>> like to call the meeting to order. first of all, i like to ask for a roll call. >> president rivera, here. commissioner ajami, here. commissioner stacey, here. we have a quorum. >> before calling the first item, i like to announce the san francisco public utility commission it own-of the oholone tribe and other descendants of the recognized mission san jose. the sfpuc recognize every citizen residing within the greater bay area has and continues to benefit from the use and occupation of the

oholone tribes aboriginal lands sinsh before and after the san francisco public utility commission founding in 1932. it is important we not only recognize the history on the traibl lands which we reside, but also acknowledge the oholone people have established a working partnership with the sfp uc and are productive and flourishing members within the many greater san francisco bay area communities today. please call the first item. >> approval of the minutes of august 13, 2024. >> are there any corrections to the minutes of august 13? okay. seeing none, would you like to please call for any public comment on this item? >> remote callers, raise your hand if you wish to comment on item 3.

do we have any members of the public present who wish to provide comment on this item? moderator, are there any callers with their hand raised? there are no callers that wish to be recognized. >> thank you. >> seeing none, i like to request a motion and second for the approval of the minutes of august 13. >> so move. >> second. >> please have a roll call vote, please. >> vice president rivera, yea. commissioner ajami, yes. commissioner stacey, aye. >> alrighty. please read the next item. >> director-members of the public may address the commission on matters

within the commission's jurisdiction and not on today's agenda. remote callers, please raise your hand if you wish to provide general public comment. do we have any members of the public present who wish to provide general public comment? >> [unable to hear speaker]

[microphone not on] and i'm glad there is some talk about creating the inspector general's office, and i hope this inspector general office will work with us, the community, because we tried to work

with sfpuc and it's not going anywhere. we tried to work with the controller's office, and we are going somewhere, but we-[indiscernible] because he retired. you know, all your commissioners and many other commissions they have attorneys, you know, and i don't know what they do. they kind of rubber stamp. they have to take the initiative of the needs assessment and helping the community. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. is there anyone else? >> moderator, are there any callers with their hand raised? >> ms. lennear, there is one caller that wished to be recognized. >> thank you. >> caller, i unmuted your mic. you have two minutes. >> [indiscernible] hard to hear

for the first part of the discussion but it cleared up by the end. please consider sfpuc staff to improve transparency. it seems to me the staff presents just one view of a subject rather then providing discussion about alternatives. for now, i will use financial plans as a example. that might be a surprise [indiscernible] by the way, i'm not a solitary voice on the matter. with [indiscernible] both agencies provided choices to the boards along with discussing pros and cons. i haven't seen that for the sfpuc. a number of people raised concerns about the puc huge budget and 10 year capital plan put forth. do you know if they will modify the next financial plans, do you think they should? is there discussion about choices and alternatives? now is the time. if the topic is left until january, as usually the case, there is no

time to make changes without radical disruption of the approval process. now is time to have public discussion for goals and objectives. there shouldn't be a downside unless staff doesn't want transparency or buy in for the commissioners and public. my point is improving transparency and using the upcoming financial planning process. >> thank you caller for your comments. ms. lennear, there are no callers that wish to be recognized. >> thank you. >> please call the next item. >> report of the general manager. >> thank you madam secretary. p item 5 a is quarterly audit and performance review for fiscal year 2023-2024, 4th quarter. mrs. blackwood will be presenting.

>> [unable to hear speaker. microphone not on] there i go. okay, great. good afternoon again

commissioners. third time is a charm. my name is mrs. black wood, the audit director. thank you for having me today. i present the quarterly audit and performance review for 23, 24 fiscal year. >> may we have the presentation, please? >> may i have the slides, please? alright. so, of our audits, completed by the close of fiscal year, 15 were financial audits, 8 performance audits and one originated from the revenue bond oversight committee. as of june 30, 20 24, there were 12 additional audits in progerize or scheduled to come in soon along with 5 ongoing performance audits and one revenue bond oversight audit and one focused on a revenue lease.

here are details of the three audits completed in the 4th quaurth. in april, the california arrearage payment program was issued by the california community service division and we issued the performance assessment we talked about at the last update. the additional fourth quarter audit was city non profit supplier compliance with the state trust audit releashed in june 2024. i are wanted to delve into how we select and conduct our audit process. it is guided by several key criteria, including risk assessment, regulatory requirement, stakeholder input, historical data and strategic priorities. for risk assessment we begin with comprehensive risk approach

that vauchb evaluating programs and departments within the puc to identify those that may pose significant financial operational or reputational risk. we rank those risk as high, medium, and low and certain audits are mandated by the state or federal entities to insure compliance with those regulatory standards. we prioritize those audits to avoid penalities, legal permissions, or operations, and more. the audit bureau coordinates with the controller office, on their audit planning for the coming quarters. this involves discuz with audit bureau staff members and the audit staff at csa. also seeks inpt from stakeholders at the puc and this feedback helps identify areas of concern and insures that our audit priorities align with the needs of our constituents. on ongoing basis we

align-analyze historical audit findings and performance data. areas with prior issues may be targeted for follow up audits to insure corrective measures have been effective. finally, we align audit selection with the sfpuc strategic goals. this insures our efforts support the broader mission of providing reliable and sustainable utility services. once we have identified potential audits, we develop a audit plan and this plan outlines the scope objective, timeline for each audit. it undergoes review and approval process to insure resources are allocated effectively and address the most pressing issues. the audit selection process is not static. we continuously monitor emerging risk and change in regulation and stakeholder feedback. this allows us to respond proactively to new challenges and opportunities. so in summary, the selection of audits at the puc is a structured

process driven by risk assessment, regulatory requirement, stakeholder input, historical data and our strategic priorities. in addition to these processes, we coordinate with other oversight bodies such as the board of supervisors, budget legislative analyst and revenue bond oversight committee. the audit bureau actively monitors open audit recommendations throughout the agency to insure they are address and implemented according to deadlines. as of june 30, 2024, 14 recommendations remain open across three different audits, 8 from revenue lease audit, 3 from the two revenue bond oversight audits and 3 from public procurement integrity assessment. moving forward, we anticipate the completion of the following audits during the first quarter of fiscal year. the chapter 6 delegated

authority audit, the board of supervisors budget legislative analyst conflict of interest audit, the board of supervisors budget legislative analyst work orders audit, the annual physical inventory count for fy23-24. the calendar year for 23 post audit and the environmental protection agency cyber security guidance assessment and wholesale revenue, statement of changes and balancing account for fiscal year 22 through 23. we anticipate the kick-off of total of three audits this quarter. namely, the revenue lease of mission value rock, the post enrollment verification of the customer assistance program and environmental protection agency cyber security guidance assessment. they think for your time and i'm available for any questions. >> thank you mrs. blackwood for a quarterly report and it is

really nice to hear that this is not a static process as you stated. this is something ongoing and constantly analyzed. that makes me feel really good and probably the rate payers too. commissioners, any questions? commissioner ajami. >> thank you so much. great thing to have the conversation every quarter. even though it feels quickly coming by. the quarters go by so fast. i want to go back to slide 5 on the recommendations and where we are with those. can you actually-i dont know if you need to answer this or somebody else needs to answer this. i wonder what is the process to get these things under our wing and pay attention to this? >> the process is every audit we do in the sfpuc, my team will take those individual recommendations and we have a little data base that put

those recommendations in and we match it to individuals that are supposed to implement those recommendations and will continually remind them to make sure they are completing the recommendation and ask if they need any help, hold additional meetings if we need and once we get their final input on the final implementation of the policy, whether a update in the procedure, whether a change in the operations, whether it is adding new staff. a variety of recommendations that are in place. once that is finalized, we'll take it to the next-the appropriate body. most of the time it is the controller's office, city service auditor and we kbiv give it to them and they review and they respond back with a formal letter that says this recommendation is closed, or we consider it still open, so sometimes they can take some time and we are working with them on their timing, but we have examples of

those types of letters we get fl for them in a recommendation response form. >> for me to understand, the zero percentage is not related to us not doing the work, it is in controller's office hand- >> yes. >> we have done the work, now it is in the process and needs to be verified and finalized? >> yes. we have our own policies and procedures in the audit bureau. we want to make this report a quarterly report and it sets off june 30. the particular set of recommendations you see with the target date of july 10, we closed by then, but we want to give you information in the protocol that cut off at the quarter so those are completely finalized of now. >> perfect. it makes me feel much better. the zero percentage is not on us, it is on controller's office. okay. another question i have or maybe a comment is on the cyber security guidance assessment.

i do appreciate the effort. i think it super important as we become much more digitalized we have to pay attention to this element and for the focus on cyber security. i was just wondering and this is me thinking out loud, is there a way to think on broader sense, not just based on some of the ep a requirements, but we have every one of the enterprises have so many different activities that are digitalized, or digitized, so i wonder if you have to expand that? >> i think we are in a good situation now with our it group, our chief information officer is allowing us to partner with them on just that very thought of how to expand beyond what ep a requires for cyber security standards and how we can think bigger, so we are working with them side by side. the audit bureau and how to expand these standards throughout the sfpuc.

not just basic guidelines given by epa. >> excellent. basically try to have a more wholesome approach across different enterprises? >> yes. >> perfect. thank you so much. >> no problem. >> thank you. director, can you please open this up to public comment? >> remote callers, please raise your hand if you like to comment on item 5 a. >> commissioners, i have been monitoring this for over 40 years. the audit partners do what they have to do. the sf-board of supervisors do

not do due diligence. the sfpuc spending $50 million, $60 million, a hundred million and going to the board of supervisors and they rubber stamp it. what type of audit is that? and you commissioners must put a stop to that. put a stop to that, because you know anything over $10 million has to first go to the board of supervisors and not the other way around. this is a reason why a lot of the indictments with the sfpuc happened and y'all have no clue. i am telling you, it is worse now then it was when kelly was there. it is worse now then when kelly

was there. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. is there anybody else? >> moderator, are there any other callers with their hand raised? had >> ms. lennear, there are no callers that wish to be recognized. >> thank you; >> 5b is recent wastewater enterprise bond sale results. edwer kwon will be presenting. >> good afternoon commissioners. edward kwon, finance. normally the capital finance director would be making this presentation, but he's out sick, so he had me.

commissioners, we are here to report back to you the results from our sale of the wastewater enterprise, 2024 revenue bonds which the commission approved at the june 25 meeting and subsequently priced july 19 and closed july 31. on august 1 following on the bonds, an announcement summarizing the transaction was sent to internal staff, city partners and to the commission community box. the notice will be sent to you shortly after this meeting, sorry for the oversight. further information on the program can be found on the sf water home page. the commission reviewed the form of the preliminary official statement in june posted for investors to consider in early july. here you see the offering of the bonds

presented to potential investors on the muni os platform, used by selected underwriters. here investors are able to view the statement, [indiscernible] presentation about the wastewater enterprise and bonds offered. for the first time we included a short video of the construction progress at one of the funded projects. one offering document and two sales under single plan of finance. the official statement shown here with the pricing information posted within the mandated 10 days following the sale. this commission may recall, we intended to sell the bonds in two components. the table summarizes the first and details the series a and series b taxable bonds. these two series issued to fund specific expenditures of biosolid project and refinance certain

bonds that funded the southeast community center. these bonds concluding pricing on the 17, the sale was lead by b of a scrurts with morgan stanley comanager. the bonds were sold as 3 year note and received a a a 2 rating with stable outlook from moodies and carries no s&p [indiscernible] the series bonds received a a a 2 rating and stable outlook from moodings. noted the size and scope of the enterprise 10 year financial plan in the forecast of declining debt service coverage relative to [indiscernible] factors for the outlook. the change in outlook has no immediate impact to pricing and interest rates itself, but it means we need to be watchful and proactive if there are premature declines in liquidity and metrics that may trigger future

rating action. series c and d tax exempt bond sold to fund and retire outstanding commercial paper for various ssip for wastewater enterprise. pricing for the series c and d concluded july 18, the date after the a b bonds. the senior manager for these bonds were morgan stanley with b of a security as co. related a a 2, stable out look from moodies and a a with negative outlook from s&p. this grap shows the curve on july 18 to illustrate the interest rate condition during days of pricing in july. that is represented by the dark blue line near the center. commission has seen prior versions of this graph, but for everyone benefit, this graph represents the rates hypothetical a a a issue with

receive on day of pricing. the credit is a a, so we expect reasonably that yield on bonds price little higher and that's referred to the spread. during pricing and throughout the last two years of the curve, it has been [indiscernible] on short end, meaning very shortest rates are higher then long rates due to federal reserve overnight rate kept high. in a normal upward sloping yield curve would expect shorter maturities to the lower end. this table summarizes the result of the two sales in july. we received strong demands for bond with taxable series 1.2 times over subcribed and 2.2 times over

subcribed for the tax exempt series. we lowered yields 1 and a half to 4 and a half basing points for taxable series and 11 basis points for the tax exempt series in the course of pricing. overall, it was a very successful sale didn't [indiscernible] we were able to clear all our bonds offered. yield for the bond sold for 4.3. for illustration the last wastewater bond sale in april of 23, we got 3.1 percent yield,b but that was more then a year ago is and the most recent comparable water bond sales july of 23 was 3.72. higher, but still good rates. we were advised on the transaction action. the lead advisor and coadvisor

[indiscernible] after the sale they prepared a summary of the market activities and we would be happy to share the post pricing book with any commissioners interested. additionally, per for debt policy for negotiated bond sales we engage a independent pricing consultant to participate in pricing activities to insure we receive a reasonable fair price on our bonds. the firm, pfm conclude in the reports the puc received the fair price on the two bond sales, we can also share that report with the commission if they like. this is just snapshot of our enterprise debt before and after the latest issuance. total debt grows by approximately $730 million. some was to retire outstanding commercial paper, but all in

all we funded close to $1 billion of project proceeds with this bond sale. the illustrates the structure of the debt. we issued mostly level structure with maximum debt service in fiscal 28. reminder, this does not include additional future debt that we do expect to issue. and this finally, summarizes the puc issuance activities year by year. the commission may recall we are coming off the largest issue year by calendar year 23. this with the issuance of the 2024 wastewater bond we issued the largest green bonds to date with over $900 million in one issuance across series a and c. and happy to take any questions.

