>> january 25 of 2022. regular meeting of the san francisco public utilities commission. madame secretary, please call the roll. [roll call] and you have a quorum. due to thon going covid-19 health emergency and given the public health recommendations issued by the san francisco department of public health, and the emergency orders of the governor and the mayor concerning social distancing and restrictions on a teleconference, this meeting is being held via teleconference and is being televised by sfgov tv. for those watching on live stream, please be aware that there is a time lapse. on behalf of the commission i

would like to extend our thanks to sfgov tv staff and i.t. staff for their assistance during this meeting. public comment must be made in a civil and respectful manner and refrain from the use of profanity. address remarks to the commission as a whole and not individual commissioners or staff. mr. president? >> thank you. and before i call on the first item, i'd like to announce that the san francisco public utilities commission acknowledged that it's on the unceded lands of the historic territory of the

tribe and familial descendants of the historic federally mission san jose of alameda county. the sfpuc also recognizes that every citizen residing within the greater bay area has and continues to benefit from the use and occupation of the aboriginal land since before and after the san francisco public utility commission's founding in 1932. it is vitally important that we not only recognize the history of the tribal lands on which we reside, but also we acknowledge and honor the

fact that the people have establish add working partnership with the sfpuc and are our production is flourishing members within the greater bay area communities today. madame secretary, please call the first item. >> first item, item number 3, adopt renewed findings under state urgency throwsing continue to allow remote meetings during the covid-19 emergency, continue remote meetings for the next 30 days and direct the commission secretary to agdize a similar resolution at a commission meeting within the next 30 days. >> commissioners, is there any discussion on this item? if not, may i have a motion and a second? >> we need public comment. >> all right. could you please call for public comment? >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment specifically on item number three, dial 5-415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 24869074577 ##. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3.

mr. moderator, do we have any calls? >> operator: there are no callers wishing to be recognize at this time. >> thank you. public comment on item number three is closed. >> ok. thank you. and now motion on the second. >> make a motion to adopt renewed findings. >> i'll second. >> and motion is seconded and received. please call the roll. [roll call] >> you have four ayes. >> the item passes. next item, please. >> next item is item number 4, approval of the meetings of the jans 7, 2022 special budget meeting number one and the january 11, 2022 regular meeting and i would like to make an announcement regarding the minutes for january 11 and offer a couple of amendments to those

minutes. first during -- to amend the role call to remove a duplicate recording of attendance and add the attendance of commissioner harrington which was admitted and secondly to admit a record of the commission votes on all the motions for the meeting to remove a duplicate recording of an ivote by commissioner-- an aye vote by commissioner ajami. >> thank you. and madame secretary, open for public comment and these comments should be for both sets of minutes. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment specifically on item four, the minutes of january 7 special meeting and january 11 regular meeting, dial 1-415-655-001, meeting i.d. 24869075477 ##. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3.

mr. moderator, are there any callers? >> operator: there are no callers wishing to be recognized at this time. >> thank you. public comment on approval of the minutes is closed. >> thank you. commissioners, any additions or corrections to either set of the minutes? seeing none, can i have a motion to second on the minutes of january 7? >> move to approve. >> i'll second that. >> move to second it. roll call, please. [roll call] >> you have four ayes. >> the minutes are adopted. and for the minutes of january 11, a motion and second, please. >> move to approve.

>> i'll second that. >> moved and seconded. roll call, please. [roll call] >> you are four ayes. -- you have four ayes. >> thank you. and those minutes are approved. >> and for clarification, mr. president, i'm sorry, both item 4 and includes the corrections to the minutes, yes? >> yes. >> thank you. >> and next item, please. >> next item is item number 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 stood's agenda by dialing 415-655-0001, meeting i.d. 24869075477 ##. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3.

mr. moderator, do we have callers? >> operator: madame secretary, there are two callers in the queue. i'm sorry. just one. no, two again. first caller, your line is open. you have two minutes. >> caller: thank you. and good afternoon, president moran and commissioner. this is policy director for the river trust. i hope you had a chance to review the short letter we sent to dr. casey brown and alexie dufour regarding the webinar on thursday, dealing with long-term former ability assessment. we think that the study was very well done. but failed to directly answer the most important question for today, which is can sfpuc manage the requirements without running out of water.

so, we requested several things for the meeting. we asked them to use 200m.g.d. demand, slightly higher than current demand. the baseline in the study is 227 and demand goes up to 334. so, 16% of 71% higher than current demand. we asked them to produce scenarios that include the bay delta plan flow requirements so we can actually see how they might impact water supply. there is table 319 that shows predictive return periods for known droughts and we asked that they do the same for the design drought and the design drought minus one year. and the study also suggests that [inaudible] will come earlier and we asked them to look at the actual run-off in the design drought year and what would happen if it came 10 or 20 days earlier. our own analysis suggests 237,000-acre [inaudible] would shift over to the sfpuc. so, didn't get a response.

we're still hopeful but perhaps there is that interest in having -- to express interest in having our questions answered and included in the webinar. we might get that very valuable information. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. next caller, your line is open. you have two minutes. >> caller: can you hear me ok? >> operator: loud and klaoefrment >> caller: good afternoon. david pillpal. just very briefly on general public comment. i hope my budget letter was received. i decided to memorialize the comments that i made on the various issues related to the budget at the last three meetings and provided that to the commission secretary. i hope that has been transmitted to you commissioners and staff. not sure if that's valuable, useful or anything. in any event, i hope the

letter was received. i may have comments later on john roddy and the other other items under 8a and my careful scrutiny on items 6f and 9c, they both refer to the date as being 2021 and not 2022. let's please be careful on dates. not just for now, but in case anyone looks at this stuff in the future. thank you for listening. >> operator: thank you for your comments. madame secretary, there are no more callers in the queue. >> thank you. public comment -- general public comment is closed. >> thank you. next item, please. >> next item is item 6, communications. >> commissioners, any discussions on items included

under "communications"? ok. seeing none, madame secretary, please open it for public comment. >> members of the public comment who wish to make public comments specifically on item 6, communications,dial 1-415-655-001, meeting i.d. 24869075477 ##. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. mr. moderator, do we have any callers? >> operator: there are no callers in the queue. >> thank you, public comment on item 6 is closed. >> thank you. commissioner ajami? >> i just wanted to say that i really appreciated the update on the project coming

up in the conversation. thank you. >> thank you. next item, please. >> your next item is item number 7, the bay area water supply and conservation agency update provided by nicole sandkulla. >> good afternoon, president moran and members of the commission. nicole sandkulla. basca is pleased that its p.u.c. and newly appointed manager are directly and fully involved to ensure that greater protection for the fish in the river and adjacent environment is provided and that the present essential water supply for water usage in the three counties assured. we believe this leadership should participate promptly in negotiations for voluntary agreements for the river. the support from governor

gavin newsome and secretaries of environmental protection and natural resources. also, basca will continue to provide leadership with support in the three counties launched by pro tem kevin mullens. the river provides 85% of the water supply delivered by the san francisco regional system that is relied upon to meet the water supply needs of basca constituents in the three counties. failure to address this challenge could result in a reduction of supply by 90 million gallons per day during drought year, requiring rationing by up to 50% by water users. that would be unacceptable. the state of california was forced to rebuild its earthquake-vulnerable system before it collapsed. with a nearly $5 billion construction program paid for by the water users that effort protected the health, safety and economic well-being of resident, businesses and communitis that rely on the system.

