officen controllers office to administer a program that's accountable, transparent and meet the public integrity standard that the city and its residents deserve. we will return to the commission to update you on this process. with that, commissioners, we're happy to take any questions. >> president moran: commissioner paulson? >> commissioner paulson: thank you general manager for that report. which i know we have as commissioners had a chance to look at prior to this presentation. i have couple of comments about where we are and including the next steps. i spent lot of my lifetime

working on workforce development and training and local hire. when any organization does work that not only done well and with good trained people, especially things like construction, that everything is done in a transparent way so that everybody knows what's going on. i was pleased to know, there was no wrong doing that could be identified in that particular audit. things that may be we would have heard about in specific ways despite the other chatter that's been going on for the last couple of years. that is pleasing to note and to hear as part of the audit

report. i will say, because of other circumstances in terms of things that have happened over laths year or two. i know that there was going to be at some time, a tentatively scheduled meeting that was going to be run also by your predecessor who is going to give the commissioners at the time, an independent analysis of every single contract that was given out. no matter how it was given out. no matter what the metrics and the transparencies were. we will probably be done in such a way that we would be able to know whether or not there was wrong doing or any real red flags at the time. of course, that didn't happen. this audit seems to moved the ball forward now finally. the p.u.c. has recommended to

the commissioners as part of this report that every single finding in the audit you agree to and are going to address in this particular year. i think you said, correct me if i'm wrong, in 2020, your goal is to make sure that everything does get covered. there will be plan that's presented to us that hopefully we can agree to so we can continue this very good program with all the metrics and accountability issues that we need to move forward.

i was very pleased to see this audit in the report and the presentation where you guys are going to work and present it. thank you and really appreciate your summary of what the auditor >> president moran: mr. harringt on? >> commissioner harrington: than k you, dennis. thank you to the controllers office and others for doing this audit. i'm very happy that we're not throwing out the -- there's some real benefits to this. if we do it well as opposed to screwing it up, this can provide benefits. as you noted, audits only good what the assignment of the auditor. clearly there's been a variety of other kinds of accusations

that weren't part of this process. insider trading, with consultants and staff. is there in the shoe that will drop? is there something else happening that we should be aware of? >> not to my knowledge. i can't tell you that's based on sort of my prior role in what i generally know. i don't think so. i will say, i alluded to, this was about process and things we can do to make the program strong. i think that you and commissioner moran identified these audits only good as they go. that is why we are looking at beyond process, the process, i try to have our folks, i want to

tell you if i noticed anything screaming that there was a firm or an entity like like you got a disproportionate amount of money that would be a red flag. we are going to continue to look internally and look at all the data that we have to see if there's something that doesn't immediately jump out that would cause concern. i'm going to look at those findings and report back to you as to if something does jump out that i think needs further sales. -- further evaluation.

>> president moran: commissioner ajami? >> i hope that answers your question commissioner harrington >> commissioner harrington: most ly. >> vice president ajami: thank you so much for your presentation. that was really good. i want to see if you can, two things. one is, you have taken this position as an outsider in a way. do you have an opportunity to look at the process in a very different way compared to someone who has been in the water and utility business for long time? it's an opportunity to have officially the first year, you're still diving in this. that's a great opportunity to figure out if there are some red flags that you might see that you can improve. there's no perfect process out there. second thing, i'm really happy

to hear that we are trying to be more data-driven on this. just because, we should be able to have a question go back and say, let's look at what everything looks like and give logical answer. be able to have a baseline that you work off of. i know it's there. it needs to be organized in a better way. i wonder if there's best management practices on contracting out there? we can potentially take advantage or bring to our organization. it's always great to learn from others, positive or negative experiences. i would suggest may be -- to have some form of industry search to figure out all the

three enterprises, some best practices in contracting. or actually on the infrastructure side as a whole and see if there are certain things that we can do or implement to make that process more transparent, efficient and effective and fair. >> to your point, you are correct. you come into an organization from outsider's perspective, you certainly bring to your own perspective from your experiences. i think this program does great work. i'm a big believer in transparency. we need to be as transparent as possible and feel comfortable, showing what the data shows. what the benefit is. what the information is. i'm a big believer that the best

way to combat or to answer questions that are legitimate but also to answer innuendo, to be transparent with the information that you have. have clear processes in place, set the rules, let folks know where things are. bring that back to this commission and to the board of supervisors, sign off on things in terms these are the policies and then what the results are. results can speak for themselves. people can evaluate them. the more we have transparency, the more the better, as far as i'm concerned. that is important so that the good high quality work can get done. i hear everything you're saying, commissioner.

>> commissioner maxwell: i think that once we formalize it as you mentioned and we take it to the board of supervisors and it's a formal policy that lot of those thing can be written in. sooner the better. >> commissioner, i pledged to you that this will be done this year. >> president moran: i think it's noteworthy, other departments have been asking for that kind of legislation, city wide basis, so they can have the same kind of program. the benefit of the program is clear. we need to make sure -- encouraging the spending lot of money that is done in a transparent and right way. you're taking the right step to make that happen. i'm also pleased that you're

going beyond just the procedure. procedures are intended to make sure everything works okay. you have to go to the next level and say, how it turns out and look at that as well. you're looking at both parts of that. that's very encouraging. any other comments? seeing none. open up for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make public comment on item 8, performance audit, dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 24843445883.

do we have any callers? >> we have two callers in the queue. first caller. go ahead. you have two minutes. >> caller: great. this is david pilpel again. vy concerned about the so called community benefits program for many years. i was concerned about it when i served on the citizens advisory committee, i've been concerned about it as a rate payer. primarily, i'm concerned about the nexus between rate payers and the benefits to rate payers from that program whether it's a good idea or not is up for debate and discussion. that's not happening right here

right now. at a minimum, i think having the kinds of controls and guidelines that were suggested is absolutely required. this too is in part why i commented last week at the budget hearing in favor of eliminating the a.g.m. for external affairs. having this program under the new chief staff would bring it closer to the general manager and his direct oversight and again, whether it's good or bad, it would have closer scrutiny, which i think is absolutely warranted for everyone concerned. there's more i can say. i will leave it at that. thank you for listening.