>> thank you very much mr. kwon for the report and wish speedy recovery to mr. [indiscernible] i did have one question that i was maybe more a explanation on slide 4 and i believe slide 5. there was a section that talks about the ratings being lowered on series b, c and d from stable to negative. can you explain that? is that connected to ongoing interest rates? what caused that to go down? >> just to clarify, the rating itself was affirmed and wasn't changed, but the agency outlook changed from stable to negative. the rational for that this time was because they took into consideration our increased capital plan and

finance plan and from their projections they foresee possible declines in debt service in the future. not to say they will lower the rating, but it puts on notice to keep watchful eye on revenues and coverage and liquidity. >> there was no impact then on the bonds, other then the professional opinion of- >> exactly. there is no pricing impact in this transaction. >> got it. thank you. commissioner stacey. >> thank you. i had a similar question and i think i heard you say in the presentation that lowered rating didn't have effect this time around, but we are not sure whether that will have effect on future? >> the rating was affirmed and no changed to the rating this time around and no impact to pricing with respect to the lower outlook.

>> okay. and on i think it was slide 2, the bond sale results, i couldn't find on the puc website. >> that is the internal letter and happy- >> okay. the post-pricing review mentioned on slide 9, i am also interested in seeing that too. i'm not a finance expert, but i'm learning and like to review all the reports, so i would appreciate that. >> will do. >> okay. and then i had on slide 6, i had a question. these graph lines, it is a a a rated bonds, generally. this is not puc bonds, this is just the general- >> right. >> outlook. >> the curve is called the mmd curve, the interest rate curve for the

marketplace and what they may expect to receive on any particular day of pricing. the wastewater enterprise being a a can expect our pricing is a little higher, but still following the general shape of the mmd curve. >> okay. >> i won't--this is the tax exempt muni, so we-it is a little nuanced but this represents the tax exempt a a a issuer. >> thank you. >> i want to add just to follow on comment with respect to the question you each asked. i think mr. kwon said no change in the rating at this point, and in terms of the outlook, that was s&p and there was mood ies who did not change outlook at all, but we take it seriously and it is

something we will continually address and watch, so we are aware of the importance of making sure we are being as stable as possible. >> thank you for those comments. commissioner ajami. >> okay, i'm going back, since i do this thing so i'll ask little more questions so make sure [indiscernible] yes, our rate didn't change, but the outlook has changed, right? that happened for various reasons and i do understand moodies did not change our credit score, versus s&p, but these conversations can actually--for next round moodies might look closer since there is a a a with negative projections on it, right? so, it is something that we do not want to be associated with, right? i think it is important to kind of have a little of a more detailed

conversation around why this happened, how can we make sure it is not going to continue happening and how can we make sure our revenue and assets are evaluated in a way that we don't end up on the negative trajectory. maybe a little more detail would be better. >> we certainly do take their comments seriously, and with our financial plan updates annually, we take a hard look what the ratings agencies use as criteria. we look at that all the time and i know financial planning team has taken a closer look how that criteria moved over the years, because we have always adjusted our plans to be above what the industry minimums are. if those goals are changing in the economy, we look at that regularly and we do take their commentary

seriously. >> thank you. laura bush, deputy cfo. it definitely preaching to the choir. we totally take this seriously. [indiscernible] isn't particularly surprising. we all know wastewater in particular has a very very large capital plan that has grown. a lot in recent years because of the major investment needs and this is what we talked about during the budget discussions as you recall. so, yes, we are taking it very seriously in fact, we have been regrouping as a team in the last few weeks since we got this news to figure what the next steps are and that will likely include review of the financial policies, the guardrails in place to protect the financial sustainable of the puc. in due course i will come back to you and keep your updated. >> sounds goodism i say based on conversations, not on this

specific topic, but s&p, climate risk is a lot more central so they are looking at every agency to show how well they are equip to handle climate process. >> i participated in the rating process and that something they talked about a lot. we are not the only wastewater utility facing the same headwinds and they mentioned during the discussion- >> i think one other thing, while we are going through the bond process and we are getting this money to invest, we do need to go back and look very seriously about the projects we have. are they really sort of reiterating what we had before or are we addressing the issues in hand from

affordability to climate to aging infrastructure and all that, so how can we bring them all together and i think the only way we can sort of pass this situation and end up above it unstead of below it, if we can demonstrate we have good strategies in place to address those three very important topics which is becoming more and more central to the rating. i would not be surprised if moodies does not do that, because they haven't yet starting-they are talking about climate but haven't started incorporating it, so they may come back next time with a different rate credit score and rating. thank you. and i look forward to a more detailed conversation on this. >> yes, definitely, and we will come back to you before long with approval for another bond sale for the water enterprise in which the same issue will

be discused. >> sounds good. thank you. >> thank you. director, please open up to public comment. >> remote callers, please raise your hand if you wish to comment on item 5b. any members of the publicprint present who wish to provide comment on this item? >> commissioners, i want to remind y'all the digesters. when we started the project, the sewer system improvement project, $6 billion, it is now heading towards $12 billion. soon it will hit $20 billion. and we are talking about climate change. what's our relationship with pg&e?

why didn't we have one single presentation on the digesters and how much energy those digesters will take? proprietary design from norway. you can talk about the bonds, you can talk about whatever you want to talk about, but the reality is, we are spending too much money. the reality is, when karen cubic was there, she did due diligence and gave us presentations. she left, and everything has gone down the drain and everybody's swimming in the cesspool of their own creation.

the lay man and the taxpayers are going to be paying for the extra amount spent. as commissioners, chronologically, you have to study the project, not from the bonds, not from some goobly goop-- >> thank you. >> thank you for your comments. >> moderator, any callers with their hand raised? >> ms. lennear, there is one caller that wished to be recognized. >> go ahead, please. >> caller, i unmuted your mic. you have two minutes. >> thank you. good afternoon. this is peter dreckmyer,

tuolumne river trust. there is alarming slides in the presentation. there are bond rating lower to negative on slides 4 and 5 ask i appreciated hearing that. [indiscernible] will soon more then double over a quarter billion dollars annually. slide 13 showed all the bonds issuance for water over the past 20 years and we know how that effected water sales, which you depend on for revenue. the next item, 5c you will see slides 3 outstanding anticipated debt showing $10.2 billion in debt and $11 billion in additional borrowing. what does this mean for the credit rating? i hope you will make answering these questions priority. your long-term vulnerability assessment which cost $743 thousand spent time on the issue. report 3 focus on water demand,

demand forecasting is a important exercise for water agencies for long-term planning process. how much will there be for water in the future? hoe much supply will be required to continue to deliver reliable service? how much will it cost to do so and what are the financial implications for the consumer? water agencies predict how the future will manifest in uncertain socio economic and climate conditions. getting it wrong can have consequences. [indiscernible] pose the risk of over investment stranded assets and high water rates. it is critical you take a close look at demand projections, which have been inflated and design drought. it is crazy not to discuss the mage r drivers of your budget. >> thank you caller, your time expired.

ms. lennear, there are no callers that wish to be recognized. >> thank you. >> 5c is capital financing plan for fiscal year 2024-2025 and mr. kwon will be continuing. >> good afternoon again commissioners. edward, kwon finance standing in for -as the commission knows-may i please have the slides? -the puc has a large complex debt portfolio can significant future capital needs. therefore additional debt issuance and credit requirements. the annual plan is intended to freud visibility regarding capital finance activities guided by previously adopted commission policies listed here. this is a brief illustration of

the $10 billion outstanding debt portfolio, which excludes approximately $1 billion approved or yet to be drawn federal and state loan capacity. the commission approved last february the 10 year financial plan update of $11 billion in additional borrowing to fund the adopted 10 year capital plans. this includes $1.9 billion in new borrowing this fiscal year and wastewater bonds, which we just discussed. quick summary overview of existing debt across the enterprises. over $10 billion in debt consisting primarily of revenue bonds and federal and state loans. this is a summary of the ratings across the enterprises and you see the

new reflected for wastewater. the slide high level of the work our capital finance team does. this commission is regularly presented with new issuances, renew and replacement of credit agreements that support our capital projects. the commission may not see is analysis and monitoring of project spending conducted by the team to deliver the issuances just in time to help minimize cost to the rate payer. our team continuously monitor the market to identify refunding opportunities and to evaluate them as they present themselves to optimize cost of borrowing. as the commission is well aware, we remain in volatile elevated rate environment compared to recent history, influenced primarily by federal reserve

action, political uncertainty and geo political tension. the yield inversion, very short interest rates are slightly higher then longer rates remained inverted for better part of the last two years. we expect rates to come down, we can't predict when that will happen. the rates are elevated. they are still relatively flat, meaning, there isn't much difference between short rates and very long rates and this unique environment actually creates potential for refunding opportunities that we are continuously evaluating. for example, the 2023 water tender refunding that closed in july of 23. so, this is the fiscal 25 capital financing plan. the first item this commission can expect to see will be request

to expand interim programming for each enterprise with the growth of capital plan, we have increased need in these programs in order for continued funding flexibility with respect to debt issuance. the commissions know interim fund capital projects with commercial paper primarily until those expenditures are retired with long-term revenue bonds or federal and state loan as we receive them. with growth in the capital plan and resulting debt issuances, and coupled with the market opportunities for refundings, we are preparing to amend or reissue the municipal advisory contracts to accommodate the additional work. we expect to approach this commission with that some time the second quarter of this fiscal year. toward the end of the calendar we expect to bring the next water bond sale. this was projected in theest la10 year financial plan and that is

expected to be up to $762 million in new proceeds to fund projects and retire commercial paper. we also expect a funding component for savings. we expect to close the bonds early next year. later this fall, we expect the commission to consider srf loan and grant for wastewater enterprise totaling up to $170 million. toward the end of fiscal year, expect to bring renewal or replacement for the credit facilities for the water enterprise. as we approach 5 years since the last debt policy update, we expect to bring to the commission a update of those. work closely with advisors and partners in the city family to remain within industry standards and best practices for debt. finally, on depending on the schedule of capital project we expect to

issue a second loan with the agreement with the epa. we may also request adjustment to the first loan issued under that master to adjust interest rate if conditions are favorable. this slide as alluded to earlier, the commission action detail portion of ongoing work in finance. the team is actively pursuing other initiatives during the fiscal year to better fund capital projects or potentially save rate payer dollars. these include direct pay tax credits by inflation reduction act. over the summer we worked to register completed solar projects and electric vehicle purchases for credits we expect to file for in november. we are continuing to work with a gm and project team to identify

potential projects that may qualify. we work closely with financing opportunities for power purchase for pre-payment options and unique structures that may benefit project arrangement such as those considered for alternative water supply programs. we plan to continue to enhance green bonds programs to insure we are at the forefront of market and regulatory changes and make investment in systems and technology to insure staff have the new tools needed to manage the growing and already very large complex debt portfolio. that's it. happy to take any questions. >> thank you mr. kwon for your report and mentioning there is a potential for savings in terms of refinancing some of these projects as interest rates hopefully come down and would be much more efficient. i did have a question, you

talked about inflation reduction act and there were credits for electric ecvoos. vehicles. are you talking about puc fleet vehicles? >> yes. >> okay. are these like what portion is our fleet electric or hydrogen or alternative? >> i don't recall the portion, but it was somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 vehicles we took the liberty of in the period in question actually that may qualify for $7500 credit per vehicle. we submitted the additional registration for those credits and will file for those credits in november. >> alrighty. i'm sorry to ask if you don't know this question, it is fine. are these sedans or work trucks, because there is a new work trucks out there and puc would have the potential for using those also for our work crews? >> i have the models, but off

the top of head and don't recall. >> that is just something i wanted to know personally. thank you. commissioner ajami. >> thank you so much. i realize maybe this you don't do this often so didn't mean to scare you with the last item but you did very well. [laughter] >> thank you. >> just i have a few questions. one main question. one comment, one questionism on the green bond program, i think one thing i wanted to say is, going back to the conversation we had on the previous item, the more we think about what projects we incorporate in the process, the higher chances of being able to use green bonds, just because the international criteria around those are tightening a lot more and much more specific, so it is really important to keep an eye on how that is

changing and how we need to change to make sure that process. another thing i want to say, this has come up multiple times and i appreciate you touching on the updating data and technology system. you brought it up in the previous presentation too. i think this goes back to our real need for data transparency and having information technology that can enable us to do better and be able to see across different situations, different enterprises, different projects and see how things are changing. i just want to say, i think that is a important initiative. i appreciate you doing this and i think again, this is another over-arching effort that can go across different enterprises and i think it is important to think about it that way, because it is kind of like creates this little

more connectivity between the different enterprises and how they function. appreciate that. thank you. >> director, can you open this up to public comment, please? >> remote callers, raise your hand if you wish to provide comment on item 5c. do we have any members of the public present who wish to comment on this item? moderator, any callers with their hand raised? >> ms. lennear, there is one caller that wished to be recognized. >> thank you. please continue. >> caller, i unmuted your line. you have 2 minutes. caller, can you hear us?