several legislators in the three counties led by kevin mullen, are stepping up again to avoid a catastrophic water shortage. and mr. mullen and basca has organize add three-county support team, including the mayors of the three of the bay area's largest cities, leaders of high-technology and other vital businesses in silicon valley and the region, bay area council to ensure continuing delivery of a reliable supply of high-quality water at a fair fries the system to water users. as the owner and operator of the system, the sfpuc and its commissioners, including president moran, new general manager herrera and its experienced operational staff, can create and support a way forward. needed are resolute actions and creativity at the highest level. and proper deployment protects fish and the environment as well as the water users to relie on the system.

general manager herrera's january 14, 2022 letter to secretaries blumenthal and crowfoot make it clear that the sfpuc is firmly commited to participate in negotiations that should begin without further delay. now that the state water resources control board has indicated that it is moving forward with implementation of the delta plant phase one the window for a creative solution is getting smaller. success now requires action responsibility at the highest level of the commission, the state and other suppliers who have water rights on the river. there have been discussions that the opportunity to produce results with high-level leadership at the commission and general manager, now is encouraging and the state board has welcomed voluntary agreements to resolve this and other water use issues. and that completes my planned remarks but i would be willing to answer any

questions that you might have. >> thank you, nicole. i do detect in there a challenge. commissioner, any comments and questions for nicole? thank you. and seeing none, any public comment? >> members of the public comment specifically on item 7, the basca update, dial 1-415-655-001, meeting i.d. 24869075477 ##. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. mr. moderator, do we have any callers? >> operator: there is one caller in the queue. caller, your line is open. you have two minutes.

>> caller: good afternoon. no one wants to face 50% rationing. and that's what people are hearing. that's what the basca line is. and it's really -- it's based on a designed is route with 8.5 years, 265 million gallons per day demand and assuming no alternative water supplies are developed. we've had six fabulous workshops over the past years plus and we would agree that that is not a reasonable scenario anymore. the long-term vulnerability assessment has return periods for known droughts. it's expected that a drought as severe as the '76 '77 drought is likely to occur one in 98 years. the design drought might be

multiplying those two together. we asked for that information and haven't received it. it's a very simple thing for consultants to do and help you make a decision about taking a year off. demand projections 265, i don't think anyone expects that. your demand projections don't even project that in the next 25 years. and we've had great conversations. i think most of us feel that the demand is probably going to remain about flat. the financial divisions leave that. we're looking forward to the graph that was recommended, the january 7 meeting, to compare projections. so, please, agendaize a discussion of these topics soon because when people realize that this 50% rationing is just ridiculous, they won'ts in line behind basca. thank you very much.

>> public comment is closed. any comments or questions? next item, please. >> next item is item number 8. recognition of retirements. general manager? >> thank you, madame secretary. thank you, commissioners. this is a happy day when we get to celebrate great contributions to the p.u.c. as our strongest asset and that is our people that work here and other folks of the city family that help the p.u.c. do its job. and this is -- why this is a happy day is when the pandemic began in march 2020, the commission paused its recognition program of sfpuc

employees who reported after -- more than 25 years of service due to the inability to meet in person. well, i think we all learned that we can do a lot remotely and it was really -- i have to give the commissioner a lot of credit for wanting to reinstitute our recognition ceremonies, even though we were not meeting in person yet. so had to commission will reinstate these important recognition efforts and i'm honored to introduce a few of our most recent retirees. the first one is someone who was not a [inaudible] provided a valuable service to his 41 years of service to the city and county of san francisco. and my prior office at the city attorney's office john

roddy who was, i think when i left, the longest serving or second longest serving deputy city attorney that still remained and still had just as much energy as when i came on the scene 20 years ago. and i had seen few people as passionate about the work that they do and so willing to engage you in a conversation or conversations about the importance of the work and he always had nothing but the utmost enthusiasm for anything that he was working on. and he's continued doing that since i became general manager. i think he -- i probably had more meetings since i became general manager one-on-one than i did as city attorney and that is a measure of not just his passion and his enthusiasm, but his incredible base of knowledge. and his ability to sort of get to the meat of the issue

and have a deep understanding about not just the legal importance of the issue, but its historic [inaudible] and we will miss them, but we will be a resource for us and always doing it with a smile on his face and great enthusiasm for the message that he is delivering. so, john, thank you so much, not just what you did for the p.u.c., but what you have done in terms of the camaraderie at the city attorney's office as well. thank you so much. with that, i want to read a resolution for john. whereas john s. roddy served as a attorney for 41 years from 1980 through 2021 and whereas mr. roddy is an expert on urban waste water systems and federal and state safe drinking water law, he

has negotiated permits for san francisco's waste water system and the operation of hetch hetchy water transmission and treatment systems and whereas mr. roddy has played an integral role in defending the waste water enterprise and claims associated with street flooding in san francisco. and he is an expert on water and sewer rates, having advised the water and waste water enterprises and whereas gregarious, atentive all describe mr. roddy over the past 41 years and whereas mr. roddy is retiring, after having served the public, the city and county of san francisco and the san francisco public utilities commission tirelessly and with great dedication and early respect and admiration of those whom he has worked now therefore be it resolved that this commission and its

general manager offer their heart d felt thanks and appreciation to mr. roddy for all that he has done for the city and his public utilities commission and wish him a long, happy, held th*is and very fulfilling retirement. congratulations, john. we're incredibly grateful to you. and with that, i'd like to introduce our general counsel, cheryl bregman, to say a few words. >> thank you, dennis. i can only add my thanks, appreciation for john's commitment over the years and all of the dedicated work he's done for the p.u.c. and when dennis said -- used the word passionate, that is a word i would say also. it's been an absolute pleasure. i've known john for 26 years and it was absolutely wonderful to overlap with him a little bit on the team since i came over to the p.u.c. and it's really just been an absolute pleasure and to have him as a colleague and friend.