>> caller: dennis, attorneys play poker on an empty hand. as long as i don't sue you, you're out of luck, dennis. what i heard from you is nothing but deception, dennis herrera. let me rephrase this one more time. december 24, 2020, go google it on nbc, channel 4 in san francisco, you will see an investigating report showing exactly what you have just denied. one of them is 5% in scoring on community benefit as far as election criteria. please tell me as an attorney, how can a consultant just ignore 5% and call it voluntary? the fact is, it's called voluntary mandatory. that's the right term.

two, look at the report again by nbc. this is not me speaking and not you defending and denying it. where did the money go, dennis? you approved that program when you were city attorney. you personally approved it. you denying all of this. the money went to a pacific pocket. a bad man and again if you look at the report, you'll see one out of $7 that went to this program went in from r.g.g. to another nonprofit called -- it's from one of dwayne jones pocket to another dwayne jones pocket. did the community benefit from this program? absolutely not. who benefited is the district supervisor through this character that you guys hiring and give him money.

also that you have also did not even touch on is the fact that dwayne jones is contracted directly -- >> clerk: your time is expired. >> next caller, you have two minutes. >> caller: let me make it very clear to you. you can lie all you want to. we're provided data which the former city attorney got read and gave it to the fbi. we're the people. he can lie or he can say whatever he wants to say. dwayne jones and i can name some

other names, god sees it all. the former city attorney knows this. we provided the data to the controller. the controller gave the data to the city attorney. now we'll have the fox guarding the chicken coop. lie all you want to. shame on you all. you know why? that's not community benefit. this is all the money. we have over 200 people on his payroll. who is robbing whom? give us five minutes so that we

can tell you no. he's never been fair to the community. he's never been fair to the community. >> thank you for your comments. the call queue is clear. >> clerk: public comment on item 7e is closed. >> next item is hetch hetchy quarterly capital improvement program quarterly report. katie miller will be presenting.

>> good afternoon commissioners. i'm katie miller, director of water capital program. i will cover highlights of the hetch hetchy capital improvement program for the first quarter of fiscal year 21 to 22 from july 1 to september 30, 2021. to start out, i wanted to share that the quarterly reports for all the programs for the first quarter include some changes to formatting and process. these changes were shared with you in a memo at the september 28th commission meeting. a summary of these changes is as follows. first we will no longer have a separate process to reset the program. your approval of the c.i.p. will be your approval to schedules and budgets that is included in the c.i.p. proposal. since this hetch hetchy program

has not been brought to you since 2018. this means starting this quarter, approved budget scopes and schedules will become those included and approved in this fiscal '21 to '30 c.i.p. budget. second, starting with the quarterly report, the hetch hetchy program, will no longer be reported in this quarterly report. in compliance with our agreement, the projects is less than $5 million in value will be reported annually in the annual report on water enterprise manage campaign improvement project. third, we added several formatting improvements to better highlight project

performance history. some of the key revisions are summarized here. most significantly, the new table 5 budget and scheduled trend summary, shows forecast the completion date throughout the project duration. we hopes this helps to illustrate the changes throughout the project. in section 7, the project status report, the reason for the changes to forecast are explained in the issues and challenges section. since this quarter is the first quarter in the fiscal year '21 to '30 approved c.i.p., here's summary of the program changes.

there are 11 continuing projects that were carried forward for the 21 to 30hcip. in total there are 17 active projects with a total budget of $803 million including the three project development accounts. $121 million has been spent to date for 21% explosion overall. this table shows project cost forecast compared to 2020 improved -- approved budget. it's due to san joaquin pipeline

valve. there was significant planning. and coordination work performed by the infrastructure staff as well as contractors in advance of the january 2022 mountain tunnel shutdown that is critical for several of these projects. the san joaquin entry project was on two major construction projects in 2023.

the moccasin power house and stepup unit project prepared to install the new generator step up transformer in light blue. this will be tied in during this current mountain tunnel shutdown. the mountain tunnel improvements construction contract continued to prepare for the shutdown including major excavation and road improvements to access the tunnel at several other locations. finally, i want to update you that last monday, january 3rd, we initiated the major 2-month-old mountain tunnel shutdown. hetch hetchy water and power staff shut down the hetch hetchy water system and began drain the many tunnels and pipelines. 100% of the water supply is now being supplied by the bay area water supply including san antonio, calvaries and san

andreas reservoir. also, water is applied in san francisco by the ground water wells. this is the first of six annual major shutdown of the hetch hetchy water supply in order to facilitate construction of the improvement project at mountain tunnel, san joaquin pipeline, moccasin power house and other facilities as well as several r&r project along the entire hetch hetchy hetch hetchy system. i want to give a shot out to all our staff and operations for this heroic event. it takes lot of effort to coordinator this safely and on schedule. i look forward to sharing more details about this critical shutdown in future reports.