i muted them on the line. ms. lennear, there are no callers that wish to be recognized. >> thank you. >> that concludes my report. >> director, please read the next item. >> item 6, consent calendar. >> i understand there is-- >> i said i conclude my report and moving to consent calendar. >> yes, thank you. amendment number 2, to contract

number pro.0165. >> on the consent calendar, 6b is going to be pulled from the calendar, because it was not listed accurately on the calendar. >> i like to call item 6 and we are pulling item b from consent calendar--okay. are there any comments or questions on the consent calendar? commissioner stacey, go ahead. >> thank you. i just had a question when i was looking at the calendar on both 6 a and 6c.

6 a is a fairly substantial, high percentage increase in both the amount and the time and so i had asked staff if there was something we didn't anticipate and it really just a ongoing compliance with regulatory requirements, but we otherwise have been satisfied with the contractor's performance so that is really just response to changing requirements. and then 6c, because i wasn't familiar with the union pacific railroad agreements i had asked about whether or not union pacific railroad contributed at all to the cost of those protective measures, but i understand union pacific has superior property rights to the puc and so it is the puc's obligation to accommodate the pacific union pacific railroad, so i appreciate that explanation on those items.

>> any other comments? okay. seeing none, director, can we open this up to public comment, please? >> remote callers, raise your hand if you wish to comment on item 6, consent calendar. any members of the public present who wish to comment on this item? moderator, any callers with hand raised? >> ms. lennear, there are no callers in the queue. >> thank you. >> alright. that thank you. i like to request motion and second to approve item 6, consent calendar. >> i'll move. >> second. >> may we have a roll call vote, please? >> vice president rivera, aye. commissioner ajami, aye. commissioner stacey, aye. you have a quorum.

>> director, please read the next item. >> delegating authority to the general manager to award and amend certain type of contract leases and other agreements. >> may i have the slides, please? are they going to be up?

good afternoon commissioners. ron flynn, deputy general manager here to ask and delegation metric. can i make sure you can see the slides? >> yes. >> great. i'm going to go over and highlight the major changes in this matrics compared to our prior material, but first, i want to give you a background for this resolution. in 2009, the commission approved delegation metric in which the agency has been operating under for the last

15 years. in 2012, the commission approved real estate guidelines updated in 2013 and 15 and with small exception, we have been operating under the guidelines for the last 9 years. the new metrics identifies the relative authority. as the organization of the new metric, it has 4 leveloffs authority recollect the general manager, the commission consent calendar, the commission regular calendar and new section identifying the board of supervisors approval role. our 6 area delegation are included. i'm going through each of these with you now. the first section we'll talk about is notification and emergency declarations. in 2009 matrix has all contract

advertisement reports approved by the gm. that means the gm approves it and the commission receives notice. there is a change in this. previously, all design build advertisement went to the commission on consent calendar. when the matrix was passed commission approval of design build project was required. that section was amended by the board of supervisors in 2015 and gave department heads the express authority to approve advertisements of design build contracts, so this now changes to simply align with the updated code. emergency declarations, again, this aligns with the admin code under chapter 6, r21. previously, everything had gone to the consent calendar, now in alignment with the code, emergency work under $250 thousand for construction and

under hundred thousand for general service are under the general manager authority and larger ones which require board of supervisor approval, we moved from consent to regular under the theory if we are taking something to the board of supervisors, we should present it to this commission on the regular calendar. next slide. so, the first group of contracts we will talk about are ones that were on the existing matrix and i'll go over contracts for construction, professional service construction related and professional service construction not related and highlight the proposed changes from the existing matrix. construction contracts, this section contains some substantive changes i want to highlight. in awarding construction contracts the gm authority does not chaichck.

it remains at the san francisco admin code threshold level which is currently 1 million dollars. the change occurs in what appears for approval on the consent calendar, versus on the regular calendar. in the 2009 matrix, everything above $10 million went to the regular calendar, here we propose contraction constructs of 1 to $25 million go on consent and every above 25 go to regular. all those contracts will come to the commission for approval, it is just in the last 15 years, the size of construction contracts in particular have escalated and we feel the additional time to focus on the larger contracts is warranted. for modifying or amending there are small changes. as i said, the thresholds change. this makes clear that whatever authority exists for awarding that same authority-you can do amendments

within that authority, so the gm could do amendments, even if it is for 20percent above, as long as it is under a million dollars. if it reaches that threshold, it goes and comes to whatever calendar it has to go. we added a sole source designation to be consistent with state law. that is how it exists now because it isn't on the matrix and what is in the quarterly report about what the gm is doing with contracts so this becomes part that report. finally, there is a change in how we do close-outs. under the admin code, the authority is granted to department head, so we moved from the gm from consent, accept where there is a modification required for the contract to close-out, then it follows the above rules. in other words, if a $1 million contract was going to have make it 11 million $11 million to close it

out, that bumps into the next level of authority. next page. this section deals with the professional service contracts that are construction related. architecture engineers, inspections, those kinds of things. there are no significant changes. there is one change that removes a little of the gm authority. there wasn't express dollar limit on the gm authority to amend and this caps at the same level award. this is just for consistency. another change is that, the tiers are based on dollars, so if you add time to a contract, but not money,b it stays within the authority that is existing and happy to go over examples when we get to the questions. next page. this section deals with professional service contracts. professional service contracts not

construction related, that is some of the ones we were-all the contracts we do related to finance, related to auditing, related to any service not construction related comes under this section. there are no significant changes in the thresholds that are here, there are changes about the amendments to sort of line up what is required by the board of supervisors on sizes, so instead of just having it be 25 percent or more, it more aligns with the charter, which has a dollar threshold and sort of those amounts, so we backed that through. but, the threshold amounts are not changing. now i want to get to new sections that are brand new to this matrix. the first one is the power purchases.

going to the-yeah. for power purchases and sales, we included the new authority granted to the department by the board of supervisors following this commission approval of proposal to grant delegate authority to the agency to enter into large scale contracts, so that is a cumulative amount of $200 million annually authority for purchases and amendments to purchase agreements, and a cumulative up to $10 million annual authority for sales and amendments to sales. that is consistent with the resolution passed by this commission and then the board. everything else goes to the regular calendar, again, because that goes to the board of supervisors, so we are aligning with the code. the next section grants is also intearly new. it is not just simply lining up with code however. the board of supervisors adopted admin

code 21g related to grants since the matrix passed so we added it and the admin code has rules accepting grants so we included those here and that is what the accepting and expending grants. those are just from the code. as to awarding grants, there are not specific roles laid out in the code, so we have what we think is reasonable policy. any new grant program would come to the commission on the regular calendar for approval. once the commission approves a grant program, grants under a million under this would be authorized for award by the gm. 1 to $10 million on consent calendar and above $10 million on regular calendar and going to the board. there is also amendment authority up to 25 percent within each one. again, this is one section where we crafted these because there was not a

specific-particular codes that we were aligning with. next section. this is a similar section. this is the mou. these were not on the matrix. we divided into various types of mou, which are essentially agreements with other city departments, agencies and other government entities. so, as to the mou with city departments, these could be done through work orders or mou. that is how it happens now, there isn't consistent role. the administrative and operation agreements are the type of things a agency department head usually takes care of. here, we are proposing to give the gm the authority to enter into agreements with other city agencies unless it involves a permanent transfer of land. if someone is going to use our land or we use their land, that type of

thing that would be to the gm. it would come to you on a report. non city government agencies, we propose anything less then the 10 millions or 10 year approval by the gm and more then that on the regular calendar. exception to the rule, if the mou involves the puc requiring new assets or taking on delivery of service that impose long-term operation, maintenance or construction cost, those go to the commission on regular calendar, unless that new action has already been approved by the commission on a separate action. if we take on a new service and the mou was implementing that, the taking oen the new service would be a commission approval, the mou would be just direct gm action. next page. now the final section has a number of items that were not on the

matrex. they are now all here. next page. the first three rows of the section involve third party use of sfpuc property. for use at the fair market value, this does change. this changes thresholds for the gm. it had been up to 9 years and proposing up to 9 years and million dollars. the old guidelines had 5 years and $300 thousand. this means leases between 300 thousand and a million are between 5 and 9 years that would have been on consent calendar are now at the gm level. there are no other changes for that. for less then fair market value, there are no changes accept in some a

million has been on consent and those have been moved to regular calendar. that whole-there are small items on consent use of things on the poles, but everything else goes to regular. as the community hub at the southeast community center, january 23 of 23, the commission approved a small revision to the 2015 guidelines to authorize the gm to sign work station license under specified circumstances. what this matrix does is the commission sets those rates and then the gm can enter into those contracts with those groups to use the work stations. and the next row is how the sfpuc uses third party property. here, again it gives authority of the gm for up to 9 years and expenditures up to $5 million. that is again, increase in authority to the gm. it had been up to $300 thousand

and up to 5 years when we did this 9 years ago. there are no other changes. so, the next group of-nearing the end, but the next group are very specific. the cottage leases, it provides the commission sets the rates and the gm rolls out those lease agreement with employees, with park service. for use of city and county of san francisco property, without a jurisdictional transfer, it sort of aligns with our proposal on the mou. that is it would move to the gm. previously that had been on consent under the guidelines, so that aligns with our proposal on the mou's. other then that, for the change for the lines jurisdictional transfer

acquisition of property and conveyance, there is no change. that moves from the guidelines in here which is all coming on regular calendar and goes to the board. the final row is new in entirety. this is agency vote on ballot measure effecting sfpuc operations. occasionally as a land owner, we receive ballots regarding creation of special use district or special assessment. on a piece of property outside san francisco. happens very rarely, these are small in nature but wanted to include this. as the ballot comes in we usually don't have time to come to commission, having it on this insure it gets on the delegation authority about the

delegated authority, so it provides that transparency. next slide. you get a quarterly report on actions taken. items can be moved between consent and regular. there will be linked up the updated matrix to the threshold amounts and to the power and purchase so that which is available. those are the major changes. i know you will have questions about details so i want to spend my timer answer questions about particular changes or particular rational. >> thank you deputy flynn for the robust nrfshz. information. i think we have questions. commissioner ajami. >> mr. flynn, thank you for the presentation. i have handful of questions.

much of them are related to changes in thresholds, time or money. >> okay. so, maybe we go through them one by one. i was wondering what was the logic to go from 2 million to $25 million and with extended timeline. >> on the awarding construction contracts? >> yes. >> okay. >> go down the list. >> okay. thank you. the primary reason here was it was $10 million. that was 15 years ago we entered the matrix and looked what was happening:our large contracts these days are as you know, they are hundred million, 200 million, we don't have a lot of contracts that are under a million. that is just the threshold under a million, but the 1-25 there are

some, but vast majority of stuff and we want to focus on are the larger ones so propose to increase, but it wasn't to get at a particular-it was able to spend more time on larger contracts and so that was the rational. as to the time, 10 years is a magic number. it doesn't apply to construction contracts because construction contracts don't go to the board, but that level of something that is 10 years is the type of thing the board usually sees so that is something we want coming to the commission so that is where we got 10 years from. >> let's hypothetically talk about a case that doesn't end up going to the board. gets approved by the gm. but never sees the commission.