>> with that, john, let's hear a few words from you. >> thank you for all the kind words. commissioners, thank you for all the glorious work we've done together. i am -- i've had a blessed career. i feel quite fulfilled and content with the work that we've done together. a lot of it i can't remember. but then again maybe a lot of it yo*r i don't want to remember. -- a lot of it i don't want to remember. but most of it is great. i truly believe the p.u.c. is the most fascinating part of city government and perhaps the most fundamental part as well. and it has [inaudible] my interest and passion over the years. and i'm going to miss all of those bril -- brilliant and

creative people that i've been working with. i'm sure they'll do just fine, but i'll miss them. seems to me that these are very exciting times. there is a lot to work on, a lot to look forward to. robust asset management. exciting stuff. rational regulatory compliance approach is one of my favorites. and effective citiwide flood plane management. there's just stuff that's undone, yet to do. my favourite, of course, is the sort of creative alternative water supply initiative that my colleagues are thinking of. add to that, you know, the excitement of new management. dennis and ron and cheryl, you know, i gotta say that i felt a little bit of regret

with my timing. a little bit. but this is really great times for you guys. and i'm excited for you and very thankful for all of my time and thankful for knowing you and wish you all the best. dennis knows where i live so i won't get lonely probably. >> thank you. thank you, john. very much appreciate it. >> and if i could have a personal privilege here. i don't -- i doubt that there is any set of city departments that is entwined with a legal process with the city attorney's office on the p.u.c. we have, you know, one of our major reservoirs in the history side is named for a former city attorney. we have dennis here at the helm at the moment.

but historically and in very real ways from waterways to federal permits to permits for operating the sewer system, we lived hand in glove with a regulatory scheme and the political bodies and through that with the city attorneys. even though they don't work for us directly. there has to be a strong, you know, cooperative relationship. clean water was not part of the p.u.c. when i first joined it. i came over and one of the -- that made sense for oh so many reasons. one of the benefits of that was that we got a group of very talented and dead indicate people who came into the p.u.c. fold. and they are scattered throughout the clean water program and john certainly embodies that.

you are a long-tenured member of the city attorney's office and a little shorter tenured member of the public utilities commission family. but very valuable member and made significant contributions. so thank you and don't be a stranger. >> thank you, andy. >> thank you, president moran. very kind words for john. our next individual is lisa diep. in recognition of her 37 years of service to the public utilities commission. i'd like to recognize lisa, who retired in december as a manager for the customer service field. lisa retired after over 33 years at the sfpuc and while

she preferred to not appear publicly, we want to thank lisa and show our gratitude for her service to the p.u.c. and i think that i'm going to have marge say a few words in a minute. but i think lisa's dedication effort in our frontlines really demonstrates the continuing commitment and is emblematic of what we get out of all of our employees, trying to do their best job on behalf of the residents of the city and county of san francisco. and our rate payers so congratulations. i'm going to read this resolution. whereas ms. lisa diep provided 34 years of exemplary service to the city and county of san francisco, began her career with the city community college as an account clerk in 1987 and joined the san francisco water departments commercial division now known as san

francisco public utilities commission customer service bureau as a water services clerk in 1988. from there, extended the ranks to senior water services clerk from 1990, senior accounting machine operator in 1995, commercial division assistance supervisor in 1999 and as a customer service billing and collection manager in 2008. and whereas, as customer service and collections manager, ms. diep was responsible for customer service of retail electric services, land lease and permit as well as the customer care for clean power s.f. and she led two successful electric billing system implementations of most the most recent one of an oracle customer information systeming that launched in april 2021 and, whereas in her capacity as manager, she was an exceptional leader. she performed her duties and responsibilities with exceptional efficiency and a

strong work ethic, positive attitude and was well-respected by her staff and peers. she consistently produced high-quality work with admirable dedication. and whereas on december 11, 2021, she retired from sfpuc after 34 years of exemplary services and we express our sincere appreciation and gratitude to ms. diep on her contributions to the sfpuc and be it further resolved that this commission wishes ms. diep a long and prosperous retirement. thank you so very much, lisa. we really, really appreciate all of your work and now i'd like to ask the manager of the customer service bureau to say a few words. >> thank you, general manager herrera. good afternoon, commissioners. on behalf of the lisa, thank you for this special

recognition. lisa and i both started with the p.u.c. customer services back in 1988. and over the years, we have remained friends. she is a valuable member of the customer services and contributed significant accomplishments to the bureau and to the organization. her loyalty, dedication and commitment to the organization is highly [inaudible] and appreciated. it was an honor and a pleasure working with lisa. though we missed her dearly, we congratulate her on her well-deserved retirement and wish her a long and happy retirement. again, on her behalf, thank you commissioners for this very special recognition. it is well-deserved.

>> thank you, marge. appreciate it. finally we want to take additional recognition of a number of other sfpuc employees. you know, while john and lisa are among our most recent retirees, we have a number of people who retired during the pandemic that were not -- that we were not able to invite in person to be recognized. but we believe that it's important to thank them for their tremendous service and prepared a short video to lift and recognize these individuals who have all worked for the p.u.c. for more than 25 years. in addition, we have prepared certificates of honor that are signed by me and the commission president that will send to these individuals. can you please start the video?

[music playing] ♪♪

>> mr. president, that concludes our recognition. >> thank you for that. late last week, donna sent over the certificates to be signed for the people that were included and i was my honor to sign those. it's also pretty humbling. there were -- i forget what

the count was. it was in the order of 30-plus or minus and the average terms of service was somewhere in there around 30 years each. i hope people paid attention to the job titles that you saw as wellful these are the people that make the place work. people who fix it and make it right and provide service to our customers 24/7. it is a tremendous amount of service and value that they have created for the city and their time with us and we are thankful for that. we also, you know, we and the city as a whole owe them a tremendous debt of gratitude for their service. and, you know, certainly we compensate people well and all of that. but that is not -- that is

not the full extent of it. you know, it takes a degree of commitment and loyalty to get out there every day and do jobs and in some cases aren't all together pleasant. so, it's -- i think, you know, we can celebrate their contribution and we mourn their loss. we look forward to, you know, people who are continuing in that tradition with the organization today and new people that will come and join us. but civil service is a noble career. and we lose sight of that from time to time. i think it is important not to. so, dennis, thank you for putting that together and thank all of those people who retired from the service and had given [inaudible]. >> our pleasure. >> madame secretary, let's see. do we -- is that a comment? >> yes. >> ok.

