all the time periods as something that is important and relevant. especially here in the san francisco bay area we feel that it's relevant to the conversations that people are having today. we hope that people can carry that outside of the museum into their daily lives. >> madam secretary, would you take roll? >> president stacy, here. vice president arce, here. commissioner jamdar, here. commissioner leveroni, here. you have quorum. >> thank you. before calling the first item, i like to announce that the san francisco public utilities commission we acknowledge that we are on the unceded ancestral homeland of the ramaytush ohlone who are the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsula. as the indigenous stewards of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the ramaytush ohlone have never ceded, lost nor forgotten their

responsibilities as the caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. as guests, we recognize that we benefit from living and working on their traditional homeland. we wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the ancestors and relatives of the ramaytush community and by affirming their sovereign rights as first peoples. please call the first item.

>> approval of the minutes. of october 22, 2024. >> and the approval of the minutes of october 22 will be continued to the next meeting. do we need a motion for that? >> yes. >> could i have a motion and a second? >> so moved. >> second. >> thank you. >> president stacy, aye. vice president arce, aye. commissioner jamdar, aye. commissioner leveroni, aye. the item passes. >> thank you. next item. >> general public comment. members of the public may address the matters within the jurisdiction and not on today's agenda. >> i like to add that the commission values civic engagement and encourages respectful communication at the public

meeting. we ask that all public comments be made in the civil and courteous manner and that you refrain from the use of profanity. thank you. >> remote callers, please raise your hand if you wish to provide general public comment. any members present who wish to provide general public comment? the first card i have is for mrs. barbara folger. >> i'm a 52 year resident of san francisco and i averaged 60 gallons of water every day this year. that is 30 gallons less then requested and actually hopeful 90 gallons per day that is on my sfpuc bill. i use 33 percent less water then what the city thinks i'm going to use. like my water use, the sfpuc

water usage was lower then projected. in 23, 24 the water use was 184 million gallons a day. it was 25 less then the projected use of 216 billion gallons a day for 2025. yet for 2045 projections, water usage is expected to go up to 270 million gallons a day, or 244 million gallons a day depending on which numbers are used, even though your finance bureau projects water sales to be flat. in spice of lower water use, sfpuc is planning to invest billions of dollars for alternative water supply. this will triple my water bill from

$155 to $465. many residents won't be able to afford this. especially as they get older. only billion airs are able to afford the billions you are planning on investing. thank you for taking my statement. >> next i have fran >> my name is francisco decosters. let me inform the commission i have been giving public comment over 50 years and coming to these meetings and trying to get something positive from the commissioners is very very rare. at one time, 25 of us would come here to give public comment. now there are only two. peter and myself. you commissioners have a job to do and you all are not doing it.

and with a new president, you will see all the more how you will be caught red-handed not fulfilling certain obligations. whether it comes to climate change, whether it comes to the toxicity in our water, whether it comes to the carbon footprint from our buildings. none of which i address in the presentation. and when it comes to the sewer system improvement project, the ssip, we the people were told that you would get at least two presentations and we haven't got them in the last 5 years. you commissioners think you all are doing due diligence and hoodwinking us in broad daylight. i don't want to come to these

meetings really. i had a good talk with peter. i want to come to the meetings. peter said, you know, let's see how it works. let's see how it works. we have a population of 850-how many come for public comment? thank you very much. >> next we have resa schwartz. thank you. next we have scott wells. >> my nail is scott webb. here today to give a awareness on the item regarding the san francisco versus ep a.