>> president moran: commissioner harrington? >> commissioner harrington: than k you for working on these reports, continuous improvement. every time it gets better. we appreciate that a whole lot. thank you to both you and the operating staff, shutdowns are a big deal. it take whole lot of work. we do very much appreciate how professional we do these things here. >> thank you very much. i will pass that on. >> president moran: commissioner ajami. >> vice president ajami: i want to comment on the shutdown. people don't realize what it takes behind the scene to bring the resources to them and what happens afterwards to operate and maintain our wastewater system.

please do thank everybody involved. >> with the impacts of covid and impacting so much staff and contractors now, extra shot out to our health and safety staff as well as managers and supervisors who are really working hard to coordinate scheduling. >> president moran: public comment please? >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make two minutes public comment on the hetch hetchy report. dial (415)655-0001, meeting i.d., 24843445883-pound pound. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3.

>> there are no callers in the queue for this item. >> clerk: thank you. public comment on item 7c is closed. >> thank you commissioner moran. next item is the wastewater enterprise quarterly report including southeast area major projects update biosolids and 1550 veronese southeast community center. >> good afternoon. this is the quarterly report for

wastewater report. starting as usual with the few construction updates across the city. we had the temporary construction staging area real estate license agreement approved by the commission in september of last year and now this quarter, the contractor has begun work installing.

this is one of three large storm water projects. good to see it getting started. i wanted to show that the wastewater quarterly report aligns with the same format. the main item is table 5, to have a budget summary. to improve the transparency of historical changes at the project level. you can see some other sections and improvements as well. our usual pie chart shows program status for the 70 projects in stage 1 representing $3.665 billion. we're continuing to move forward. progressing projects between

phasing. the blue area at the top shows currently seven projects. in the green area, 19 projects and construction. for that no change was seen this last quarter. this is table 3 from the new quarterly report format. it shows a summary of cost for all of ssip. we used to show this in two separate tables. meaning priority projects were initiated in 2018 and then again in 2020 as what we call phase 2 and phase 3. we recognize that was confusing. this is one of the improvements we're making in the report. we've combined these into one larger table but the data is there to see on the screen. you can sow roll up of phase 1 at the bottom. orthe last months, the teams have been reporting some

variants that we see in red on the slide. the numbers are large. you can see the vast majority of this is within treatment and primarily the majority of that is made up from our biosolid projects. i'll be explaining those later in this presentation. it provides some perspective here for the order magnitude that we're talking about. now if you look at the five active projects in the facility infrastructure program, same way, only item of note here, ocean beach climate change with the forecast project increase $13.6 million is largely related to the change in escalation rate we're using and updated estimate for construction as the project has progressed. few highlights in this quarter, -- [ indiscernible ]

the second bullet here is the celebrate one project, green infrastructure work on sunset boulevard. the largest of the early implementation project. for green infrastructure. in the image, you see the installation of temporary art on evans avenue. this mural is all called clear the air. using past experiences to clear the air to help build a better future which i thought was beautiful. earlier we saw the cost variant of variant at the program level for the last quarter. which showed up in red. i want to cover the current updates on those three southeast area projects and help explain some of that. the biosolids forecast cost has now increased from $1.68 billion

to $2.37 billion. if you recall in february of last year, more than doubled what was projected. we needed to do something different. in july we came to you to negotiate the contract. we had a more positive experience on biddingen a limited part of the project. with new team and new process in place. it came in at or below what we expected it to be. in the first bullet here, we decided to proceed with the cngc model. we did try looking at a smaller element of the project and to see how it has changed. cost has now increased. looking back at the history of this project with various scope changes, it's not anything to do. difference here from the past

estimates, we do have our own independent cost estimate which takes into consideration the difficult timing with covid, market conditions, supply chain issues, etcetera. more realistic site logistics and sequencing of the work and impacts from pausing the project last year which ultimately extended the schedule and increased the amount. these primary reasons are very similar to the pie chart we showed back in february 2020. when the project is forecasting higher cost, at that time, we included as a reason to justifying some of the increases, the work was designed progression things have changed. second bullet notes the schedule has schedule extended. then also -- we have a more realistic sequence of

construction. it takes into account an appropriate amount of time with the procurement process to right-size these packages. we did break off the biogas part of this project. considering a p3 solution that we're still continuing to evaluate really carefully. i appreciate your patience. these are significant changes as a team, we wanted to say p.u.c. is working with the contractor. we are much more confident where the project is going now. it remains a top priority for us and there is no change to the overall project objectives or our commitment. the need identified over a decade ago for this project remains the same. we need a new facility at this plant to be more sustainable.

we're looking at new ways to make this construction more accessible and to the public to see it. we do own the fact that this project has challenges. as we grow our capacity in this type of work, we have to accept we can't attribute it's just the physical concrete and seminole the ground. it's growing long-term capacity for us, for engineers and city staff, for contracting processes and firms and individuals. it's a wider community and rate payers and the benefit from it. we're now on a much better path to deliver. it shows forecasted cost that

have increased. from 619 to $679 million. construction continues on schedule with minimal change orders and steadily moving forward on a good track for some time. when the team did analysis on this increase, it can be attributed to about 12% increase of escalation and for the scope packages that's under construction now. those have been issued since the start of the covid-19 pandemic. we're tracking that with good accuracy. meanwhile construction continues. we've completed installation of the east walls. the tower crane is now in use. lastly, this is the same forecast project scheduled we