so, if you would open it up for public comment, please. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment, specifically on item number 8, the retiree recognitions, dial 1-415-655-001, meeting i.d. 24869075477 ##. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. mr. moderator, do we have callers? >> there is one caller in the queue. you have two minutes to comment. >> caller: i can assume that you can hear me. it's david pillpal, again. i think i previewed this a couple of meetings back with regards to john roddy having

served 10 years on the waste water subcommittee of the citizens advisory committee. i have occasion to spend much time and many hours with john roddy on waste water sewer issues and i appreciate very much his thoughts and wise council and great work for the city over many, many years as the, you know, retiring, i believe, snow showerer deputy in the city attorney's office. he certainly spoke well for the team and for his good work and i wish him the best and i told him so privately and now i'm saying the same publicly. i agrees that p.u.c. is both fascinating and fundamental to the city and it's long been one of my great interests as many people listening know. i think it's great that now former commissioner

harrington is still listed on the retirement resolutions. i hope that he had a chance to sign them and i really appreciate that this tradition of recognizing retiring employees has been brought back and i hope that the commissioner will continue doing this. i should also say that marge and her entire customer service bureau team is topnotch along with all the other p.u.c. employees who work 24/7 for all of us as i also said. and i agree strongly with the remarks of president moran. thank you again for listening. thank you for everyone for doing the work for all of us. and i wish the employees well who have retired. thanks. >> thank you for your comments. madame secretary and commissioners, there are no more callers in the queue. >> commissioner maxwell? >> thank you. hundreds of years just of

knowledge just went out the door. and so i'm hoping and keeping my fingers crossed that they left some of that and in some way we were able to capture it. on the job training is good, but we need people who know what they're doing. anybody listening, there are jobs available. and obviously we need you in the city. so, thank those people who have dedicated their lives to our city. they probably spent more time here than they did at home sometimes. so, again, thank them for everything that they did. >> thank you, commissioner. any other comments. thank you. >> i'll make a quick comment.

i know it's often -- people forget what it takes to bring these services to them. it's very easy to forget. and i think it demonstrates how many -- this is just a handful of people who work in this institution and organization and it's just so important to always remember the value of public service in any form or shape and how it enables our lives and successes and growth and just always be mindful of that. it's always very easy to be glorified by all the, you know, shiny things that are out there. but these are real jobs and they are bringing a lot of value to the society and i'm personally grateful for every single one of those hours they spent on the job and all the work and energy and resources that they put into it. just really thankful. >> thank you. commissioner paulson? >> i don't want to be the only commissioner that doesn't say a few words no that we're initiating these

wonderful recognitions again but i just know that, you know, despite the wonderful experience and the training and the -- you know, all the dedication that these retires have demonstrated and lived their -- you know, their working careers with in the city. that i just know that, you know, during much of what i do for a living when i'm not sitting on the commission is making sure that folks that actually work in departments and work in both the public and private sector have a voice that works so they are part of the infrastructure and, in particular here, the departments that they worked in and that they did have representation and that is what makes for the success that this wonderful agency has is that, you know, there's engagement. this isn't done with people having their heads buried in the sand.

but workers have always in ways that some people don't even know, do have their own input and their own -- their voice at work. in very many ways so i want to thank you as a commissioner for all the work that you've done and know that it has been not just getting up in the morning or at night or at midnight calling, you know, to fix a break in a water supply or, youb, the many different jobs that we do, but also that it's a complicated career of which there is lots of engagement. congratulations on well-deserved retirement to everybody that was acknowledged today. thank you. >> thank you, commissioner. and if there is no further comment, next item, please. >> next item is item 9, report of the general manager. >> thank you, madame secretary. item a is a draft update.

>> i'm acting first as the general manager, steve richie, who's out. next slide, please. so looksing at reservoir storages again to note that these are storms from last week as we prepare this presentation on the monday before -- the monday the week before the commission meeting so it's a little bit of old news. but the story hasn't changed that much. you'll just note that hetchy is relatively high and we expect to see inflows increase storage volume as mountain tunnel is shut down. don't be surprised if you see hetchy nearing the 300,000 acre foot mark in the next coming weeks. all in all, considering where we've been, these storages look very good. next slide, please. looking at reservoir storages across the state, the picture

has improved for many of the reservoirs across the state. due to the wetter period in december. you'll note that that 79% of historic capacity, which is also matching lake oroville now. so we are looking at how the state and federal projects are doing and their storages are improvinging. next slide, please. drought conditions across the state. so, for almost the whole state, we've moved into severe drought with the moderate drought which is a much better picture than we've seen earlier in the year. so it's quite encouraging to see. next slide. here is hetchy precipitation. as everybody knows, we really haven't seen any precipitation to speak of in january. and so if we were to continue to not see precipitation through the end of the month, we'd be at the median for hetch hetchy and that does seem to be the case. but we'll talk about the

forecast a little bit later. next slide. same situation with the snow pack. i would like to report that our staff are out doing snow surveys this week and next week and that means that they actually go out into the high country, back country and look at the high elevation snow and take measurements. we're seeing snow pillows which tend to measure the snow pack in the lower elevations. so we'll get a much better picture when they come back from the snow sur vase on what the snow is looking like in the i hooer elevations. next slide, please. looking at water available to the city, we've had a fair amount of water available to the city for this time of year. next slide shows that we are at 127,000-acre feet and you will note that that is quite a bit of water available to the city for this time of year.

our goal is 598,000 acre feet which would allow us to fill the entire system by july 1. next slide. just looking at where we are on precipitation as i mentioned. january has been pretty dry and indicates what we've receive ed at country. not much. january has been relatively dry. next slide. so now looking at the precipitation forecast, this picture has been updated this week and i'm just happy to say that the forecast for the 26th through february 3 has actually continued to look wet. and so it does look like we will get a little bit of precipitation starting in the beginning of february and hoping that that storm door opens up again. the next slide.

now looking at deliveries, this is a time of year where there isn't a lot of story to tell because we only have one data point here. but you will start to sigh, seeing that we're in the winter period, we'll don't see demands being relatively low. this gives you a picture of where we are in comparison to the five-year average and calendar year 2021. next slide, please. and this gives us a comparison of the calendar year 2015, which was the last drought when the state was asked to conserve 25% and you will note that we're still well below that. and calendar year 2021 is also shown on the slide. next slide. here we're just looking at the comparison of calendar year 2019 and now we're showing calendar year 2020 as we've all talked about, the goal for the san francisco p.u.c.'s regional water system is to achieve no --

excuse me. achieve at least 10% reduction in the service area. and that is compared to fiscal year 1920. and so here, as you look at the calendar year 2020, that's a portion of the fiscal year 1920 that we're in now and so we want to look at how we're doing compared to that purple line. and just to note that, again, sort of the peak that you're seeing in february there in the purple line is indicative of dry conditions when we saw demands go up so we hope not to follow a similar pattern there. next slide, please. this shows you where we are on the water reduction tracker. for the entire service area, at 9.2% reduction compared to fiscal year 19-20 and happy to take any questions. >> any questions, commissioners? ok.