over the last few months close to 5 # ongo signed on to letters and hundreds give public comment and hosted multiple rallies over 6 thousand e-mails and letters sent and leadership from supervisor melgar and peskin we held council resolution [indiscernible] the argument raised risk eliminating the epa and state citizen ability to implement substantial portions of the clean water act. [indiscernible] half a century that protects san francisco and the whole united states. san francisco actions put the ep a ability to protect clean water in the supreme court. the effects cab catastrophic. [indiscernible] watching supreme court hearing was rough and it looks like the incorrect assumption this is a narrow brief. today with [indiscernible] head of the epa [indiscernible]

intention said to [indiscernible] we are calling the sfpuc to help find a solution before the supreme court renders a hearing in the spring and give the administration-do not give the administration the opportunity to canning change the clean water act. our coalition love to meet with the commissioners and hope we find a solution together and work collaboratively so dont give trump the opportunity to rewrite the clean water act. thank you so much. >> do we have members of the public who wish to speak moderator? >> there are four callers with their hands raised. >> thank you. >> caller, your line is unmuted. >> dave warner, thank you for your services here to highlight a letter you received. summary thof presentation i made bay water steward meading.

bay area water stewards is made up of participants including sper, bay area council, [indiscernible] sierra club and tuolumne river trust. this letter highlights demand and financial information leading up to wholesale water rate protections 20years from now. the sfuc is self-funded organization. our key to keeping the organization solvent. the short version of the letter is all the demands supply scenarios 20 years from now are very expensive, more so when you take into consideration water supply should exceed demand projections. i need to correct one error in the letter and at the end of the letter i state the sfpuc is seeing the debt downgraded by a agency. that is wrong. what the rating agency did was

issue negative outlook for wastewater debt which isn't a downgrade. my apology for not correcting the error. i hope you take time to read the letter and consider findings. thank you. could you guys hear me okay? >> yes, we can. >> okay. thank you. >> thank you caller. caller, your line is unmuted. you have two minutes. >> thank you. good afternoon everyone. this is peter dreckmiler, tuolumne river trust. the design drought is major pont of contemption defined as, level of service objectives for water supply [indiscernible] 8 and a half year drought planning scenario, 87 to 92 fallowed by 96-97 [indiscernible]

265 million gallons per day, mgd. for years the 265mgd was treated as demand projection mptd in 2019 staff was forced to acknowledge it was just the contractual obligation. the 265 became known as obligation and staff began to include a separate assessment based on demand projections, which is off by average of 22 percent over the past 25 years. those numbers are highly inflated. regarding the two droughts that up the design drought, the first and third most severe droughts on record. the design drought is 72 percent more severe then the worst drought on record which is 87-92 and might expected once in 8 thousand years. removing one year reduce the need for expensive alternative water supplies by 25 mgd and used the failed projections whether then demand projections reduce

the need for alternative water supply by 37 mgd. these two actions combined save more then $11 billion and avoid stranded assets which is wurlth exploring. between 2020-and 22 hosted workshops such as demand projections climate change [indiscernible] did nothing. it was a huge embarrassment and those commissioners are now all gone. i will send a link to the workshop jz energ can you to review them and request your own workshop. >> thank you caller, your time expired. caller, your line is unmuted, you have two minutes. >> good afternoon. my name is mary butterwick. as a resident of san francisco i have a specific connection to tuolumne river. the source of my drinking water and responsibility to do what i can to support a ecosystem.

members of the public have repeatedly asked the commission to revisit the extremely conservative [indiscernible] the policy is particularly damaging to the river environment during dry periods. [audio cutting in and out] i urge the commission to reduce length of design drought by one year, apply reasonable demand projections based on finance bureau water projections and present the results to the public. these actions would facilitate meaningful dialogue on flows needed to restore the [indiscernible] last match the sacramento superior court ruled [indiscernible] state water board 2018 bay delta plan. now is time to insure flows in the tuolumne are consistent. stream flows [indiscernible] we already lost over 5 years of

progress implementing the flow standards. all salmon are in desperate need of flow. the proposed tuolumne river volunteer agreement cannot achieve these objectives. [indiscernible] by water agencies to avoid [cutting in and out] reasonable use of water in a over-appropriated river system that claim they can produce more fish with less water is [indiscernible] the seven workshops hosted by sfpuc provided ample evidence [indiscernible] i encourage the new commissioners to review the workshop videos. thank you. >> thank you caller. no more callers who wish to be recognized. >> thank you. >> thank you for the public comment. next item, please. >> item 5, report of the