basically the gm approves the contract or ends up in a consent calendar. this is the case here. goes into consent calendar between $1 million and $25 million and longer then 9 years and the items don't end up at the board, correct? >> correct. no construction contract ends up at the board. >> exactly. the hope is commissioners read the consent calendar, which i'm hoping everybody does and make sure that every item that is in there is correctly lined up. i'm wondering if instead of and we should make this a or, so that way if something is between $1 million and $25 million, or it is longer then 9 years, needs to end up in front of the

commission. >> when you say end up, i want to make sure i understand. you mean on the regular calendar? both consent and regular come to the commission. when you said that-okay. >> it becomes conversation, has a presentation, has a individual attached to it, versus something that ends up being item that is in the consent, everybody reviewed and basically as a batch we approve them and let them move forward. the reason i'm asking the question is right now we have a lot of construction project that come and go because we are going through a phase of change, building a lot of new things. say in 10 years we don't have that many construction projects, doubtful, but let's say, i want to make sure like who ever inherits whatever matrix we put in front of them has all the right tools to make sure we as a agency are doing the right thing, everything has

enough oversight and done in the right way. does that make sense? >> yes. is there a question? >> the question is, does this-do you think 10 years from now, if you are done with all the wastewater projects and water projects and all that, do you think changing $25 million and number of years in a way that would make sure that more projects end up in fruchbt front of the commission is necessary or you think it isn't necessary? >> i don't think it is necessary, but that is why we are here and saying why we made the change. let me tell you why i don't think it is necessary. i do think 10 years from now, $25 million construction is a lot of money. we do a lot of work under $25 million. a lot of repair and replacements, but a lot are larger then that now. even when we are doing projects replacement of pipe, we gather together

large portions and those will come and those are going to be there. i do think it provides the discussion on the larger ones, and i also think since i've been at this agency, i don't think just having on consent means it doesn't get considered in and the commission don't read and pay attention and ask questions. that does happen, it just allows we believe greater discussion of the larger ones, but that is just a policy call. it is still a number that i think 10 years from now when we are talking about there will be new people, what does it mean to go $25 million construction contract, it is on consent. someone wants to dig into it, they can pull it to the regular calendar. that was our thinking. there were various proposals all over the place and that is what we came up with. >> let me ask you another hypothetical question, you're a lawyer, you know how to make sure everything is done

correctly and under law, let's say. hopefully you do since you are keeping an eye on this organization. if this proposal was put in front of you as an option of should we keep it in consent or should we have it in the regular calendar, what do you think? is it tighter policy approach to this issue versus make the agenda and make it shorter and go faster? >> right. i don't think our-thank you for the question and for that. i didn't approach this as a lawyer. i can tell you there were lawyers involved. contract admin group was involved. the real estate group was obviously involved, the city attorney was involved, i was involved thinking through the issues for a long time. i don't think the goal is to make us get through a commission

meeting just like that. i think the goal is to have staff make presentations on significant matters that should be having discussions that we know are the public want to know about and there are going to be public discussion about and not sure that today or in 10 years a $15 million pipe construction project is that thing. if this commission thinks it is, that's what we are doing here, but i did i think the it was reason to think about what we want to do. it isn't shorten the meeting, but spend the time saying when you present to the commission, you should be prepared to answer questions and presenting on that and that's-there something significant about that public presentation. i'm comfortable talking-a lot of employees, this is a hard thing and so we want to make sure we are using your time wisely and our staff time

wisely and why we pulled the threshold. people come to this meeting and you see it every time at the end of consent calendar, a lot of people get up and leave. that's because people come here prepared to answer questions on the consent caldener. it doesn't mean we are not expecting questions and they won't happen. >> i don't doubt that and i do pay attention people come and go and we ask questions, but for me, it is more thinking about not the commission you have now or the staff you have now, but what kind of organizational process need to be set up to make sure this specific organization is successful, regardless if i sit here or you are standing here dennis is here or any of us here, because that is the point of the commission, to make sure regardless what we have in place, there are enough checks and balances for all of us to be successful then our kids or families will have aue utility that is

successful. that is the lens i look through everything and why i ask that question, because i want to make sure every one of the changes we see would enable us to keep this organization healthy and move forward. $25 million, you are absolutely right, we do spend a lot of money, because we have aging infrastructure that needs attention, we have a huge system that needs a lot of attention, but also at the same time, it is a lot of money for a lot of people and for less then that people have got into trouble for different reasons. i'm just trying to make sure every decision we make here, ends up making all of us to be more successful rather then just making sure-i want to make sure what the criteria of change is. is it like time? is it process? is it long-term, short-term? that is the just of all the questions i

want to ask, which is all focused on that. as a individual, if i am given the role to be sitting here, while i have very limited time, i am dovoted to make sure the time is spent to make sure we have a healthy organization. that is my personal goal. >> i appreciate that and so how this particular line is set up, everything up to a million is gm approved, where you draw the line what goes on consent versus the regular calendar is what we are talking about and that is something that is movable. we suggested $25 million based on looking at the 15 year old matrix, looking what contracts are putting out now, how many-we were looking at this material. it is bit arbitrary. all the numbers are a bit arbitrary, but that is how we came to it.

but that is really everything above a million will be on this calendar. everything will be on the calendar whether a report or we are approving it, where you want it on the scale of regular or consent. >> which bucket it falls in. the same kind of question--actually, i will jump because we are talking about thresholds and i will go back to power later. for example, we have a few other one of these, like for example, as a puc third party property, we now have expenditure, less then 10 million dollars. those numbers-i can tell you which page-- >> i think you are talking about

-this is under real estate. there are two items, one is the third party of puc property at fair value market. at this point we will be first go to gm if revenue is less then $1 million is lease time shorter then 9 years, right? >> that's right. >> i don't have a problem with that specific item, but i like to know how all these numbers have come about. for example, the million. if you go down that line, the next item you have sfpuc use third party

property license and easement and the threshold is $5 million. >> on the real estate, real estate in some ways could be contracts we have above, but they are different just in the realization we have a real estate group, real estate operates different in the city. you notice there isn't the same admin code, blah blah blah on these, because even in our code in the city we deal with real estate differently. it is really left--they go with the market and the roles are slightly different, so there is very prescribed things that have to be in contracts and construction contracts, indemty, insurance, there is much less that in the code for real estate contracts because of the nature of the work. the real estate group worked on this a long time to come up with a structure of the ones they think are the ones

that are sort of the smaller ones that they negotiate with the landlord and are going to move quickly and they want to work out and are those numbers are widely different then before. we had $300 thousand and that isn't a number in these multi-year contracts anymore that we are entering into. so, as for use of our property, there is a threshold that is in the charter, so we work from there. for use of other, the threshold we are spending is much higher, so it ends up being higher, but the idea, it is the smaller leases. we don't lease typically and may in some cases but don't necessarily lease the small places we lease to other people. we lease a warehouse for 9 years. those types of things were the changes. this was really work over by the various people on the real estate team

to see what's the practical thing and what do we want to be done. what are big, what is the discussion points and what are more routine, so those are i highlighted threshold changes in the real estate. they moved from 300 thousand to a million. 300 thousand to 5 million in the other instance. you are correct. but that was sort of through the real estate broker-the people out there negotiating the contracts. what makes sense for them. >> can you give me a logic why some of these that did not used to be approved by the general manager, now have a threshold they end up going-being approved by the general manager? >> happy. can you give a example? >> from this matrix how it

goes into the matrix. it has been expanded,er as it should have been. fwr example, here we have real estate property sales. >> okay. >> which was always supposed to come to the commission, and also real estate property acquisition. >> yes. >> they both had to come to commission, i'm not hundred percent sure where that ended up-- >> those ended up on the last page of your matrix, that acquisition of the puc and fee interest and conveyance of permanent property so buying and selling of property are long-term interest and that goes to, in this no gm authority, it is listed as all under regular and reaches certain dollar thresholds it goes to the board. all those go on regular calendar. >> map into three items. >> there were not changes, it

is just pulling out in the guideline that wasn't in this and putting it right there. >> okay. now i want to go back to the power. so, let's talk about power first and then- >> there are 4 different categories on power. >> yes. >> purchase, sales, entering into and amending of each. >> i want to talk about power purchase and the power sales. i do recognize that-- >> power purchase and amending power sales. >> those two i wanted to talk to you about. on the power purchase, i noticed that we have had the less then 25 years and i found that to be a little of a long sort of timeline for that to be approved by the general manager.

for example, if you are the general manager, you have 25 years ahead of you, some of the decisions are very long-term, so some oversight is important. >> absolutely. >> can you tell me how that 25 years have come about? >> yeah. so, as you know, and barbara is here if you want to get into specific s, as you know a major expenditure we have in power is the buying and selling of power. that really is--and as we get in and negotiate those contracts, there are lots of times we needed both to be able to act quickly and act with exceptions to city contracting rules. so, what we did is came to this commission and identified what those the thresholds would be, what that would look like, and those have changed over the years. this is the current section and

we went to the board and they delegated authority to the general manager that which is what those ordinances were to enter into a number of those contracts up to an annual threshold and so the 25 years comes from that delegated authority for an ordinance, so the board of supervisors gave this authority to the general manager of the puc. this is taking that authority, which is ordinance that isn't there and putting oen the matrix so it is laid out who is doing what. if it doesn't fit in the box or exceeds the annual threshold if we bought wind power and we no longer have $200 million, it comes on the regular calendar and board. these four boxes, there is a lot of information and the numbers are big, but those numbers, this is an area where that was delegated--it

was recommended to be delegated by the commission but delegated by the board of supervisor in a ordinance to the department head up to certain amounts. these four boxes, there is a lot, but this is translating what is in the code just on to the matrix. >> i think this was approved by the commission before it went to the board about a year and a half ago. >> because we had so much volatility in the market. we were-i remember that. >> i [indiscernible] >> [indiscernible] >> so, i was speaking to assistant general manager barbara hale and she reminded, there are times we have brought contracts, which are under this amount, which and brought for approval and that just is a matter if we

have the time, we don't want to use up our--if we have the time we don't want to use delegated authority on a contract because it is within the thing, if this is acting fast. >> that was my next thing and this came up in the power purchase and also in the item you had on agency vote and ballot measures effecting sfpuc. >> okay. >> the same issue, which is, time matters, yes. if thereis something that needs to move forward today two weeks from now or imagine it is june and we have summer off and things need to move forward, we cant wait a month, but there are cases we might be able to put these things on the calendar right away, and i wonder if there needs to be some form of a amendment or statement in there that says, if there is no opportunity to attend to this right away, then

general manager can make that decision. otherwise, for example, today is deal starts and tomorrow we have a meeting, maybe should just--i understand- >> on the pow r one, it is what it is under the code. on the agency vote, we put it on there just because we are scouring everything that had gone on. think what this is. this is a special assessment. land owner, do you-are you going to approve a new 5 cent per tax on your property? what will end up being on the puc whether we vote yes or no isn't determined. whether we vote, we want to be able to. but, it also is not-they are not asking for a $10 million special assessment, this is a land owner assessment type question that comes and they usually do come pretty quick by the time

they get to us they never come to the right address and always go somewhere else and forwarded here and there is a long lead time to get things on the calerder here. for action item or approval item, so this is a way of highlighting it and putting it on so it is there. i don't know it would-i think there is two of these in the last 10 years. i don't know it would kill us if we have time. there is a transparency thing is not the big-it is the opposite of the big dollar thing, it is the special assessment, our special use district votes that come to property owners and as you know, we own property in many counties. >> to be honest, a lot of the questions are going back to transparency. we really want to make sure all that is in place.