thank you. >> sure. >> better picture than we've had in the past. >> i'm sorry, we have public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make comments for two minutes on item 9, dial 1-415-655-001, meeting i.d. 24869075477 ##. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. mr. moderator, do we have any callers? >> madame secretary, we have one caller in the queue. hello, caller. >> caller: thank you. you know, it's interesting that even though november and

january were really dry, this has been an average year so far. an average year from between october 1 and the end of january would be 18.68 inches of precipitation. this year we have had 18.67. and the annual cycle is expected to be similar that we're going to have some very wet years and some dry years, but on average, the san francisco's entitled to 750,000 acre feet per year. current demand is 195m.g.d. 15% of the water comes from the bay area. so, in an average year, the sfpuc is entitled to enough water to last three or four years so it's really not surprising that although we had dry years the past two, it looks like it is likely that it will fill up this year.

and this bodes well for the san francisco we know that climate change isn't likely to change annual precipitation much. if it does, we might get more precipitation. so, we're in a great position to make these decisions that would enable us to leave more water in the river and not risk running out of water. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. madame secretary, there are no more callers in the queue. >> ok. public comment is closed. >> item 9b is a power customer program update presented by daniel young. >> good afternoon, commissioners. thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today. my name is daniel young of s.f. power enterprise. our group develops and manages energy programs for hetch hetchy power customers and supports power s.f. in

its development and implementation of their programs as well. today i'll be providing a quick update on our energy program offerings and i'll be going over an overview of our program development process. and finally highlighting a couple of new programs that have launched over the last couple of months. next slide, please. so this slide provides an overview of our current and planned customer program offerings grouped by how they help to better sefrk our customers. so, just going down our list here on the left, we have different programs for addressing affordability, e-mobility, energy efficiency and decarbonization so thing like fuel switching and electrification, load shifting and renewable energy so we don't have time go over the programs listed here. but you can find more information in the memo attached to today's agenda as

well as online on our customer programs [inaudible]. the next slide, please. this slide provides a high level overview for our customers. step one, a needs assessment and vision exercise. so that can include customer surveys as well as analyses of our various policy objectives and to that end, we're utilizing tools that help us better quanitify us as how our portfolio programs can help to address those issues. the next step is market technology and industry research. so, this includes a deep dive into the technology or the behavior that we're trying to incentivize. we look at the incrementtal

cost and benefits and finally we can learn from some of the best practices in our industry. so step three is to finalize the program design so usually that means we're creating some sort of incentive mechanism. that looks to overcome market or institutional barriers in some way. step four is implementation and marketing so this is developing a plan for program operations as well as marketing and outreach to reach [inaudible] for customers. finally, we are ready for launch and the program is made available to customers and the last page on the box, monitoring improvement, this is just to make clear that even after we lunched a program, the job is not, in fact, done. all of our programs require ongoing maintenance once they're live so we can

continue to improve the program's effectiveness, customer needs and watch the conditions change over time. next slide, please. so yeah, next quickly highlight our two newest programs. so, to start, this is the low-income solar inverter replacement program. so we launched in november and this serves s.f. power customers and specifically talking about care and fair rate customers who previously received incentives. it helps customers with costly inverter repairs to make sure that they can maintain their rooftop systems and continue to benefit from their solar. we figure that they could be left with systems to repair and maintain.

we'll don't work with the mayor's office. hiring workforce development program since this is basically an extension of what we were doing. a final note on this program, this is something unique that we haven't seen elsewhere. but we do think that this is really -- it's just a critical piece for helping us follow through on our long time support of in city solar while also continuing to help load communities. next slide, please. our newest program is evchargesf and we have infrastructure new and newly constructed buildings. so, with almost half of san francisco's carbon emissions coming from transportation, we feel that electric mobility is essential for the city to meet its emissions reduction goal.

in particular in san francisco which has so much multifamily housing, especially when looking at new construction, so getting charges into these multifamily garages as well as commercial developments is going to be key. so, this program just had a soft launch at the end of last month and so we're offering rebates up to $3600 per charging space along with technical support to help participants the new and complicated world of e.v. charging. this program synergizes with the s.f. environment e.v. readiness ordinance and together we're really hoping to drive higher adoption of e.v.s throughout the city. and there's a way to make it available to s.f. power customers as well.

they will be launching the next [inaudible] and so we look forward to providing additional updates in the future. so, thanks again for your time. >> thank you. any questions for mr. young? commissioner ajami? >> are we -- thank you for your presentation. that was great. are we. taping into -- i i this i know the answer, but i just wanted to highlight it is all. are we. tapping into the new resources that are becoming available for the e.v. charger opportunities or those are -- or those don't apply to multifamily units? >> i'm sorry. can you be more specific on -- >> so, you know how as part of the infrastructure bill and also some of the new

california budget, there will be some money available for more distributed e.v. charging stations. and i wasn't sure if those need to be on the public settings so everybody can use them like the gas station and can that money also be tapped for these building scales. >> i see. great question. this program in particular for now, we are funding this out of our own dollars so we expect for this program to run on its own. we're absolutely looking at other ways to support e.v. infrastructure in the city and that does include, like you mentioned, as well as other programs such as the low carbon fuel standards program and there are many different ways that we can support electrification of

our transportation sector and this is just one of them. >> we have applied for grant funding in the past and then denied. it's pretty competitive out there. there are a lot of cities and counties trying to access those funds. but we will persist. we will keep trying and we're keeping an eye out on all the new offerings from the infrastructure bill as well. >> one quick comment i have, i know that when we're looking at the older buildings or multiunit buildings that have both received -- they have submetering for power but do not have submetering for water, it is very difficult to do outreach for both when it comes to these low-income incentives or low income bill assistance program. i know that, if i understand

correctly, in the new buildings, it is california law since 2018 that all the multifamily units need to have submetering for water as well. so it would be good to make sure that maybe in those buildings, we coordinate our efforts on these low-income programs because it would simplify the application process and can take -- we can help these customers to minimize their sort of administrative work so we'll be able to coordinate a cost difference and enterprises especially for the newer buildings. >> any other questions? thank you. we'll open this up for public comment. >> members of public who wish