general manager. >> madam president, i have nothing to report other then i want to report on conversation you and i had when i talked about over the next several months we will be scheduling for the commission various high level briefings on important issues the commission will be facing over the next several monthss and we are in the process getting those organized. >> thank you. item 6. >> item 6, bay area water supply and conservation agency report. >> public comment on [indiscernible] >> sure. would you like to comment? >> sure, sorry, i forgot public comment. >> the general manager said he has nothing to say accept there is a conversation with the chair and we heard it. what about the presentations

that are promised to the people but are not fulfilled? what is the role of the attorney that is here to remind y'all that when you make promises to the people that y'all don't treat them with destain. do you think it is right that you start the sewer system improvement project with a budget of $6 billion and now it is close to $12 billion and the people are kept in the dark? we need a general manager who is an engineer. and with a new mayor, i hope all is a change in what's happening with sfpuc.

i'm asking you commissioners to look into the indictments linked with the sfpuc. i'm asking you to bring to the attention of the people millions of dollars that have been wasted. million of dollars. calaveras, irvingten tunnel, mountain tunnel, force mains, replacement of clean water drinking pipes, replacement of sewer pipes. thank you very much. >> do we have other members of the public who wish to speak? moderator. >> madam president.

[no audio] >> that is generally correct, yes. >> thank you. >> thank you. item 6, bay area water supply conservation agency report. >> good afternoon president stacy, members of the commission and general manager herrera. i want to thank you for the opportunity before you to speak one last time to the commission as bosca.

i had conversations with commissioner stacy and she challenged me to think btd things. twive yours ago i was given the opportunity to work with san francisco and the stewardship of the remarkable hetch hetchy regional water system on behalf of 26 member agencies and the 1.8 million residents and businesses and counties throughout the bay area. reflecting on the past 25 years grateful for the challenges and accomplishments we shared and yet we are not done. looking ahead the system continues to face new challenges, including anticipated growth in the region, changing climate and increasing regulatory requirements that threaten the reliability of our water supply from the tuolumne river. in 2002, at urging of local elected officials and others outside san francisco, the state passed legislation that required san francisco to fix the earthquake water system. the water rate payers outside

of the city understood the fixing the system would triple the water rates and still these rate payers pressed the state and san francisco to do what was necessary to insure the system could continue to deliver water following earthquake. san francisco is not initially supportive, however, i believe today we all look a at the implement at 4.8 billion program as a successful and local rate payer investment in the water supply reliability. however, as we navigate future challenges we must adopt a more holistic approach. while tradition engineering might present a singular answer to these problems, that will not suffice moving forward. to address today's risk to reliability we must challenge ourselves to examine more possible outcomes and broader solution then ever before. whether those challenges

relating to development of alternative water supply program or the construction of necessary system upgrades is important bosca and puc work together to find solutions that recognize the needs of water users. as we did to successfully address emerging water challenges securing water useer support is paramount. this required trust and confident in the solution jz costs by foster transparency and open communication we can build trust and garner support for new investment in the water system essential to insuring water supply reliability. i'm pleased to be part of our continuing relationship have forged a stronger partnership through the implementation of collaborations on behalf of respective constituency. we have learned to balance our distinct responsibility and shared objectives.