i also had a question on the amend power sales. >> okay. >> actually, on both of these items, i wonder why is the board deciding the threshold versus us deciding the threshold? both on the amend power sales and on the power sales? >> the charter gives the board authority over all contracts above $10 million where we are buying something, and above 1 or $2 million where we are getting money. sales, below a threshold. for us to get this, we had to ask the board for specific delegation of their authority to us, and that in those ordinances that was written the amounts who went to, how long it would last,

what kind of reporting we have to do to them. all those things are in there, which is one reason if you notice on the reporting, the quarterly reporting it pulls it out because there are specific board requirements for that reporting so we are-we do that reporting. everything we send to the board we do to you. it is just--we ask for that authority. the short answer, we ask for those amounts in that time, and the board- >> we give them a number then they approve that number. >> yes. it goes through the legislative process with a specific amount and specific time and we have over the years gone and asked for increases to that when things happened and when we first did this, it was before the market went crazy and powers went, so it wasn't useful for us. there is two important parts of this. the part we are talking about, which is the amount and the time and

there is the ability to enter into these contracts without specific city rules which is really the piece preventing us participating in a lot of green markets and all kinds of things so we had to get delegated authority to enter into contracts so that is where that came from. >> okay. i still say, i appreciate you walking me through these. i would just say, you know, based on the criteria i said earlier, from me personally, right? accountability, transparency and making sure we have a healthy organization that survives and thrives under different administrations, different commissions, different leadership. some of these do like those thresholds do make me a little bit worried to be honest with you, because i feel like in some cases sort of takes them

away from valuable discussion, puts them in a place that might not necessarily get the attention they need, and we do have some projects that are in important. regardless of the amounts, they are important to be part of a discussion. they might be a million dollar projects, but it is a important one that needs to be discussed, because context matter. to your point, if it is a major pipeline or building wastewater treatment plant, the amount is significant, but a small project might you know cost a lot more then it should as it should not have cost them. the whole discussion around the $28 million toilet that we went through last year or something. it wasn't ours the board of supervisors. just saying, context very much matters. the size of the project, what project we are investing in very much

matters and the size of those contracts are very much related to that project, right? some of these projects do need attention under the $25 million threshold. we may not have enough oversight or discussion to make things are spent properly and in the right way. >> i appreciate that. i would say in response to that, i'm not pushing back on that. this threshold we are talking about is the threshold between consent and regular, so-- >> yes. >> i hear you saying that there is a question whether it gets the attention, my experience is commissioners do read things and get questions whether at this meeting or beforehand. we heard on consent calendar there was questions asked beforehand and answered and telling the public, here is the

answer to these questions, so it doesn't mean there isn't ability to answer questions. >> yeah, and that's fine. people have different ways of approaching things. personally for me, i like to ask the questions and like to hear those questions answered and if if there is follow up i like to ask them. different commissioners have different strategies approaching things. i do ask tons of questions about the consent calendar, but this isn't about me or this specific commission, this is about long-term as people come and go how things are going to work and you would-i have been in a lot of boards. not every commission and board is formatted the same. they are not the same people are on these things, so we need to make sure things don't go unattentioned. >> right. >> that's my-not thinking about are we doing the right thing, it is more like, if we change this, is it going to impact the organization financial

health or accountability if for the generations to come for the next commission, for the next gm, for all that. for now, i will let other commissioners speak and then we can-- >> commissioner stacey. >> thank you and i want to say first of all that, i really appreciate the organization and the readability of this matrix. it makes so much more sense to me then the other matrix and breaking it out into more detail with the citations to codes and charter sections is incredibly helpful. >> it will pass the thanks to those who did it. >> it is so much easier to understand and read. i wanted to follow up and make sure i understood and some information that you gave in response to commissioner ajami's question on the construction contracts. >> yes. >> it is your power point page

6. is the threshold amount set by admin code section 6.3 current ly $1 million, is is that what you said? >> yeah, the threshold amount is $1 million. >> okay. good. alright. and then, when i was reviewing the matrix, i was concerned about mou. sometimes there is an exchange of money between-this is just within the city, intracity mou, i was concerned about exchanges of money and i was thinking about the ocean beach project. do i remember correctly that was a mou within the city? maybe it doesn't matter. >> we do have mou's related to construction projects, related to operations of our facilities, related to

-we have mou we are paid on mou for our utilities by other departments. like, it all--we have all kinds of mou with other city agencies are not contracts, they are agreements between departments that can happen through a mou or work order. >> and i think that sort of alleviated some of my concern that the mou are often a good faith attempt at setting out a procedure or a way of working together. what i was concerned bet is when there is a exchange of money, but i think we do see the work orders in the budget process. i remember seeing work orders department to department, so we the commission would see that in the budget process for the most part. >> yes. so, there is money that is

exchanged between departments. those end up coming through the budget process and they are line items. i want to be clear that the mou's can include that money that has been appropriated, but a mou does not appropriate money, so that still has to sort of happen. the other side is, because there were no set roles and they are not set roles in the city about mou's, they happen in various ways. some come to this commission, like we enter this thing or talk about and take to the commission. others are entered in. this is the first formalized prauz. process. we have been working hard to gather mou's so we can say this is part that process. every mou that will be entered in by anyone has to end up on these

lists and being able to sort of be there digging for mou or mou's that last fl year and find them listed so we are working hard at making that in a central place and central public way, so, this both does grant to the general manager authority that was not on the matrix before. not appropriating money, but enter into agreements, but it also then sort of requires that the general manager come to this commission and list out what those things are. both those sides were missing before. it was silent and done in a very -it was just done in different ways. >> okay. and then, i was looking at some of the real estate provisions that were not on

the matrix before, but when i reviewed the record, i think there was a 2015 policy adopted by the commission that dealt with these real estate matters. >> you are absolutely correct. that is much more difficult. as hard to go to the matrix to matrix, the cottage leases were rule 6.1 and they were scattered all over so going through what is-what is the approval of those things and putting pulling out and put in here. i want to say, i tried to highlight, i did highlight for you when pulling that out of the guidelines the amounts would change and those are pieces we talked about. i highlighted those for the thresholds would change, but where i was pulling it over like the jurisdictional transfer stuff, that is when i said there is no change. it is a change adding to our matrix, but not a change in the

threshold or where it sits on the calendar or something like that. >> yep. got that. and then, i think that it is a really important function of the commission not only to have oversight of a lot of these issues, but also public accountability. allowing the public to see how the business is conducted, having a public hearing is really important and i think that can happen both on consent and regular calendar so finally, in connection to that, i also think it is really important that we pay attention to these quarterly reports that will be submitted to the commission and i think that will help both the commission continue to be aware of what's happening at the general

manager level that might not be coming to the commission, but i think we need to look at those reports carefully and if we think something should come to the commission or the policy needs to be changed, we can certainly revisit this matrix if something isn't working. >> not gathering pieces of paper, but saying that box i want different. >> yeah. the report gives me a lot of comfort and the something being on the consent calendar to me doesn't mean we don't have the same public accountability and the same public review. i think it is really just a matter of paying attention to everything that comes before us. so, i am comfortable that the report and the public accountability and the oversight role of the commission will continue. i have one more clarifying question and

that is, i'm not sure i understood the very last item in the matrix. an agency vote on ballot measure effecting sfpuc operations. when you were discussing it today mr. flynn, you talked about ballot measures that may arise in other jurisdictions where the puc has property or functions. >> land owner and there is is a special assessment or special use district or anything that talks about the assessed value, we will get a ballot. we don't get them very often. we don't get to vote on city ordinances or city rules or those things, but as a land owner, if santa clara is going to create a historic district and we are go-our property is in that, we get a yes/no vote if tied to

assessment to the property. so, those ballots come in, they go to the department of real estate and city administration and come over here and then people wonder who gets the vote on this. when we were trying to gather up the things, that's why we decided that happens and doesn't get reported anywhere, it is just one thing that is out there and so, [indiscernible] that's why it is on there. it has happened. >> okay. i think that's it for me. thank you. >> alrighty. >> i have questions i can go after you. >> okay, i just wanted to thank you and your team for putting this together. this is obvious ly a very very heavy lift in terms of all the work that went into this, and also, thank you for updating a lot of this that needed to be addressed.

it hasn't been done since 2009 and real estate, 2015. trying to-my feeling about this is that, it is making the puc more efficient and kind of updating and addressing a lot of changes the board of supervisors made and making sure that is incorporated, especially the area about the mou's. just having that level of communication is critical and having it written down i think that's what you know, in the future like commissioner ajami said, this is a blueprint for the future and i think there are some safety measures in here if i can use that term in terms of the quarterly report and then also the ability to consult with the general manager or the commission

president to address anything that we would like to either add to the consent calendar or regular calendar, so i want to thank everyone on your team for a lot of work on this. i really appreciate it. go ahead commissioner ajami. >> two things. by the way, when we worked on those items, who ends up voting the general manager? >> the general manager. >> is the one that signs the ballot? >> yeah. >> so, i'm still very hung on the $25 million and 10 years thing. i'm not sure where the number is and where the year should be, but i would like to see if there is a way we can change that without necessary-continuing the item,

but figuring out that number and voting on it. is that a possibility or no? >> yes, this line right here, we are talking one line on the matrix. it is 25 and 10 years. it used to be $10 million is what it was on the old one, and we moved that to 25. that is the change. the 10 years is-was a implied on the old one, so it is what was there, but there was no things. we pulled in because there- >> i like the year, that is a good idea because it gives the and thing. >> we added that in, but it was up to 1, 15 years ago up to 1, 1 to 10, 10 and above.

what we proposed is moving it up to 1, 1 to 25, 25 and above. that's the real move. the years are kind of new, because--but, that's the number you are talking about. >> if i might, mr. flynn, for my perspective i don't have a problem if this were approved today to revisit what our experience is on the number and come back in a year to see if that number works or doesn't work for you and we see how that works. this is put together based on our best thoughts and experience of where we have been, but from our perspective, the number isn't in stone and we are happy to see what our experience is and come back and see if needs adjustment. >> could i be clear what we are talking

about. are we talking construction award? whether on consent calendar versus regular? >> yes. >> thank you. >> if we change the number of years could we pass it today or no? that is my question. $25 million, but 5 years? >> if you like to adjust the numbers as between consent and regular, that is something we can do and it isn't a significant change to bring something down, just because between those two

items, because it isn't dictated by law, it is a policy decision. >> okay. and i know i appreciate you saying this, because i think you and i had conversation last year or year before how things end up in consent versus regular calendar. maybe we can just actually change the year. i don't mind keeping the money on $25 million, but needs to be less then $25 million and less then 5 years. >> [indiscernible] >> i think--i will leave it to chair. i think that's a--i don't know how they go about doing that. >> so, you have to make a motion to approve it, approve the matrix or policy with that proposed

change. >> okay. okay. is that okay with you? >> that's fine. is that something if we have consensus with that or-i know president paulson isn't present. i dont know if that has any impact on our vote. >> it doesn't. you have quorum. >> alright. we would have to open up to public comment before we did that. are there any comments or questions regarding item 7? >> i am sorry, i thought that you commissioner ajami were going in the opposite direction that you didn't want to change the years but did want to change the money. now you are saying, leave the money amounts as they are on the matrix, but you want to shorten the time period? >> basically, in my engineer

mind, i'm dividing 25 to 10 by 10 and like, that means 2 and $2 and a half million a year. so, if i change the number of years i we can do either. we keep the years, change the money threshold. or change the-keep the money and change the time threshold. either way you end up with more -you get to see a lot more of these items that are sort of big chunk of money, but needs to be spent over shorter period of time. that's what i'm trying to achieve. therefore, $25 million need to spend within 5 years, if it needs to be spnt within 6 years then they have to come to to be on regular calendar. >> if i understand the math you just

gave us, if we shortened it to 5 years, then we are talking about $5 million a year. rough calculation, i get that. >> right. >> you are trying to increase the amount that the general manager could approve to be spent on for each year. >> not necessarily-this is a and. either the money needs to be certain number, or the number of years needs to go beyond certain number of years. >> yeah. >> i hear you. maybe i'm going backwards so maybe we need to increase the number of years. >> if you are trying to get to the department being able to spend less each year-- >> that's not the case. i'm trying to figure out-this

is what i'm trying to figure out--if you are putting a pipeline today, which is like a mile long and is going to cost $25 million and 10 years, and then another project comes around that will put a quarter mile pipe and cost $25 million and 10 years, then somehow we need to see how these things line up or $25 million--just try ing to figure how we can tighten in a way if a project is being over-charged, we will have a chance seeing somebody presenting it to us and having discussion around it. >> okay. i don't have a strong feeling either way, because i think both the consent calendar and regular calendar

come to us and we can comment on it or pull it off the calendar if we don't feel it is appropriate. pull it off consent if we don't feel-- >> one gets discussion, one doesn't as much get discussion. one gets a presentation, one dozent get a presentation. so it is a little bit more-there is more transparency in the process if there is something that is presented to you and you have discussion and you hear more about the project. >> deputy flynn, would you like to-- >> maybe i can make a proposal here that would sort of get what i think is going on here. if we moved it to the less then $20 million, so anything more then $20 million or 10 years, that tightens those two numbers together there. it still gives us the room above 10 which we have 15 years ago, so we are not in 2009, there is no construction contract like that now, but it

is somewhere in between there. if you wanted to amend it to be the award construction contract line, 4th box and consent and regular moving it to 25 to 20 in both those boxes. i don't know whether that is a change that could be made. councilor. >> that can be done as a proposed amendment during the meeting. >> alright. anymore discussion or quadratic equations regarding the pipelines? >> from my understanding that is a proposal that commissioner ajami is making is to on the road it says award construction under chapter 6. under consent it is greater then threshold amount and less then