to make two minutes of public comment specifically on item 9b, the power customer program update, dial 1-415-655-001, meeting i.d. 24869075477 ##. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. mr. moderator, do you have any callers? >> mr. secretary, we have two callers in the queue. hello, caller. your line is open. you have two minutes. >> caller: hello. i didn't plan to speak on this item. i think my hand must have remained raised from before. >> operator: no worries. thank you. hello, caller. your line is open. you have two minutes. >> caller: great. david pillpal again. so on this issue on 9b, i'm

looking carefully at page 6, the update on power enterprise customer programs. the section in the middle on guiding principles. those bullets look like they would sit very fwhel a commission-adopted policy. so, perhaps the next time the commission takes a look at its adopted policies, like the rate payer assurance policy and the debt policy and all of those other fun policies, these guiding principles related to the power enterprise and customer programs look like they could be sort of pasted right into a new commission policy. i'm not sure whether this would work as a [inaudible] policy or could be a broader policy about energy and the p.u.c. but that is my thought. otherwise, i appreciate the presentation and the work

that staff is doing in this area. thanks. >> thank you for your comments. madame secretary, there are no more callers in the queue. >> thank you. public comment on 9b is closed. >> thank you, madame secretary. item 9c is water enterprise capital improvement program quarterly report presented by catie miller. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm catie miller, director of water capital programs. today i'll provide an update ton status of projects in the water enterprise interv.i.p. at the end of the first quarter in september of 2021. at the january 11 meeting, director steve robinson and i presented changes to you to the quarterly reports that were initiated in the first quarter, including the new table budgets and trend schedule summary. in addition to these changes, we have added an executive summary to this report that includes program status, cost

and schedule smaers and key project highlights. we hope these changes will help to increase accountability and transparency for our program reporting. >> this slide shows the status of the 36 projects in the program with a total budget of $2.7 billion. including 25 regional and 11 local projects. eke pent chures at the close of the recording period were $801 million or 31% expended with $42 million expended during the period. next slide. this shows the cost category for all active projects. note that regional had cost forecasts $33 million over the approved budgets and had a forecast of $45 million over the cost overruns were attributed to four regional projects and two local projects.

this is total budgets for each phase of the program. note that 12 out of 25 of the projects and more than half of the program budget are in the planning phase. next slide. the five regional projects with cost and scheduled variances at the end of [inaudible] and the hvac projects cost changes involved major scope changes that were identified during final design. the project teams have discussed how these changes might have been avoided or better prevented in the future. the long-term approvements forecast change is due to minor scope additions that were necessary during construction. the sa-1 service road are in the early planning phase. when scope assignment is more likely to result in cost and schedule changes.

note that in resfons your suggestions about collecting and analyzing forecast data, we are currently evaluating a process to categorize forecast changes so we can analyze the forecast data for general trends over time and develop mitigation. and now for a couple of project highlights. it is related to pg&e's change of decision to require all electrical connections to provide full-power transmission step-down facilities. this is estimated to have a cost impact of about $12 million increase to the phase three contract. the good news is that the schedule has been accelerated for the phase three contract, resulting in earlier

completion of the entire project. next slide. s the alameda the creek water shed center, part of the long-term improvements project is making great progress in construction. these photos show the new community room that will be available for public meetings and gatherings. the cost and schedule variances are due to longer procurement times for the blue stone pavers and exterior glass. these delays are related to the covid procurement issues. next slide. this slide shows the total current approved budget, so the 11 projects in each phase of the program, note that more than half of the budget is in three projects with multiple phases, including the main replacement program and the emergency fire fighting water system project. next slide. there were three local projects with cost and scheduled variances at the end of the quarter.

the reasons for these forecast changes again are varied. it is in design and had a major change in construction methodology. the new c.d.d. headquarters at 2000 marin is in planning but delays to contracting procurement have added $43 million in escalation costs to the project forecast. the college hill reservoir outlet project is in construction phase, but the reward phase took three months later than anticipated. we'll continue to analyze the causes to project delays and cost increases to look for trends and mitigations we might tyke prevent these changes in the future. the design services requests for proposals was readvertised. this was received for the construction management general contractor services contracts. however, we selected to rebid

based on only two qualified proposals. that contract is readvertised at this time. next slide. for the college hill reservoir outlet, the notice to proceed was issued to the construction contractor in september and construction is currently under way. this construction will continue until early 2023. next slide. and that is it for my presentation. but i'm happy to answer any questions. >> i'm just wondering what's the timeline on the forecast and information gathering on these projects. do you have any idea of when we can see -- i remember talking to the team about

putting together some form of spread sheet with all the information in them. do you have any idea what the timeline is on that? >> i don't. i think we were really focused on getting these out and working on the budget. so it's something that we want to take a little bit of time to consider. but we have worked on some categories of forecasts. a lot like construction change orders. we put those into categories and so we considered that. and how we might store those in our reporting database. but i'll get back to you with some kind of timeline for that. >> ok. thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioner paulson? >> i had a similar question. and i guess based on your comments about reporting database. what does that mean? reporting to us or just your own personal -- >> yes, i'm thinking p-6 internal database.

we store all our financial and schedule data in that database so we're looking for ways that we can leverage that very powerful database to give us data on the forecast. >> i know that we have discussed at various times, you know, design cost overruns based on field conditions and all the other things that happened in the sake of stuff. so i just want to make sure that we as commissioners are ahead of that stuff and sometimes you get a bullet point that says cost overrun is 12.5% and that is going to, you know, i want to make sure that we're able to explain or not explain for whatever reasons what that is.

and rebuild and new projects that are in the pipeline. that was just my comment to follow up on commissioner's request. >> i agree entirely. at this time, you can find that information on issues and challenges for each individual project in the quarterly report. we do put the reasons. but right now we're not looking at it cumulatively over time and looking for trends and so that's what we're latching on to. could be a real key to see where are we repeating these same types of things. how can we better get ahead of that and predict it and mitigate it. >> thank you. it's pretty exciting, some of the -- at least it's intriguing what may come out of that kind of analysis. just looking at it very quickly. some kinds of jobs are pretty consistent.