showed in the last quarterly report. no change. that concludes my presentation. >> president moran: thank you, commissioners? i would only add, the need for the biosolids goes back probably 20 years. we're getting there. thank you. thank you commissioners. public comment please. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make public comment

on item d, the wastewater enterprise quarterly report, dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 24843445883, pound pound. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. do we have any callers? >> we have two callers in the queue. >> caller: this is david pilpel. very briefly, i won't go into details on this report, i did hear director robinson mention

possible use of drones as a way to observe site conditions or give tours or such. i will remind him and the rest of the staff and everyone that the uses for drones are regulated in part by the city's surveillance policy and drone policies approved by the committee on information technology. i'm not sure that use of drones for the purposes that he mentioned are within the approved use cases. i would offer that as a caution. thank you for listening. >> thank you for your comment. next caller. >> caller: i went to school in san francisco state, we had a joke in the engineering department, how many engineers does it take to unscrew a ball.

the answer was four. today's presentation, the question was, how many lawyers were involved in this debacle? the answer one. when you talk about a 40% increase in overrun and cost, there's reasons for that. the p.u.c. had a policy in the past of blaming everyone and his mother, the contractors, the smaller firms and the engineers and everybody for their mistakes. they never looked for one second in the mirror and see what did we do to increase the cost of this? let me give you few examples. take a look at the requirement that your agency have superimposed on the bidding -- i think it was the mechanic call package. look at the cost of simple item that could have been addressed properly but the project manager from the p.u.c. read the book.

say, let's do that. the second cost is the fraud in the l.b.e. program. i want to show the list of the l.b.e.s on those projects all you want. when i questioned it, they were all hand picked by none other than dwayne jones. this is what the cost is. look at this report as to why the bay area cost is ten times as high as compatible projects in the city of london. two large cities, one is 10 times higher. if you don't get it, get it. >> another caller has joined the

queue. next caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: commissioners, please pay attention to very simple mathematics. we started with $6 billion for sources of improvement project. we had a task force that agreed to 5% of the $6 billion, which is $300 million. today you heard about an audit that said something but means nothing. you commissioners now really agreed that is indicating to us $12 billion. i said this years ago. i saw the corruption.

i said this years ago. you think that this project manager, with all drone or whatever he thinks is, it was brought in by julia adams. [please stand by]

... ashamed of itself. >> thank you. your time has expired. >> thank you for your comments. madame secretary, the call queue is clear. >> thank you. public comment on item 7d is closed. >> very well. >> hi, commissioners. i think today in public comment they talked about the emergency fire water system and the final report from aecon. as i read through it, it

occurred to me maybe we're not thinking big enough on this one. i realize that people have heard me be critical of the fire fighting water system and spending billions and billions of dollars on it, but it seems it's based on the assumption about fires after an earthquake. my recollection is that when we've had fires after an earthquake, it's been because of natural gas pipes breaking. we've already made a decision as a city not to have new natural gas appliances go in. and there has been a lot of discussion about wouldn't it be great if we could give people money to retrofit all of the homes and get rid of the natural gas appliances. if we did that, in theory, we could cut off all the pipes and when we had an earthquake, i would assume it would dramatically decrease and eliminate fires. to get rid of all the furnaces

would cost 4 to $5 billion. we're talking about building out part of the city on the emergency water system and that's going to cost between $2 billion and $3 billion. it would be great to think whether we could use that same money and get rid of natural gas appliances which create 38% of our greenhouse gases in san francisco. so if we killed several birds with one stone by getting rid of natural gas appliances, and if, in fact, my theory is that we get rid of many, many of the fires, or all of the fires, we could instead of doing this emergency fire-fighting system, we could do dramatic things to the entire city. and i'm wondering if the staff could take a look at that and tell us if they think that is something worth pursuing or not.

>> i gather, commissioner, that is a directive. so -- >> it's a request. >> it's a request, a directive. i hear you and we will investigate. >> thanks so much. okay. >> can i add another layer to that request? i wonder if as the staff are doing this, correct me if i'm wrong, but we potentially such action would qualify to receive money from other entities, because of the climate change impacts that it has. so it would not be us paying the $4 billion, but it would be collaborative effort across the

board for different groups participating or potentially tapping into something that the states might provide. so if the staff are doing this, it would be good to see, okay, maybe our money is this much, but the rest of it can come from potentially from this source, this source, this source. so... >> president moran: thank you, commissioner. >> all interesting stuff. any other commission business? seeing none, we should open this for public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment specifically on item 8, new commission business, dial 1-415-655-0001, meeting i.d.

>> we have one caller wishing to be recognized. caller, go ahead. >> thank you. commissioner harrington, could you please let me know and let the public understand where does electricity come from? there are two sources. one is the wind solar nuclear that does not require fossil fuel and the other source is fossil fuel. that can be natural gas, coal, or even diesel fuel. one way or another, if you don't have wind, solar or nuclear, you're burning fossil fuel. maybe not in your house, but somewhere nearby. whether it's -- or somewhere else. that's one, commissioner

harrington, what i'm hearing is mind boggling as to how the state of mind is. because we're not fixing a problem, we're passing a problem. i'd like you to do a quick search on mission local and look at the reports that joe has put in to show how the city, your city and your mayor, allows the building department to direct the contractors to run the gas lines through the concrete footing. would you believe me if i tell you there is no other city in the entire earth, not even in the fourth world countries, that would allow this? it's the same -- same contractors. we don't care, just put it through the concrete. because when you have an earthquake, it's going to break the foundation and guess what else is going to break?