$20 million dollar and less then 10 years. anything on consent has to meet both of those criteria under 20- >> yes. i'm still thinking about the number, but we can have public comment and maybe then land on a number. >> okay. director, can you open this up to public comment, please? >> remote callers, please raise your hand if you like to comment on item 7? any members present who wish to comment on this item? moderator, if there are callers with their hand up. >> ms. lennear, there are two callers who wish to be recognized. >> go ahead, please. >> caller, i unmuted your line. you have two minutes. >> hello, this is steve. can someone explain what happens if a design build item that was part

of this at a earlier time i believe? >> caller--go ahead. mr. lawrence, this is your opportunity to provide comment. no response will be given during public comment. >> okay. well, the other aspect of this is, i wish to remind you that 25 years ago the people brought-the commission had so much difficulty, the puc had no financial difficulty, that there was a freeze on rates. since that time, things have

certainly changed dramatically, but i hope that the commission will not advocate its responsibility to keep on top of the finances of this organization, which is [indiscernible] not only that freeze, but also corruption since then. >> thank you caller for your comments. caller, i unmuted your line. you have two minutes. >> thank you. this is peter dreckmyer, tuolumne river trust. this makes me nervous. commission which is supposed to provide oversight [indiscernible] if the puc is [indiscernible] commission is differential. this proposal makes the problem worse.

it comes across as a staff power grab. staff ignores comments and suggestions and the problems identified keep getting worse. commissioner requests also get ignored. i remind you of commissioner ajami's request last november for a sensitivity analysis looking how water sales projected impact the budget. we heard nothing. [indiscernible] convinced him to lift commissioner request on advanced calendar, then had to get him to list due dates. once he left the commission, all that quitely disappeared. couple years ago the commission changed the rules of order moving general public comment to the end of the meeting. commissioner ajami's name was [indiscernible] but couldn't believe it was her idea. she is very transparent to the public. [indiscernible] request for communication leading up to that item. i was denied based on attorney client communication. illegal use that. earlier this year, 3

commissioners returned general public comment beginning of the agenda. it was wonderful. the first time i heard someone on the commission make a motion other then the staff recommendation. staff has gotten away with that so long it is now part of the culture. if i were in your shoes i would reject the proposal outright, but at least give the public a opportunity to understand it and weigh in. don't allow yourself to be pressured into rushing something you will likely reject. like general public comment. thank you. >> thank you caller for your comments. ms. lennear, there are no callers that wish to be recognized. >> thank you. >> i like to make a motion or request a motion and second to approve item 7 with the changes discussed by deputy flynn in regards to our previous discussion. specifically--i don't know what those

changes are, i just want to make sure we get those correct. >> i like to suggest we do $20 million, 5 years. sounds good? >> it is up to you. i think the staff have a harder time on the shorter years. we really did look and say how many contracts. we haven't looked ed at 5 years. we looked at various thresholds so i don't have a reaction as to what that does. >> this is-we can easily bring this back as suggested. we can do 20 million, 5 years, revisit it within a year. if this ends up populating our items in a way that is over

[indiscernible] we have such long meetings or things are used less in general sort of regular calendar, we can go back and revisit, right? even now, we don't have like-we have meetings that are quite timely and sometimes shorter, sometimes a little longer, so obviously this is not going to significant change if we go down to number of years and the amount, right? >> manager herrera, do you have any comments? >> i think deputy general manager, we looked at a certain amount and did certain evaluation. we tried to make a proposal we thought would accommodate your request, but if that's not-we have to look at that. so, i would say we pull the item and continue it. >> that's fine. maybe then if you want to continue it

you can come back with data and how that impacts the consent and regular calendar. >> i just have a comment to add if i may. i like the idea of lowering the amount of money that the differentiation between consent and regular calendar on construction award line item. i really am not as concerned about the length of time, so i would be-if we want to continue it and get more information that's okay too. i just am more concerned about the threshold amount of money between the consent calendar and regular calendar more so then the length of time. >> i understand for policy perspective that is something for you to decide. if you can come to agreement oen the years,thalities polk fine. if it is going to reduce the

number of years, i have to continue the item. i leave that to you all. >> can somebody explain to me why number of years matter so much? >> it isn't i'm necessarily sure. when we were doing this, we were looking at numbers, where we started and went and how many contracts given out in the last 5 years and frankly, i think we were looking at dollars. there was no limit on time, so we were adding a limit to add clarity here. it was silent on that before. because 10 years is--the 10 years is a new limitation that didn't exist so we were adding in this, if it is bigger then that could be a really big thing and go over here. it didn't, it was just numbers before. it was 1 to 10, 10 and above.

1 to 25 we could have stopped there, but this was a attempt to bring some more in but we didn't look at this how many we are giving that are 5 years. we didn't do that, so it isn't i have a philosophical problem, i look at it and so i don't want-- >> so we don't know what would that-- >> yeah, so my proposal is that we go to the 20 and we go to the-keep it at 10, and we come back and we look what those numbers are and we tell you how many number of contracts. if you want to change at that point and look at it it will have make a matter do t but i would like to move this forward. it is continued a number of times. part that i was on vacation and part a number of things. >> part is because i asked you because i wasn't here-- >> totally fine, but there is a

lot in here and lot of staff work in here and so i'm reluctant to say yes to something i haven't looked at. i feel comfortable on the money stuff. that is completely your criteria so if you want to lower that and think that will be--that is still operationally good for us. i just-we came up with a new limitation and didn't think about is this new limitation we are adding that didn't exist before to be big. it was-could have been a 20 year contract. it didn't matter. we thought that 10 years just adding a new thing way of talking about a big contract, but didn't analyze the other way at all. >> if i may, maybe the 10 year makes sense to me just because we are used to that charter section, 9.118 where the cut-off is 10 years for certain

kinds of contracts that have to go to the board of supervisors, so 10 seems like a reasonable number to me, but it may be i have gotten used to the charter requirements. >> i think you put your hand on why that number came from. it is number we are all used to and exists throughout the thing. there was no number on it, so we pulled that sort of in, but it wasn't-- this again, you are really discussing what is on consent and are what is on regular. this is-i would like to leave here today with something passed. if we [indiscernible] where that fits and of course because [indiscernible] just saying you are asking me how do i feel about that and i can't- >> because i have to ask you. look, there is you know

operational efficiency versus transparency and they should not go against one another. we are not necessarily involving a day to day operation of this place, but i also want to make sure again, i'm emphasizing the fact that you will have to different combination of management, commission, board, and you want to make sure this organization survives under any of those. any political or manage or any kind of storm that can come and go. that's why i have to ask that question, because it is important and remember, it hasn't been long since we have come out of all the drama this organization has gone through. i was brought in during that process. i can't forget that. for me, every question is, is this going to be good for the

organization, or is it not going to be good for the organization. i'm happy to go with 20/10, but i do not want to sit here for a year and wait for results. if you want something to pass today, maybe by the next few meetings we will have a item maybe can be general manager report that shows data on how we came up with these numbers, because the way you are presenting to me, there was a lot of conversation, we decided these numbers. some data was hopefully involved in this process and i would like to see that data, then i can make that decision a little more-in a more educated way. now, if we go 20/10 and you bring me the data and i look at all these different contracts that have gone through and we figure out oh,

this is totally fine, that is fine and we don't need to revisit, but if it is not, we can think about how we can change this to make it work. i'm not necessarily--look, i'm not a lawyer, i'm not detailed-dont have a super detailed understanding of the code, beyond the water code, so for me it is like all these things is more does it work, does it not work, is it going to be right or not going to be right and majority of the public is going to look that way. >> i'm happy to come back with information about construction contracts in terms of dollars and time, so we can put that together and we will bring it back and i will leave to the general manager to decide whether that is a communication- >> it won't be communication, we'll make a presentation.

>> i agree. i like to move this forward today. there is a lot of discussion and lot of staff work on the matrix. i am comfortable with it 10 year period of time and happy to change the $25 million $10 year period of time and happy to change the $25 million number to $20 million and i think we'll have a report on that continuum of where the contracts land where the construction contracts land, but i also think the quarterly reports and i think this commission's attention to both the consent calendar and regular calendar gives me comfort that we will continue to be transparent and responsible on these issues, whether or not on consent or regular calendar. i like to move this forward today too and see more information from

staff. >> i like to reyest motion and second to approve item 7 as written with more discussion to follow on certain aspects of contract-- >> [indiscernible] we change the number, threshold to 20million. >> 20 and 10. >> $20 million and-we went from $25 million to $20 million. can we amend the number? >> i like to request a motion and vecd to approve items 7 with the $7 with the change of 20million and a 10 year maximum-is that acceptable language? >> i will make the motion and just to be clear what we are amend ing is line item for awarding contraction and the column is the consent calendar column and regular calendar column

that reflect the change from the $25 million to $20 million number in both of those columns. >> thank you. >> so moved. >> second that. >> director, may we have roll call, please? >> rivera, aye. ajami, aye. stacey, aye. we have a quorum. >> >> item 8 has been removed so will you read item 9, please? >> yes. approve the appropriation of earthquake safety and emergency response tent twen and 2014 general obligation bonds. >> good afternoon again. laura bush, the deputy cfo

hoping the item should be quick and easy. this should be relatively unconsverseulum. we are asking your permission to ask the board of supervisor to appropriate $6 million of interest earnings sitting in a bank account at the treasury, sf treasury, and this is earned on go bond proceeds and this money is intended for the emergency fire fighting project. it is budget supplemental because this money isn't legally appropriated in the current budget. we are asking for additional supplemental to use the $6 million, it is just sitting there in a bank account for this project. i will hand it over to josh anderson from infrastructure to walk you through what the project is about. thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners.

can i have the slides, please? i'm josh from the project management bureau. we are looking to reinvest the 2010, 14 bonds, interest earnings from the bonds. part of the reason we are asking to use this is we are looking at a funding gap coming up temporary. this helps bridge the gap and we use for planning and design. we use for the west side potable

emergency fire fighting water system as well as the fire boat [indiscernible] this slide shows the financing-funding on the program. i want to draw your tension to the green portion. the $9 million on 2020. this is where we are working mostly, 2020. we have about $9 million available, but that funding is accounted for. $5 million is about to be appropriated for the 20 motorized street valve project. that is construction and construction management. we also have a new pro-163 contract coming up and the other one is [indiscernible] we have a claim issue, so that takes us all the way

through that $9 million and on the next slide, i'll talk about the other funds we have coming up for the program. this is used for planning and design. we have a future funding for two more user bond sales. one in january 2025 for $41 million, and one in 2026 for $75 million. those funds will be used for the remainder for design and into construction. and after that, we are looking to go to ballot measure for 2028. this gives a idea where the funding is and how to appropriate the interest earnings. the summary of the proposed action is to approve the appropriation of 2010 and 2014 general obligation bonds interest earnings in amount of 6

million, 180, [indiscernible] for earthquake firefighter water system project and authorize the general manager to submit capital project supplemental appropriation ordinance and associate bond authorization to the mayor and board of supervisors. that's all we have and can take any questions. >> thank you for that report. any questions regarding this? i did have one question. you mentioned pump station 2. i'm trying to see what work needs to be done there. i thought it was just rehabilitated. >> there was a claim issue that came up that is about $1.2 million. >> can you specify, what do you mean a claim? >> with the construction. not familiar with it details because i'm relatively new but i can

get more information and bring it back if you like. >> yeah, i just like to--i'll talk to-that's fine. can we open up to public comment? >> maybe this goes to mrs. bush. what's the long-term strategy on this? $6 million here, then what? >> the project is funded through go bond, not through sfpuc. >> i was wondering that. >> this is a rare beast, so this is go bond funding. >> okay. >> these go bond have been sold by the controller office and dpw and puc and the money is transferred to the projects. as josh mentioned, the small $6 million we like to appropriate will bridge the gap until the next planned issuances go bonds under the program.