main route replacement kind of jobs. we seem to have that down pretty well. other jobs take twists and turns as they go forward and understanding why. and also figuring out where in that process you want to start holding yourself accountable. you know, i don't know if you go from rough concept to a little bit better concept, variations in the scope or something that should concern us. if anything, you want to identify them and make sure that as you proceed you have the complete picture. at some point, the scope should lock and you start saying, ok, this is what it is and this is -- we've done our hockey and due diligence. we believe that we know it is going to cost at that point and start measuring. i think we tend to start measuring earlier than that. but that is the kind of thing that will come out of that. i would be interested as we get into public comments and all, these reports have

several audiences and, you know, they are useful within the organization to track your work and help you figure out where to allocate resources. they are useful to us as commissioners and terms of providing oversight and understanding what's going on. they are also something that members of the public will look at to understand what's going on. we've had, you know, comments in the past that things were too difficult to get to or too opaque. i'd be interested, as we have more experience with this to hear public comment about how this report format is addressing some of those issues. or not. as the case may be. any other comments? seeing none, then we'll please open this for public comment. >> members of the publics who wish to make two minutes of public comment specifically on item 9c, the water enterprise capital improvement quality report, dial 1-415-655-001, meeting

i.d. 24869075477 ##. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. mr. moderator, do you have any callers? >> operator: madame secretary, there are no callers in the queue at this time. >> thank you. public comment on item 9c is closed. >> madame secretary, that concludes my report. >> thank you. >> thank you, dennis. next item, please. >> next item is item 10, new commission business. >> commissioners, any new business? seeing none, next item, please. >> the next item is item number 11, the consent calendar. >> ok.

commissioners, any items that you have questions about or would like to remove from consent calendar? seeing none, madame secretary, please open it up for public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of public comment, specifically on item number 11, the consent calendar, dial 1-415-655-001, meeting i.d. 24869075477 ##. to raise your hand to speak, press star 3. mr. moderator, do we have any callers? >> operator: there is one caller wishing to be recognized. hello, caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: great. david pillpal again. so, this may seem like a

minor issue or incredibly technical, but on item 11d, the increase to construction costs for the new montgomery contract, very buried in the staff report is discussion of elements from the tenderloin and knob hill suer improvement project in there and there is no detail in the staff report and the only detail i was able to find was on the statutory exemption attachment with actual streets and linear feet and number of manholes. but no further description of the elements of work here. and so then i went back to compare to the agenda item description on page four of the calendar and i'm just wondering, as a legal matter, if the description of item 11d on the calendar is

sufficient in as much as it has no reference to the specific work that would be added here from that tenderloin and knob hill project and so it's pretty difficult to figure out what's happening and what the work here is. there's no map. there's no, you know, list of streets here and i'm just wondering if there's sufficient public notice. i'm not questioning whether the work needs to be done or the budgets. you know, $2.25 million. i assume it's appropriate amount for the skoem of work. but there's really not a whole lot of explanation for this. and if i could get some further clarification on that today, that would be great. if there is not a need to move on this immediately, then maybe this could be taken off, brought back and repackaged. those are my thought on 11d.

thank you for listening. >> thank you for your comments. madame secretary, there are no more callers in the queue. >> thank you. public comment on item 11, the consent calendar, is closed. >> thank you. would you like to comment about the legal sufficiency of the notice for this item? >> thank you. my reading was that the title matched the scope that was described by staff in the staff report. but i have to defer to staff here. this is a complicated set of streets that was involved in this project and so i don't think would be appropriate for me to speak to that. >> president moran, i can speak to the location of

where the work >> i guess before you do that, i was a little confused by your answer. because the question is not whether those streets need to be, you know, repaired or whatever. the question is whether the inclusion of those streets somehow was not sufficiently included in the notice that the item is now properly before us. >> sorry if i wasn't clear. so, my understanding is that the streets that are -- we're looking at 11b, correct? and there are a number of streets that are in the title of the -- of the agenda item. and it's my reading that the -- those streets are the

locations for this contract. and that is consistent in the description. but, again, if that is not the case -- if that is not the case, all of these streets are lifted and it's very specific where the intersections are. >> commissioner paulson? >> maybe it wasn't absolutely a one-answered question. but i heard her say the answer is yes. and it was written in the way that we were looking at item d. without having a long explanation of why i heard a "yes." so i think i was -- >> that is my understanding as well. again f there was some confusion about the locations, i'm going to have to defer to mr. hanson here.

>> i heard a "yes" even though it was a little bit oblique. and i think i'm hearing that reconfirmed. so i'm just making my observations as a commissioner, as we try to move on. >> if there are streets that are included in the work and not included in the title of the item, would that be a problem for notice? >> is it because the title is

so specific as to the streets and so not to be able to give a more specific answer here, but the -- i don't see the other reference that was raised. again, i'm going to have to defer to mr. johannson here. >> may we request that we sever the item? >> can i just jump in? cheryl, if i understand what you're saying it could make a difference if the title and the listing was from -- and it could affect things materially. there was a great difference and even a minor -- but even a minor difference would not be material.

it would have to be significant. so why -- so basically you're saying -- you're deferring to mr. johannson to say, ok, there r there a whole host of other streets that are not listed in the title that are -- that are not consistent and that's why [inaudible]. so mrs. johannson came in and said, look, the streets are the streets and maybe there is one missing. that would be something in your opinion would likely not be material. xrekt? >> correct. >> ok. so, mr. johannson could probably give us something whether there's consistency between what's in the title and what is the work that's listed to be done. so, mr. president, if i could just ask mr. johannson to say, ok, there's consistency between the two. i think this could be cleared up relative quickly. >> thank you, dennis. mr. johannson? >> ok. the question in the staff report, there is reference to the tenderloin knob hill sewer improvement project. and that is the streets and

work that you're wanting to add to this contract. that's the contract that they're originally in. or the scope of work is originally in. to give you a little background, what had happened, this work was initially planned to be part of the federal market streets project. and then in the summertime last year, it was pulled out and was good without that. it didn't give the p.u.c. much support so that's why we're requesting to add this work, which is similar work -- similar construction methods and along market street, but about a mile away from the previous -- the other contract. [please stand by] [please stand by]

>> clerk: would you like the caller to clarify? >> president moran: i thought it was david. >> clerk: mr. president would like to have the caller clarify?

mr. pilpel, please raise your hand. >> caller: thank you. sorry whatever confusion i caused. this is not about 11b, i got no issue with the diamond street project. i'm sure it's diamond certified. it's 11d. my concern is that the existing contract is for work around new montgomery ignition. this is proposing to add work from a different -- that was scoped in a different project, the tenderloin and not hill improvement project. the detail i only found in the statutory exemption that's the attachment referenced in the environmental review box under 11d. it's the statutory exemption that planning department signed