a gas line. mission local, at least three reports related to this. some of us live in the city. some of us live outside the city, i guess. [bell ringing] >> your time has expired. >> madame secretary, one more caller in the queue. next caller, go ahead. >> all i want to say is that in order to address this drastic change, there are many entities from restaurants that need to be consulted, but most importantly,

we do have a department of the environment, but we want a realtime empirical data on green gases. i must understand that one -- of gas contains 22 tons carbon monoxide. in close proximity. we also want to know how much of the -- construction aggregate and concrete?

that's about climate change. when it comes to replacing our gas pipes, we just have to study the department of building inspection. there have been very, very slow. they have been very, very slow. and if money doesn't buy that, if we have contractors who can do quality work. so -- [bell ringing] -- i am for eliminating -- >> your time has expired. >> thank you, caller. madame secretary, another caller has joined the queue. next caller, go ahead. you have two minutes. >> yes. have you given any thought to this at all? if you understand electricity, there are still houses that have electrical services that come

outside from the telephone pole. if there was an earthquake of the kind of magnitude, it would just as likely cause those wires to come down and do what you're accusing pg&e of in the wooded areas of california and cause even a bigger catastrophe than the 1906 earthquake where gas wasn't widely used yet. think about what you're doing. converting gas to electric in san francisco, you've vastly underestimated, try 8 or $9 billion. it's reprehensible to us as ratepayers that you think you can dictate what we need to do. we're not total goddamn idiots. we will convert to electricity if and when it makes sense. at this point, you're talking about privatizing pg&e which is quadrupling the electrical rates and you want us to convert

everything to that, in addition to the electrical vehicles we're talking about in the future. you haven't given any thought to this whatsoever. you have to consider this in a lot move depth. and political employees, consider the consequences that would happen. this happened with the m.t.a. they thought they were going to get rid of cars, but didn't realize 90% of the public still use single vehicle occupancy and it's caused five times the amount of pollution they claim they're solving. you change your estimate to move from gas to electric is reprehensible and a superficial analysis of it and i think you should find out what the reality and the truth is. >> thank you for your comments. the call queue is clear. >> thank you. public comment on item 8 is closed. >> thank you. next item. >> next item is 9, the consent

calendar. and i would just like to announce that consent calendar item 8h, which is approved specifications to award wd2843 has been removed from the calendar and will be rescheduled to the meeting of january 25th and won't be considered today. also, calendar 9f, which is contract number wd2729 is removed from the calendar for separate discussion as there is a minor edit to present with that resolution. mr. president? >> president moran: thank you. commissioners, any items you would like removed from the calendar other than items f and h? okay, seeing none. then on the consent calendar,

without items f and h, could you open that for public comment, please? >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment, specifically on the consent calendar, item 9, without items 9f or 9h, dial 1-415-655-0001. meeting i.d., 2484 344 5883. pound, pound. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. do we have any callers? >> madame secretary, we have one caller in the queue. caller, go ahead. your line is open. you have two minutes. >> thank you. commissioners, you've heard a

lot of harsh words today. and it is a reflection of a widespread frustration in the city by the city. item 9e is a contract that is setting in front of you. and again, i'm looking at the lbe that, are we going to go back and forth with the lbe, the widespread fraud in the lbe program that the p.u.c. is paying for. the third of e is a company called corner stone consulting. again, corner stone consulting and it's been identified as san francisco -- [indiscernible] -- i don't see it anywhere -- i

don't see it anywhere on the lbe directory. could it be mistaken with another in san francisco? or could it be -- let's see -- how did the lbes fraud the system. one owner, six companies. stay under the $2.5 million threshold and i found out one company that miraculously brought $14.5 million, they can only do $2.5 million. is this another one, commissioners? are you going to say there is no risk for you again? fraudulent transaction that you're going to be sitting now and approving it. please, go ahead and approve it again. you've been notified. [bell ringing]

>> thank you for your comments. another caller has joined the queue. caller, go ahead. >> can you hear me okay? >> yes, go ahead. >> great. david pilpel. so i was slightly interested in item 9h which is a relatively routine water main replacement contract, but it appears to me there are several items on the consent calendar that present an opportunity going forward where there are things that are not just problematic city-wide throughout the service other, but are location specific. it would be great to include one page somewhere in the calendar item lineup with a map that both shows the location and maybe a photo, just so that we know what areas being talked about.

so if it's a water -- sewer project in city, you can see what neighborhood is affected. if it's something down the peninsula or east bay or country, you can see what facility on a map. i think it would just familiarize all of us with the locations involved and give people a better sense of the facilities that are all over the place that p.u.c. operates, maintains, controls. i just think that's an opportunity that we should have. so, no problem with anything that is before you today, but just a suggestion for how to package calendar items in the future. thanks for listening. >> thank you for your comments. madame secretary, the call queue has cleared. >> thank you. public comment on consent calendar excluding those items removed is closed. >> president moran: thank you.

commissioner? >> vice president ajami: i actually had a similar comment on one of the other items. maps would be great, but not just a zoomed-in map with four streets this way and four streets that way, but actually a little bit of a zoom app so we can see the location on the service area and then a zoomed-in map. that way, one of the items i had today, i had to do a lot of google searches to figure out where it was located in the city. it wasn't as easy to pinpoint the place. thank you. >> president moran: thank you. on the consent calendar, absent items f and h, can i have a motion and a second? moved and seconded.