>> got it. okay. thank you. >> director, can you open up to public comment? >> yes. remote callers, please raise your hand if qulou you wish to provide comment on item 9? do we have any members present who wish to provide comment on this item? moderator, any callers with their hand raised? >> ms. lennear, there are no callers in the queue. >> thank you. >> i like to request a motion and second to approve item number 9. >> i'll move. >> second. >> may we have roll call, please? >> vice president rivera, aye. commissioner ajami, aye. commissioner stacey, aye. you have a quorum. >> please read the next item. >> approve amendment number 1 to

contract number pro.0138c engineering for dams and reservoirs with aecom technical service inc. >> may i have the slides, please? good afternoon commissioners. my name is ted lee with the sfpuc here this afternoon to request approval of amendment 1 to contract number pro138c engineering service for dams and reservoirs. after the orville dam failure in 2017, the california division of safety of dams sent letters to all the dam owners in the state of california requesting condition assessments of their still ways that are under dsod

jurisdiction. so, we advertised pro138 a, b and c in late 2019 for all dams and reservoirs from hetch hetchy, all the way down to the city. pro138c covers facilities shown here in the east bay, the peninsula and in the city. at the time of advertisement, the capital plan for the pro138c projects had a budget of 81.5 million based on what we assumed at the time. meanwhile dsod they were learning and analyzing repairing orville so imposed additional requirements as they learned, so these requirements and analysis were put on dam owners in the years that fallowed. so, we since completed some of the needs assessments on several of

these facilities and these assessments helped define project scopes. we significantly increased our budget to $208.9 million to reflect these updated needs. so, this slide shows the projects in 138c on the left, the current phase of each project, the current contract budget, and our proposed amendment 1 modifications. the original contract is $1 modifications. the original contract is an leave million 11 year pool contract where we list the selection of pre-determined projects that this contract will support. this type of contract provides flexibility to us in professional service support throughout project planning, design and construction. so, we funded these task orders

under the contract based on project criticality and priority. we did not assign a set aside amount of the $11 million for each of the projects there on the left. as the work was really not known prior the condition assessment of work. now we know more, in amendment one on the right side, we are asking for additional $9 million with no additional time to continue planning and engineering design for several of these projects. san andres dam, turner dam, [indiscernible] sunset reservoir and university mound reservoir, so it is a significant increase on the contract but a intentional evolution of the work based on project criticality and priority, so i'll do a quick review of each of these dams.

san andres dam, [indiscernible] the second bullet shows the budget for when the contract was advertised, in this case $25.7 million, versus the budget in the capital plan, increase to 32.2. for turning dam, east bay, we are addressing recommendations in the turner dam still way condition assessment report. this project is pretty much stayed the same in terms of dollar value. for [indiscernible] also on the peninsula, we are looking to address seismic stability through upgrades to the dam, spill way and outlet works. sunset south basin in the city, we analyze embankment, reservoir, roof and structural components. for university mound south basin, also

in the city, seismic strengthening of the roof structure and other structural elements such as divider walls, liners, gate towers and inlet/outlet conduit. so, this slide is the same slide as the earlier slide and adds additional column on the right for rough order of magnitude request of future capacity as planning and design work continue on these projects. so, we anticipate that we will need to find other means for contracting capacity to do the work, which may utilize existing as needed contracts for smaller efforts, or most likely a new rfp. or we can come back to the commission for future amendment to pro138c. from a funding perspective however, as the projects move through condition assessment and planning and we keep learning more and update our scopes and

our budget-that is taken into consideration in the 10 year capital planning and budget process. happy to take any questions. >> thank you mr. lee. commissioners, any questions or comments? commission stacey. >> thank you for the presentation and clarifying other means. i was thinking there other sources of money we would be tapping into. this is big increase and you mentioned we are looking at criticality of certain dams and reservoirs. it also seemed from the staff report as though you were not only anticipating regulatory changes, different standards implemented following the orville dam analysis and that you were watching to see what dsod was doing and so you are

not only responding to changes that are already taking place, but trying to anticipate what might be coming in the future based on what you see happening else where in the state. did i understand correctly? >> yes, dsod is doing their analysis and they learn then they think maybe we should get these state dam owners to do this too and so then they continue to pass down requirements onto us. >> it looks particularly on the [indiscernible] dam there is a wade range from 0 to $64 million. i assume you are evaluating and that is why there is the wide range on your slide. the status here--see the slides.

the conceptual engineering, so end of planning is march 2025, so by then we will have a pretty good idea which alternative is the best. >> great. >> and which we move into design. >> good. it just seemed there had to be a fairly wide range of possibilities given the raisk raisk of cost. >> imposed reservoir restriction so we are at water level lower, so there were different alternatives we were looking at whether to operate with reduced reservoir restriction forever more and the most extreme is build a brand new pil a rcitos. >> thank you. >> commissioner jaumy. ajumy. ajami. >> glad to see sthis and we have a very old and functioning and wonderful system that needs attention and i think

it is important to pay attention to these dams, especially the older they are, the more maintenance they need and it cost more to operate them. so, i was glad to see this and hopefully--depends on a lot of storage, so that storage, all the dams are quite important to our system. so, i look forward seeing how this progresss. >> thank you. >> alright. thank you. director, can you open up to public comment, please? >> remote callers raise your hand if you wish to comment on item 10. do we have any members of the public present who wish to comment on this item? moderator, any callers with their hand raised? >> ms. lennear, there are no callers in the queue. >> thank you. >> alright. i like to request a motion and second to approve item 10. >> move to approve the

amendment. >> second? okay. may we please have a roll call? >> vice president rivera, aye. >> commissioner ajami, aye. commissioner stacey, aye. we have a quorum. >> please read the next item. >> we have a public hearing to approve the irrigation controller rebate program. >> good afternoon commissioners. my name is julie ortiz and manage the water conversation section and want to introduce team member sergio ramirez here today and we are seeking your approval today to establish a new irrigation controller rebate program to encourage customers with irrigated landscapes to water efficiently. to give context, we estimate

landscape irrigation use represents about 12 percent of total retail customer sector use. many water utilities in california offer rebates for instillation of smart irrigation controllers. the pacific institute of water sufficiency program supports our plan to establish this program and market to customers who may be over-irrigating. this program ised a ministered in-house by puc staff like our other conservation rebates and we plan to launch january 2025 where your approval. the program will provide rebates off the purchase cost for qualifying ep a water certified weather based or soil moisture based irrigation controllers that are installed in existing irrigated landscape in the retail service area. we are proposing two pricing levels for the rebates based on the size and complexity of irrigated landscape.

for small landscape typically find at a single family home or small multi-family or small commercial site, we would provide a maximum rebate of up to $250 for qualifying controller up to 2 controllers per customer and large landscape over 10 thousand square feet with irrigation systems that serve many zones, we will provide up to $35 per active station. these large sites would generally be more like parks, ball fields, large apartment and ho a complexes or campus like settings. again, for perspective, large irrigation systems in our service area, may have 25 to hundred active stations with some up to 200 active stations. we base proposed rebate amounts looking what or water utilities are doing and setting so it is a substantive rebate, which could represent between

50 up to hundred percent of the controller purchase cost depending on the size of the landscape. participation requires applicants to get a free landscape assessment from the puc conservation team that enable to give site specific guidance. water [indiscernible] two type of controllers, weather based irrigation controllers that use local weather and landscape conditions to taylor watering schedules and soil moisture based irrigation controllers that monitor moisture levels in the soil to prevent irrigation when water isn't needed. both types of controller are considered smart technology. poorly scheduled irrigation is a key cause of over-watering at some properties and for the sites replacing or upgrading conventional irrigation timer with water sense labeled

smart controllers could reduce water waste. the new rebate will expand the suite of outdoor assistance with free evaluation [indiscernible] community garden irrigation meter grant program, rebates for rain barrels and sis turns training and measures. we plan to promote the new program with landscape for focus on sites we identified through the landscape assessments as being top users, having leaks or other potential water waste. we also plan to do direct outreach to customers to garden and home supply stores and contractors. we will have articles in current and have social media posts and ads. that concludes my remarks and happy to answer any questions. >> thank you mrs. ortiz. commissioner ajami. >> thank you.

obviously i'm very excited about this. that is wonderful. i is a neighbor that constantly her irrigation is running and water going through the streets and it drives me crazy. as you can imagine and i hope maybe i can gift one of these to them. but, on that topic, i'm very glad to see this, but since we have you here, you know, i often when i go to the golden gate park i see every grass area or irrigation is over-watering where they are being used and i wonder if we can sort of work with park and rec on that as well and try to help them to do some of these smart irrigation systems. it is just again, makes me crazy to see-i know they are using recycled water, but using a lot of resources and

energy to turn the wastewater to recycled water, so i'm just asking you to see if you can look into that and let us know what we can do. >> absolutely. we certainly will be letting rec and park and our big muni department agencies that have irrigated landscape know about our program and i imagine they will be interested in participating. >> i hope so. please keep us posted. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> director, can you open up to public comment? >> remote callers, raise your hand if you wish to comment on item 11. do we have members present who wish to comment on this item? moderator, any callers with their hand raised? >> ms. lennear, there are no callers in the queue. >> thank you. >> alright. i like to request a motion and second to approve item 11. >> i move to approve.

>> second. >> may we please have a roll call? >> vice president rivera, aye. commissioner ajami, aye. commissioner stacey, aye. you have a quorum. >> please read the next item. >> next item 12, communications. >> i don't think there is comments on this. alright. so, let's move to the next item, item 13. items initiated by commissioners? discussion? okay. item 14, please. >> item 14 is public comment on the matter to be addressed before closed session. remote callers, please raise your hand

if you wish to comment on item 14. do we have members of the public present who wish to provide comment? moderator, are there any callers with their hand raised? >> ms. lennear, there are no callers in the queue. >> please read item 15. >> item 15, motion on whether to assert the attorney-client privilege regarding the matter listed. >> may i have a motion on whether to assert the attorney/client privilege regarding closed session matters agendized as conference with legal counsel? >> move to assert the attorney client privilege. >> i second that. >> may i have a roll call, please? vote. >> vice president rivera, aye. commissioner ajami, aye.

commissioner stacey, aye. you have a quorum. >> alright. we'll go into closed session. [meeting reconvened] >> alrighty. item number 17, the commission is recommending that the board approve the settlement referenced in item 16. director, please read the next item. >> we need a vote not to disclose. >> move-- >> i was asking-i could read it. item 18, a motion regarding whether to disclose the discussion during closed session pursuant to san

francisco administrative code, 67.12 a. i would like someone-request a motion not to disclose discussions during closed session. >> move to not disclose the conversation in closed session. >> can we have roll call vote, please? >> vice president rivera, aye. commissioner ajami, aye. commissioner stacey, aye. you have a quorum. >> adjourned. [meeting adjourned]

>> long it was in fashion, o'shaughnessy water system has been sustainable. in addition to providing water for the bay area, it also generates clean hydroelectric power to run city buildings and services. and more recently, some san francisco homes and businesses. >> satellite electricity is greenhouse gas free, so we see a tremendous benefit from that. we really are proud of the fact that, we've put our water to work. >> even with the system as well coon received as hetch hetchy,

climate change has made the supply of water from the sierra vulnerable. and requires new thinking about where and how we use water. >> we have five hundred million gallons a day of wastewater being dumped out into san francisco bay and the ocean from the bay area alone. and that water could be recycled and should be recycled for reuse through out the bay area. >> we're looking at taking wastewater and reading it to drink watering standards. we're also looking at our generation and looking at onsite water reuse looking at the technology and strategies we have available to us today. >> the very first recycling plant in the state of california for landscape irrigation was built in san francisco. we've just developed a new recycled water plant in the ocean side wastewater facility for irrigation purposes in golden gate park, lincoln park and the panhandle. >> a century ago, san francisco

built a dam to create bunched znswer of fresh water to ensure the future and ensure the taps will flow for future generations, it will take as much vision when it reflects a fundamental change about how we think about water. >> i think we recognize there's going to be change in the future. so we're going to have to have the flexibility and the creativity to deal with that future as it's presented to us, it's a matter of how to see it and say, okay, let's make wise use of everything we have. >> this o'shaughnessy centennial moment is made possibbbbbbbbbbbb

when i shoot chinatown, i shoot the architecture that people not just events, i shoot what's going on in daily life and everything changes. murals, graffiti, store opening. store closing. the bakery. i shoot anything and everything in chinatown. i shoot daily life. i'm a crazy animal. i'm shooting for fun.

that's what i love. >> i'm frank jane. i'm a community photographer for the last i think about 20 years. i joined the chinese historical society. it was a way i could practice my society and i can give the community memories. i've been practicing and get to know everybody and everybody knew me pretty much documenting the history i don't just shoot events. i'm telling a story in whatever photos that i post on facebook, it's just like being there from front to end, i do a good job and i take hundreds and

hundreds of photos. and i was specializing in chinese american history. i want to cover what's happening in chinatown. what's happening in my community. i shoot a lot of government officials. i probably have thousands of photos of mayor lee and all the dignitaries. but they treat me like one of the family members because they see me all the time. they appreciate me. even the local cops, the firemen, you know, i feel at home. i was born in chinese hospital 1954. we grew up dirt poor. our family was lucky to grew up. when i was in junior high, i had a degree in hotel management restaurant. i was working in the restaurant business for probably about 15

years. i started when i was 12 years old. when i got married, my wife had an import business. i figured, the restaurant business, i got tired of it. i said come work for the family business. i said, okay. it's going to be interesting and so interesting i lasted for 30 years. i'm married i have one daughter. she's a registered nurse. she lives in los angeles now. and two grandsons. we have fun. i got into photography when i was in junior high and high school. shooting cameras. the black and white days, i was able to process my own film. i wasn't really that good because you know color film and processing was expensive and i kind of left it alone for about 30 years.