2021 -- my concern is whether those streets that are described in that two page statutory exemption request, whether those streets needed to be listed in the calendar item and if so, if failure to do so is fatal to approval today and whether it requires continuance. the calendar item doesn't sufficiently alert anyone that the contemplated action today is to do work that otherwise under the tenderloin and nobb hill project. i hope that clears that up. >> president moran: one last shot here. are you in position to say

whether the issue raised by mr. pilpel are material or not? >> i'm not able to. i don't know what document he's referring to from the planning department. it's not appropriate for me to make a comment. >> president moran: proceed with the rest of the consent calendar. is there any other public comment? mr. paulson? >> commissioner paulson: for the record you're severing 11b, i

mean 7d. you are severing it? >> president moran: i'm severing that. if we can have a motion and second on the consent calendar absent 11d. >> so moved. >> second. >> president moran: we have a motion and a second. please call the roll. [roll call vote] you have four ayes. >> president moran: with respect to 11d i expect we continue that to next agenda so staff with get that together. next item. >> clerk: next order of business is item 12.

approve modification for program for accounts complying with article 12c of the city and county san francisco health code to change the name of the program to water ordinance excess use charge program change the water usage data reporting requirements for the projects subject to the program, establish methodology for applying excess use charges on a project's bill and change the building schedule for excess use charges to a six-month cumulative basis, clarify eligibility requirements for project and to request a temporary suspension or prevision.

>> good afternoon. thank you so much for the opportunity to report on the non-potable water ordinance. this program is in relation to san francisco non-potable water ordinance known as article 12c of the health code. this ordinance was amended recently in october 2021 by the board of supervisors and those amendments lowered the threshold for compliance with the water ordinance to apply to new buildings development projects, 100,000 scare feet for greater. it changed the requirement for buildings that are 100% commercial to capture and bring all the buildings wastewater,

not just rain water on site to help meet non-potable water demand. it requires mixed use residential buildings to capture water in addition to toilet flushing and irrigation demand. as you may know, the commission approved this excess use charge program in 2017. there's a resolution number on the screen. at that time, the commission approved the excess use charge program so that each non-potable ordinance project is signed in

allocation of potable water. this is just the general high level proposed process for how this program would work. first off, projects would be assigned in allocation of make-up water based on their submitted approved sfpuc documentation. the project will report on the volume of potable make-up water use. sfpuc would use that self-reported and our billing system data to calculate any applicable excess use charges. those applicable excess use charges will appear on project bill two times a year. it will be on a august bill and

federal government bill. sfpuc would allow projects to apply for allocation revision, temporary suspension of the allocation or allowing customers to appeal their excess use charges. this is my last slide. summarizing that the proposed commission action is to approve technical modifications to the program including changing the name to non-potable water ordinance excess use charge program, modifying the process for determining the potable wakeup water allocation. changing the data reporting requirements, establishing a methodology for applying excess use charges on a project bill and changing the building schedule to six-month cumulative basis. clarifying eligibility requirements and process for projects to request the temporary suspension or allocation revision. lastly, authorizing the general manager in consultation with the

city attorney to approve future modifications to the program rule. thank you for your time. i can take any questions. >> president moran: thank you. commissioners any questions? >> vice president ajami: i have a question. i assumed this program based on -- i didn't know this already exist or if you're trying to establish it. if it already exist, do we know what percentage of time people go beyond their allocation? >> it's an existing program that the commission approved in 2017. it's an existing program. i'm asking commission to approve technical modifications to how we administer the program. second part of the request, we do not have any current projects

that are receiving excess use charges there were a few projects, commercial projects that were ready and in the queue to begin the start of the excess use charge program. then the pandemic broke out. there was no occupancy in the building, they weren't able to use the system. those projects are on hold at this point. we haven't had any projects received excess use charges to date. >> president moran: any other questions or comments? seeing none, please open this for public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wishes to make two minutes on dial (415)655-0001, meeting i.d., 2486 907 5477.

do we have any callers? >> caller: this is david pilpel. last time today. on item 12. i have to substantive concerns, i have technical and procedural concerns. on page 16 of the calendar item packet, the first page of the proposed rule. there's a typo after the date. also the rules don't have internal page numbers. it will be great to have the rules. i noticed and looking at them quickly on page 24, the last

page of the rules the last line is the general manager will issue a refund. i'm pretty sure the general manager is not actually issuing the refund. same thing with other instances where it prefers to the general manager. on the sixth element of this proposal, which would delegate authority to the general manager to make non-substantive changes. i disagree strongly with that under charter section 4.104a1. i would encourage the city attorney to check this.

it doesn't talk about delegation. i'm not of the opinion that approving rules and regulations is a power that this commission can delegate to the general manager. in the future on items like this that require public notice, i would include a section in the staff report documenting the public notice that was given. i hope my comments are clear. thank you for listening today. >> thank you for your comments. there are no more callers in the queue. >> clerk: public comment on item 12 is closed. >> president moran: thank you. most of david's comments are things that can be cleaned up. shouldn't affect our ability to take a vote. one question is the delegation

of authority. >> i will say that the item is full i approved for your review and approval and consideration. it is consistent with the guidance. >> president moran: okay. i'll take that as a yes. commissioners, any other questions or comments? may i have a motion and a second. >> i move. >> second. >> president moran: move and seconded. roll call please. [roll call vote]

you have four ayes. >> president moran: item passes. next item please. >> clerk: next item, i will read the items to be heard during closed session and then call for public comment. the following item will be heard during closed session. item number 15, conference with legal counsel pursuant to california government code, regarding the following litigation which the city petitioner of pacific gas and electric company is an adverse party. city and county of san francisco federal and regulatory commission. members of the public who wish to make two minutes, dial (415)655-0001.

meeting i.d. 2486 907 5477. >> there are no callers wishing to be recognized at this time. >> clerk: thank you. public comment on item to be heard in closed session is closed. >> president moran: can i have a motion on whether to assert attorney-client privilege >> move to assert. >> second. >> president moran: moved and seconded to assert. roll call please. [roll call vote] you have four ayes. >> president moran: thank you. we will now go to closed

session. >> clerk: please standby. [closed session] >> president moran: can i have a motion and second on whether to disclose the discussions in closed session? >> move not to disclose. >> second. >> president moran: roll call please. [roll call vote] four ayes. >> president moran: thank you. that motion passes. no further business before the commission. this meeting is adjourned. thank you all.

>> i am so happy. african-americans in the military from the revolutionary war to the present, even though they have not had the basic civil rights in america. they don't know their history. in the military the most sacrifice as anyone in this country to be willing to lay down your blood and fight. i believe that all african-americans have served because they love this country and the hope that the citizens.

>> good morning. this is is the transportation authority board. >> commissioner mandelman. >> present. commissioner mar.