roll call, please. >> president moran: aye. >> president moran: the calendar is adopted. item 9f. >> item 9f, this fish passage facility is within the alameda watershed project for $43,422,940 and with the total contract duration of 1,991 consecutive calendar days and authorize final payment to the contractor. this is presented by susan howe. susan? >> trying to start video?

it's stuck. i'll try again. i cannot start the video. >> that's okay, susan, if you want to give a verbal update. we will project the -- >> no problem. thank you, donna. you can start right now. perfect. good afternoon, commissioners. my name is susan howe and i'm the regional project manager for the capital improvement program and the manager for replacement project in which construction was successfully completed in 2019. this agenda item is for the fish passage facility. which is a project to replacement project to support the restoration to the watershed. we're here today to seek

commissioners' approval for wd2729 for contract amount of $43,422,940. and with a total contract duration of 1,991 consecutive calendar days and also seek commissioners' approval to authorize final payment to the contractor. this approval for the construction contract should be on the consent calendar. unfortunately, we made a mistake on one of the dates and did not catch this typo until late last friday. so instead of contribute work completed on september 30, 2021 with the duration of 1,991 days, as approved in the last resolution, we have november 12th as the completion date. and the full paragraph of the resolution. i apologize for the inconvenience, cost and will continue to do my best to avoid these mistakes in the future. the final closure of this contract is critical because if this is not approved, not only

will it delay the contract term, it will delay the entire project. so for that, i would like to speak approval and also to authorize final payment. i also want to take this opportunity to personally thank all of you for your support in the past 10 years. i'm the p.m. also on the expansion project, so with the situation, i'm looking forward to continuing work with all of you and continuing to push for the project. with this, i'm going to take any questions you might have. >> president moran: thank you. commissioners, the item before us then is item f, as amended. any comments by the commission? any questions? seeing none, please open this for public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment specifically on

consent item 9f as amended, dial 1-415-655-0001. meeting i.d., 2484 344 5883, pound, pound. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. do we have any callers? >> we have one callner the queue. -- caller in the queue. caller, i've unmuted your line. go ahead. >> the commissioners, this is a $43 million project. and we who are watching this have not got a clear presentation, nor has the

presenter spoken in a manner that we understand what exactly is happening. are we aware that calaveras we failed on the fish will to remove a million tons of dirt? other critical features at calaveras. and that when it comes to the cost of the calaveras dam, we haven't got today how the percentage of how much more we have spent. shimmic has been working with us

for a long time and they should know better. i think this item has to be continued. this is not -- >> 30 seconds. >> -- thinking that everything is okay. we, the people, want to know exactly what is happening on this project. thank you very much. >> thanks, caller. madame secretary, the call queue is clear. >> thank you. public comment on item 9f is closed. >> thank you. commissioners, what is your pleasure? >> approve of the item as amended. >> i second it. >> president moran: thank you, it is moved and seconded. roll call, please. >> president moran: aye. >> vice president ajami: aye. >> commissioner maxwell: aye.

>> commissioner paulson: aye. >> commissioner harrington: aye. >> we have five ayes. >> president moran: okay. the item passes. next item, please. >> next item is 10, approve the terms and conditions of subject to board of supervisors approval and authorize the general manager to execute a no-fee 10-year right of way permit renewal with the united states department of interior, through the national park service and to operate and maintain radio communication facilities and equipment within yosemite park. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'd be glad to answer any questions. it's a pretty simple item at this point. >> president moran: thank you, michael. any questions? -- or comments? public comment, please. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment specifically on item 10, dial 1-415-655-0001,

meeting i.d., 2484 344 5883, pound, pound. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. mr. moderator, do we have any callers? >> madame secretary, there are no callers in the queue. >> thank you. public comment on item 10 is closed. thank you, a motion and a second please. >> move. >> i'll second. >> president moran: moved and seconded. roll call. >> president moran: aye. >> vice president ajami: aye. >> commissioner maxwell: aye. >> commissioner paulson: aye. >> commissioner harrington: aye. >> you have five ayes. >> president moran: the item passes. next item, please. >> next item is item 11, authorize the general manager to execute on behalf of the city

and county of san francisco a memorandum of agreement with the city of san bruno that would require total payments of up to 13,500. it's presented by mr. ritchie. >> thank you, commissioners. general manager for water. this is an element of the ground water storage and recovery project operations agreement we have with our wholesale customers which we share with this project. basically, the project works by us delivering excess regional water system and they reduce their ground water in wet years so the ground water can recover. as part of that reduction in pumping, san bruno identified that they could have pressure problems in one part of their system that would normally have been served by wells or turned off during these periods. so the agreement reached between the project and san bruno was to

provide for the funding of an additional one million gallons of storage that would be available for keeping pressure up during fire-fighting situations. so this is to actually execute that portion of the project agreement. [please stand by] [please stand by]

>> caller: this is david pilpel. maybe it was in the staff report and i missed. i couldn't quite figure out if the p.u.c. owns the current tank and would own the new tank or if the city of san bruno does or would? if this is just kind of a right-of-way entry kind of agreement with san bruno and the staff report did indicate there's going to be more ceqa work. i wanted to confirm that the final design of this project and the replacement tank will come back before this commission for approval and not just -- or not the city of san bruno. i'm a little confused.

i admit. thanks. >> thank you for your comments. next caller, you have two minutes. >> caller: good afternoon commissioners. i'm pleased to speak before you today on this item in support of the recommended staff action. it's taken some time to get us to this point. we strongly support it on behalf customers. >> call queue is clear. >> clerk: public comment on item 11 is closed. >> president moran: if you and steve respond to the comments raised by mr. pilpel. >> in this case, san bruno was

going to build a two and a half million tank. it's an opportunity to add million dollars to help pay for the expense in terms of engineering, design and construction. that's what the money is for. it's a city of san bruno tank. they will own the tank. they will be doing supplemental environmental review prior to construction of the project. >> president moran: any other questions? motion and second. >> move. >> second. >> president moran: roll call please. [roll call vote] >> clerk: you have five ayes.