i was doing product photography for advertising. and kind of got back into it. everybody said, oh, digital photography, the year 2000. it was a ghost town in chinatown. i figured it's time to shoot chinatown store front nobody. everybody on grand avenue. there was not a soul out walking around chinatown. a new asia restaurant, it used to be the biggest restaurant in chinatown. it can hold about a 1,000 people and i had been shooting events there for many years. it turned into a supermarket. and i got in.

i shot the supermarket. you know, and its transformation. even the owner of the restaurant the restaurant, it's 50 years old. i said, yeah. it looks awful. history. because i'm shooting history. and it's impressive because it's history because you can't repeat. it's gone it's gone. >> you stick with her, she'll teach you everything. >> cellphone photography, that's going to be the generation. i think cellphones in the next two, three years, the big cameras are obsolete already. mirrorless camera is going to take over market and the cellphone is going to be better. but nobody's going to archive

it. nobody's going to keep good history. everybody's going to take snapshots, but nobody's going to catalog. they don't care. >> i want to see you. >> it's not a keepsake. there's no memories behind it. everybody's sticking in the cloud. they lose it, who cares. but, you know, i care. >> last september of 2020, i had a minor stroke, and my daughter caught it on zoom. i was having a zoom call for my grand kids. and my daughter and my these little kids said, hey, you sound strange. yeah. i said i'm not able to speak

properly. they said what happened. my wife was taking a nap and my daughter, she called home and said he's having a stroke. get him to the hospital. five minutes later, you know, the ambulance came and took me away and i was at i.c.u. for four days. i have hundreds of messages wishing me get well soon. everybody wished that i'm okay and back to normal. you know, i was up and kicking two weeks after my hospital stay. it was a wake-up call. i needed to get my life in order and try to organize things especially organize my photos. >> probably took two million photos in the last 20 years.

i want to donate to an organization that's going to use it. i'm just doing it from the heart. i enjoy doing it to give back to the community. that's the most important. give back to the community. >> it's a lot for the community. >> i was a born hustler. i'm too busy to slow down. i love what i'm doing. i love to be busy. i go nuts when i'm not doing anything. i'm 67 this year. i figured 70 i'm ready to retire. i'm wishing to train a couple for photographers to take over my place. the younger generation, they have a passion, to document the history because it's going to be forgotten in ten years, 20

years, maybe i will be forgotten when i'm gone in a couple years but i want to be remembered for my work and, you know, photographs will be a remembrance. i'm frank jane. i'm a community photographer. this is my story. >> when you're not looking, frank's there. he'll snap that and then he'll send me an e-mail or two and they're always the best. >> these are all my p p p p p p

>> i don't think you need to be an expert to look around and see the increasing frequency of

fires throughout california. they are continuing at an ever-increasing rate every summer, and as we all know, the drought continues and huge shortages of water right now. i don't think you have to be an expert to see the impact. when people create greenhouse gases, we are doing so by different activities like burning fossil fuels and letting off carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and we also do this with food waste. when we waste solid food and leave it in the landfill, it puts methane gas into the atmosphere and that accelerates the rate at which we are warming our planet and makes all the effects of climate change worse. the good news is there are a lot of things that you can be doing, particularly composting and the added benefit is when the compost is actually applied to the soil, it has the ability to reverse climate change by pulling carbon out of the

atmosphere and into the soil and the t radios. and there is huge amount of science that is breaking right now around that. >> in the early 90s, san francisco hired some engineers to analyze the material san francisco was sending to landfill. they did a waste characterization study, and that showed that most of the material san francisco was sending to landfill could be composted. it was things like food scraps, coffee grounds and egg shells and sticks and leaves from gardening. together re-ecology in san francisco started this curbside composting program and we were the first city in the country to collect food scraps separately from other trash and turn them into compost. it turns out it was one of the best things we ever did. it kept 2.5 million tons of material out of the landfill, produced a beautiful nutrient

rich compost that has gone on to hundreds of farms, orchards and vineyards. so in that way you can manage your food scraps and produce far less methane. that is part of the solution. that gives people hope that we're doing something to slow down climate change. >> i have been into organic farming my whole life. when we started planting trees, it was natural to have compost from re-ecology. compost is how i work and the soil biology or the microbes feed the plant and our job as regenerative farmers is to feed the microbes with compost and they will feed the plant. it is very much like in business where you say take care of your employees and your employees will take carolinas of your customers. the same thing. take care of the soil microbes and soil life and that will feed and take care of the plants.

>> they love compost because it is a nutrient rich soil amendment. it is food for the soil. that is photosynthesis. pulling carbon from the atmosphere. pushing it back into the soil where it belongs. and the roots exude carbon into the soil. you are helping turn a farm into a carbon sink. it is an international model. delegations from 135 countries have come to study this program. and it actually helped inspire a new law in california, senate bill 1383. which requires cities in california to reduce the amount of compostable materials they send to landfills by 75% by 2025. and san francisco helped inspire this and this is a nation-leading policy. >> because we have such an immature relationship with nature and the natural cycles and the carbon cycles, government does have to step in and protect the commons, which is soil, ocean, foryes, sir, and so forth.

-- forest, and so fors. we know that our largest corporations are a significant percentage of carbon emission, and that the corporate community has significant role to play in reducing carbon emissions. unfortunately, we have no idea and no requirement that they disclose anything about the carbon footprint, the core operation and sp360 stands for the basic notion that large corporations should be transparent about the carbon footprint. it makes all the sense in the world and very common sense but is controversial. any time you are proposing a policy that is going to make real change and that will change behavior because we know that when corporations have to disclose and be transparent and have that kind of accountability, there is going to be opposition. >> we have to provide technical assistance to comply with the

state legislation sb1383 which requires them to have a food donation program. we keep the edible food local. and we are not composting it because we don't want to compost edible food. we want that food to get eaten within san francisco and feed folks in need. it is very unique in san francisco we have such a broad and expansive education program for the city. but also that we have partners in government and nonprofit that are dedicated to this work. at san francisco unified school district, we have a sustainability office and educators throughout the science department that are building it into the curriculum. making it easy for teachers to teach about this. we work together to build a pipeline for students so that when they are really young in pre-k, they are just learning about the awe and wonder and beauty of nature and they are connecting to animals and things they would naturally find love

and affinity towards. as they get older, concepts that keep them engaged like society and people and economics. >> california is experiencing many years of drought. dry periods. that is really hard on farms and is really challenging. compost helps farms get through these difficult times. how is that? compost is a natural sponge that attracts and retains water. and so when we put compost around the roots of plants, it holds any moisture there from rainfall or irrigation. it helps farms make that corner and that helps them grow for food. you can grow 30% more food in times of drought in you farm naturally with compost. farms and cities in california are very hip now to this fact that creating compost, providing compost to farms helps communities survive and get through those dry periods.

>> here is the thing. soil health, climate health, human health, one conversation. if we grow our food differently, we can capture all that excess carbon in the atmosphere and store it in unlimited quantities in the soil, that will create nutrient dense foods that will take care of most of our civilized diseases. so it's one conversation. people have to understand that they are nature. they can't separate. we started prowling the high plains in the 1870s and by the 1930s, 60 year, we turned it into a dust bowl. that is what ignorance looks like when you don't pay attention to nature. nature bats last. so people have to wake up. wake up. compost. >> it is really easy to get frustrated because we have this belief that you have to be completely sustainable 24/7 in all aspects of your life. it is not about being perfect.

it is about making a change here, a change there in your life. maybe saying, you know what? i don't have to drive to that particular place today. today i am going to take the bus or i'm going to walk. it is about having us is stainable in mind. that is -- it is about having sustainability in mind. that is how we move the dial. you don't have to be perfect all the time. >> san francisco has been and will continue to be one of the greener cities because there are communities who care about protecting a special ecosystem and habitat. thinking about the history of the ohlone and the native and indigenous people who are stewards of this land from that history to now with the ambitious climate action plan we just passed and the goals we have, i think we have a dedicated group of people who see the importance of this place. and who put effort into building an infrastructure that actually makes it possible. >> we have a long history starting with the gold rush and

the anti-war activism and that is also part of the environmental movement in the 60s and 70s. and of course, earth day in 1970 which is huge. and i feel very privileged to work for the city because we are on such a forefront of environmental issues, and we get calls from all over the world really to get information. how do cities create waste programs like they do in san francisco. we are looking into the few which you are and we want innovation. we want solutions.

>> making to may grandkids a program all about pop ups, artists, non profits small business in into vacant downtown throughout the area for a three to 6 months engagement. >> i think san francisco is really bright and i wanted to be a part of it revitalization. >> i'm hillary, the owner of [indiscernible] pizza.

vacant and vibrant got into safe downtown we never could have gotten into pre-pandemic. we thought about opening downtown but couldn't afford it and a landlord [indiscernible] this was a awesome opportunity for us to get our foot in here. >> the agency is the marriage between a conventional art gallery and fine art agency. i'm victor gonzalez the founder of gcs agency. thes program is especially important for small business because it extended huge life line of resources, but also expertise from the people that have gathered around the vacant to vibrant program. it is allowed small businesses to pop up in spaces that have previously been fully

unaccessible or just out of budget. vacant to vibrant was funded by a grant from the office of economic workforce development that was part of the mayor's economic recovery budget last year so we funded our non profit partners new deal who managed the process getting folks into these spaces. >> [indiscernible] have been tireless for all of us down here and it has been incredible. certainly never seen the kind of assistance from the city that vacant to vibrant has given us, for sure. >> vacant to ibvooerant is a important program because it just has the opportunity to build excitement what downtown could be. it is change the narrative talking about ground floor vacancy and office vacancy to talking about the amazing

network of small scale entrepreneur, [indiscernible] >> this is a huge opportunity that is really happy about because it has given me space to showcase all the work i have been doing over the past few years, to have a space i can call my own for a extended period of time has been, i mean, it is incredible. >> big reason why i do this is specific to empower artist. there are a lot of people in san francisco that have really great ideas that have the work ethics, they just don't have those opportunities presented, so this has been huge lifeline i think for entrepreneurs and small businesses. >> this was a great program for us. it has [indiscernible] opening the site. we benefited from it and i think because there is diverse and different [indiscernible] able to be down here that everybody kind of benefits

from it. (music). >> today wire he emergency operations center for england with one activation so oversight board that one of the many activations have locations which probably has between to one hundred people at this time 340r7b 25 different city departments and hundreds of partner local partners and straight and fell partners we're in the echg a critical consultant of emergency center

and surcharged with the single voice communicating with media about all issues with the apec and go a lot of preparation went into stemming up this e oc and little actuated managing things as they come up and the people in the room and making sure that everyone is in the next step and doing count work of a single set of objectives with a single idealogy in mind many is having an apec that runs smoothly. >> i basically organ the agency projects and um, whatever this is in-person, transmissions have (unintelligible) to we're never (unintelligible) i will get a response right now and (unintelligible).

>> please check in. >> my role here in the agency to help the cooperation and the way to do that is by sharing information corresponding activities and some cases requesting additional resources when the cfo steady the property of the departments working at the moment and one of the first agencies that was called the energy planning for the agency that we do streets and pipes and others involving a to point b. >> and this activation there are parts of the city cut off limited access points and information is sometimes confusing and so the information that not necessarily always refined for their knowledge and

this activation is different from the activation we're waiting for something to happen if or if we don't have the resources available we we have to piecemeal it because 6 departments we are able to make things happen and from my department is the 9-1-1 features and be able services which runs the emergency operation center where we are right now. >> by insuring the rights of people to exposure the first amendment rights our job we don't want people to think that because the federal government was coming into town that for federal government will be cracking detain on protesters looking to demonstrate and also the law enforcement partners insures that people could do that while keeping everyone safe

and something we are doing. >> the jet has responder to over two had the and advising people of the impacts and plan for delays and plan their travel of entertainment commission and wounding to do that without people. >> what is happening on event like this people love individually and because they find integrity in themselves that didn't go know was there and have to rise to occasion they didn't know they'd have to and really across the board for us and the city to make us a better city. >> and really a good learning experience xrefrns city augment but amazing departments across the city working together or

working together in the same room and part of this in a meaningful way it everyone is united truly everyone. >> what we do matters a lot of i can't take credit. >> when i'm done with that all we can tie the bow on that and send it off. >> i'm he getting an opportunity to find it exciting that's what we're here to do to serve the city we love and wanting really great learning experience. >> extremely rewarding and the great relationships with the people

>> i call the san francisco public works commission. today is monday, july 22, 2024. it is 903 a.m. secretary fuller, please call the roll. >> good morning. please respond with, here, or present. warren post. , here. chair post is present. gerald turner, present. commissioner turner is present. paul woolford is absent. fady zoubi, present. vice chair zoubi is present. with three members present we have quorum. public comment is taken for informational and action items. to comment in person please line up against the wall, near the screen, the audience left. for members of the public wishing to comment on an item outside the hearing room, you may do