i hope future leaders will continue to prioritize the balanced approach because i believe it is yielded positive results for water users and the system. i have been fortunate to have good working relationships with the commissioner members and i know bosca next chief executive officer will work with you and general manager herrera to build relationships that focus on results for water users. i want to express gratitude to the commission and puc staff for the honor of working with you on this remarkable water system on behalf of the 26 member agencies and customers it truly a honor and thank you very much. that concludes my planned remarks. >> thank you so much for your many years of work. you bring great perspective and expertise to your role and you've always approached it with a very collaborative spirit and i really appreciate that. >> been my pleasure. thank you. >> anyone else have-general

manager. >> thank you madam president. on behalf of the staff i want to thank you for your tremendous collaboration in the three years i have been here, but more so for the two decades more then two decades you have been involved as a true partner with the sfpuc on behalf of bosca and member agencies. a good advocate and partner and collaborator and appreciate all the great work you do and partnership you bring between our respective agencies, so thank you for your service. >> thank you very much, dennis. >> commissioner arce. >> thank you. ypt to say thank you for your many years of service and i can remember being advocate sitting in the audience on various audience seeing you up here and present on behalf of bosca, and you made it such effective advocacy

operation organization umbrella for the region and appreciate you in your statement you outlined the work done to bring the region along advocating and for and necessary investment thin water system. i think your roadmap is something for us to work with and we met your successor at the last meeting so look forward to the good work to continue. >> thank you very much for your kind comments. >> i do have a few more questions for you. i think it is really important that we learn as we go and i wonder if you have comments you alluded to the need for sort of a holistic and maybe more creative approach in the future. do you have a prognosis or advice for us for what we will see in the future or how we approach an uncertain future, especially with climate change

in mind. >> i wish i had a magic wand to give the answer, but i think we have done our best work when we started trying to examine possible scenarios. there is such great uncertainty in many areas, right from demand projections, reliability to climate change. what the investments need to be for system reliability and think doing a broad approach of looking at those scenarios and arare of planning greater then what we have done in the past in a way that helps bracket our solutions and helps better connect all us to the decisions that are being made. i think that's going to be the important thing. your next decisions are going to be significant. they will be expensive and i think it will be important that we have the trust of the water users to be supportive that. i had the opportunity last week

to speak before a utility advisory committee in palo alto and more then one commissioner how they continued to believe it was the right think and recognize the risk. that is where we need to get with next level of investment. it needs to be clear. we have to make it very clear for the customers why we are doing things and part is being open and examining all the possibilities and getting them to a comfort level and basca is here to do its part because we have a big role to play with you on that. >> i couldn't agree more and i think especially with the uncertainties of the future it will be really important to be as transparent as possible and also to really listen to all of the different effected parties. you mentioned in your comments the water system improvement program was a

real accomplishment and highlight. i think also the work that bosca has done managing drought and uncertainties has also been a real positive step forward. couldn't have been easy. >> no, not easy. those are the challenges, right? i think this commission and bosca, our obligations are to the water users and reliability singular have that job so it means we have to tackle tough things that if that want someone's job or their obligation, they might-it might be a easier answer and that is a part of the difficult challenge because at the end of the day it is to this body to your staff to bosca, the water users would come in and say, you knew there was a drought or we had reliability issues and you actually chose a different path. we have to stay focused on the

water user and obligation to the water user and droughts and reliability and inest vestments as we try to make tough decisions ahead. >> thank you so much for your role in all of it in the past and i don't know if you'll be keeping an eye on bosca or the puc but i hope we will hear from you if you advise or redirection. >> they are going to keep tabs on me, so not going too far. thank you very much. >> thank you so much and congratulations on your retirement. next item. sorry, public comment. would anybody like to comment? >> remote callers, raise your

hand if you like to provide comment on item 6. >> commissioners, i want to give you some history. the hetch hetchy valley was one of the most beautiful valleys in the world. if you read the history you read about john muir and a number other advocates. would you not want to dam the hetch hetchy valley. one of you-all your commissioners should read the rico act. when you read the rico act, find out who suffered the most when the hetch hetchy reservoir was created? the tribes. not once, not once, not once have you all commissioners paid

attention to the [indiscernible] the tribes. did the rico act have in mind [indiscernible] did you all have in mind [indiscernible] ? yes. why? because of greed. how much water do you all-how much do you pay for the water when you first dammed the reservoir, the hetch hetchy reservoir? now, the glaziers that were there are no more. we have finite water. okay? and i don't want to tell you who should have the water and who should not have the water. we should be ashamed in the year 2024 we flush our toilets with clean drinking water. thank you about that.