>> president moran: item passes. >> clerk: item 12, approve selection of apx incontinued and sole responsive and responsible qualified proposer and execute professional services agreement with a.p.x. for amount not oexceed $136,000,500. this is present bid barbara hale. >> thank you. in order for us, power to participate in the california independent electricity market and to provide services to our customers, we need to have a certified scheduling coordinator recognized by the caiso.

the r.f.p. includes two services. certified interface and pass or placement of invoices. providing the day ahead and realtime schedules under our direction to the caiso, manage our assessment and process payments and metering, outage, settlement, scheduling. a number of services to allow us to participate. the certified services interface that a.p.x. will be providing under this agreement would amount to $6 million over the 5-year period. that second set of services, the pass-through services, under

this agreement would have a.p.x. scheduling coordinator managing the payments to the caiso for all the invoices we receive. it would not exceed $130.5 million. there's no additional billing fee associated with this pass through service. i ask for your approval of this item. i'm available to answer any questions you may have. >> president moran: thank you. commissioners any questions? seeing none. commissioner ajami? ajami -- >> vice president ajami: was there a reason we did not get any other bidders for this service? i was just curious. >> to my understanding, the contract services bureau staff did their typical outreach. we provided them with the

entities that we know provide the service for like parties. we know there was comprehensive outreach. a.p.x. is the only party that was responsive. >> president moran: any other questions? >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make public comment on item number 12, dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 24843445883, pound pound. to raise your hand to speak press star 3. >> we have one caller in the queue. >> caller: on behalf of the

world record association, i would to congratulate the san francisco public commissioner and the project manager on this achievement. this is a world record. no other agency, not even in the foreign country have achieved what you guys have achieved today. first of all, it's the same idea. we went out to the bidders. we did outreach and we did. as the mayor says, bull [ bleep ]. there's no outreach. there is no outreach. it is one bidder, one sole bidder. that's it. let's look at the bigger issue here. all of you live in the city or county of san francisco. i'm assuming that. if you're a business in san francisco, you have to pay business tax for it city and

county. that's 1%, 1.5%? you have a company either they got duped by the p.u.c. or there's a side deal somewhere. that doesn't make any sense. for a company to receive $6 million in exchange to be a pass through for $130 million and if i want to calculate the tax that they have to pay to the city and county of san francisco as a business tax, that's going to take $2 million off. what a deal. how many lawyers are involved? world record gentlemen. >> thank you for your comments. the call queue is clear.

>> clerk: thank you. public comment on item 12 is closed. >> president moran: thank you. any other questions for the commissioners? >> vice president ajami: i have this question, i forgot to ask, highlighted in my reading. they have been providing this service to us since 2008. was there a significant increase? i don't think i saw that in the item. there was an increase from the time -- previous period or previous contact. obviously like a long time. i was wondering was there an increase? they are doing the same service right?

>> yes, they are providing the service to us for clean cleanpowersf and hetch hetchy. i have on the call with me -- [ indiscernible ] she may know the specific answer to your question. we have seen an increase in the pass-through cost. because the i.s.o. charges are higher and market price vary for power. they are relatively high now. i don't know the answer with respect to the services, the other services aspect. sunni do you know the answer to that question? >> yes. can you hear me? >> yes. >> sorry about my video. mostly it's because of the evolution of the i.s.o. market and industry. our services changed and we've become much more sophisticated in what we need. cleanpowersf is growing in leaps

and bounds and the services they need. it's kind of a combination of us growing and the market growing and especially clean power growing. we have a lot more that we need in service. >> vice president ajami: this contract, the parameters changed because of the way the service that we provide has changed? >> and the volume services changed quite a bit. >> vice president ajami: thank you. >> president moran: any other questions? we already did public comment right? motion and a second.

>> move. >> second. >> president moran: motion and second. thank you. roll call please. [roll call vote] >> clerk: you have five ayes. >> president moran: item passes. next item. >> clerk: item 13, authorize the general manager to execute a memorandum of understanding with the san francisco regular creaks and park department setting forth each agency's responsibilities for the construction, operation and maintenance of green infrastructure in mclaren park as part of the construction by the wastewater enterprise campaign improvement program upper yosemite creek daylighting early implementation project.

>> this is greg norby. the item before you is a memorandum of understanding between san francisco public utilities commission and the rec and park department that outlines the two departments obligations and roles and responsibilities for the design and construction and operation and maintenance of a new multibenefit storm water management in the mclaren park setting. the staff report that you have spells out the various details

of that agreement. i won't try to go through those. i want to start by anchoring the significance of this project. how green infrastructure fits in that. we know that over time, green infrastructure will play an increasing role for the effective storm water management for the city and that strategy relyings on partnership with large parcels. because we need those types of things to achieve the infrastructure that we're striving for. in the case of rec and park, we have over approximately 4000 acres of land under management across the city. they are one of our most important partners in this strategy. another really key element of our storm water management

strategy is that we strive to incorporate the widest range of public benefits wherever possible. as this project will demonstrate, this is the type of work that will keep us on that path. we have a long-term goal to establish by approximately year 2050, managing about one billion gallons a year of storm water through these types of features and projects that we're pursuing. the details for the yosemite creek project itself, this project will help manage what we call drainage management area, or d.m.a. approximately 100 acres. it will incorporate two significant features. one being the daylighting and

reestablishment of nearly half a mile of historic natural corridor. also the use of storm water for non-wet season, so to speak, irrigation. that will be offsetting approximately million gallons a year, irrigation demand through that reuse of the storm water. this project is a really textbook example what we strive for in our grown infrastructure partnership project. it's going to be providing storm water management, water supply, recreational facility improvement and biodiversity features within the city. the rec and park commission considered this m.o.u. back in december. it was approved to move forward by the rec and park commission. we have eric anderson from rec

and park to speak to this project. if there are any follow-up questions, we have our infrastructure team to address those as well. i want to hand it off to mr. anderson to provide comments from rec and park's perspective. >> thank you and thank you commissioners for having me today. i'm representing the recreation and park department to just express our support for this memorandum of understanding. greg really laid out many of the benefits of this. we're extremely excited for the storm water management benefits. the daylighting of the yosemite creek in san francisco is a great thing to have happen. we're really excited about the

pilot of the water reuse irrigation system. i can say we've worked really closely with p.u.c. staff on outlining the roles and responsibilities in this memorandum. we work closely in detailed way so that i think we're all very clear and on those roles for both during construction and after. to ensure success of the project. that's very important. we have a pilot of a new technology which we're excited about. we're looking forward to continuing this collaboration

between our agencies. this is a great project. it's a great benefit for mclaren park. we're just looking forward to it. >> president moran: thank you mr. anderson. commissioners, any questions for greg or for mr. anderson? >> harrington? >> commissioner harrington: not a question just a comment. this is great. i really appreciate both the staff and the p.u.c. and the cooperation from rec and park. this is the m.o.u. i can't wait until the actual project. congratulations. let's get it going. thanks. >> president moran: thank you. commissioner ajami? >> vice president ajami: again, i do also appreciate this. this is great. quick question on the monitoring and data collection.

how do you take data that's needed for these kinds of system? i wonder if there was in the material provided, there was a line item that's performance monitoring. i forgot -- specific new ways of monitoring. do we have new monitors in place or data? i was very curious if you have that? >> commissioner ajami, i will start by -- we have heard that comment loud and clear from you. we really appreciate that. we take pride in our green infrastructure program. it has a heavy emphasis on performance management and very

transparent validation of the these systems. this particular project is still in design. there are still opportunities to improve in this area of the performance management. i like to ask sarah if she could address any existing features or ideas that we already have in the works as far as performance management for the system? >> as greg said, this project is still in design. it will have a chance to determine what the monitoring plans will look like. it will be wrapped up into our overall green infrastructure monitoring program as the rest of that ones before it already

is. it will be part of the san francisco institute which is using projects across the bayside >> vice president ajami: this is a project pinpointing the location where it is. the park was easy to find. i would have loved to see city map, to say this is where this is and zoom in. i ended up searching for the street around that. it will be great to have that. thank you.

>> president moran: thank you. any other questions? seeing none, thank you all for your presentation. public comment please. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make public comment on item 13, dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 24843445883, pound pound. >> there is one caller in the queue. go ahead. you have two minutes. >> caller: this is david pilpel. hopefully last time today. just two comments on this item, the

staff report at page 3 in my favorite box, the environmental review box, does indicate that the project was determined to be appropriate for class 1 with the specific date. it does not include the planning department case number if somebody can relate to me now or offline what the case number is, i would appreciate it. i think it's important to include the case number and to reference that as a linked document, which usually happens. i'm surprised it wasn't in this case. i would also request that in the future that environmental review box for exemptions indicate if this is the approval action for purpose of chapter 31 or if the approval action was already taken previously, where that was taken and who did it and when.

it may be that the rec and park commission in december already triggered the start of the appeal window. i don't know that. that would be useful to include going forward in the environmental review box. if it's possible to amend the resolution. this is a great example of a g.i. project in mclaren park. i support it. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. the call queue is clear.

>> clerk: thank you, public comment on item 13 is closed. >> president moran: thank you. any other questions? motion and second. >> move. >> second. >> president moran: roll call please. [roll call vote] >> clerk: you have five ayes. >> president moran: item passes. >> clerk: following item will be heard during closed session. item 16 conference with legal counsel california government

and san francisco administrator code 67.10, conferring with the city attorney regarding the following litigation. members of the public who wish to make public comment on item 16 on closed session. dial (415)655-0001, meeting i.d. 24843445883. do you have any callers? >> there are no callers in the queue. >> clerk: public comment on item to be heard in closed session is closed. >> president moran: can i have a

megs on whether to assert attorney-client privilege? >> move. >> second. >> president moran: thank you. roll call please. [roll call vote]. you have five ayes. >> president moran: we will now go into closed session. [closed session] >> president moran: i think we're good. >> clerk: you may begin. >> president moran: we are back in open session. there was no reportable action taken in closed session.

do we have any other business before the commission? >> clerk: we need a motion. >> president moran: one of these days i will learn this. after 40 years, i might have figured it out. [ laughter ] may i have a motion on whether to disclose? >> move. >> second. >> president moran: roll call please. [roll call vote] >> clerk: you have five ayes. >> president moran: this meeting is adjourned. thank you.

>> you may now begin the retirement board meeting of january 12, 2022 at this time. >> roll call, please. (roll call).