>> thank you. >> moderator. >> mrs. lennear, there are three callers with their hand raised. f >> thank you. >> caller, your line has been unmuted, you have two minutes. >> thank you. this is peter dreckmyer from tuolumne river trust. i mentioned in my prior comment about a change [indiscernible] the puc looked at demand projections and interestingly it was a comment made by mrs. sancola that triggered this and looking at my notes, this is october 22, 2019, she said, there is a very good chance for my agency that number won't reach 184 mgd by 20245. that doesn't mean you don't have a obligation for 184. all pressure from bosca, you

better mead your obligations. the past year fiscal year 23-24, total system delivery was 184 mgd a combination of bosca and san francisco. demand is way down. the same meeting another comment made, i will tell the bosca agencies are highly interested in reducing use as much as possible. that said, they also dont want to pay for projects they don't need. they also are concerned about the bottom line and to the extent that can stall extra investment or reduce investment you have to make, they pay 2/3 of every dollar so very interested in that. these are mixed messages. you better be prepared to deliver 184, which means investing in expensive alternative water supplies, but we don't want to pay for water we don't need. you can have a super reliable

system plenty water and rates double. it is balanceic act. :we would to chat with you, have a workshop, get bosca involved and address the delima. thank you. >> thank you caller. caller, your line has been unmutesed. you have two minutes. hello caller, are you there? >> sorry, can you hear me now? >> yes. >> sorry about that. this is dave warner. i like to thank mrs. sancoola for her service. as much as we didn't see eye to eye, all times she was clear and transparent and always had time for me and others to exchange views and i just really appreciate that and want to say thank you. thank you. >> thank you caller. caller, your line has been unmuted. you have two minutes.

>> john [indiscernible] can you hear me? >> yes, we can hear you. >> i'm sorry, i had my hand raised for general public comment, so ied with like to have two minutes to do that. >> please continue. >> my name is john [indiscernible] grew up fishing with my family, grand parents and later a biologist and stint as commercial fishing person. i want to talk about the tuolumne and the way-the fall run and how the san francisco public utilities commission switched on how they counted fish returning. before 2009 they used to count fish carcass which most biologist do, that is fish that come back to breed and went to the weir down river. a lot of fish you see there

don't make it back up. that when you look at if you take a look at the different figures, you may see at the weir 1 year, 600 fish returning, 1300, but the actual number of fish who come back to their spawning grounds is more like 2 or 300. as other people have talked about, there was workshops back in i believe 2021 or 2022. one of them dealt with fish dr. john rosenfield talked. i urge you to do that. in september there are guiding tours of the spawning ground and canoeing on tuolumne and as far as i know since i have been involved the last 12 or 15 years, no commissioner has ever gone up there. i'm issuing a invitation that so you can mark on your calendars a year ahead of time that you come out with

us and take a look at the fish. >> thank you caller. your time expired. there are more callers who wish to be recognized. >> thank you. >> thank you. next item. >> consent calendar. 7 a-7d. >> does anybody have any comments or questions on the consent calendar? i had a general question that came to me when i was looking at the consent calendar about compensable delay. i don't know if somebody can answer the question for me, but i noticed that two of the items on the consent calendar included a compensable delay component. item 7b and d and two items 7a and c didn't.

i would guess it is because of the amount of information that we have on the particular projects that compensable delay seems adviseable in one case and not the other. would you mind commenting on that? >> [indiscernible] so, compensable delay in the contracts are when we ask the contractor to estimate the cost of a delay that would be the city's fault. how much they get paid a daily rate if we delay the contract. it is usually a estimate. it is never really the real cost, and it is used to determine the winner of the bids, because it is factor. it is a way to factor in the scoring. so, we use it in some contracts

and not others. we hold the contractor to that delay cost if there is a delay that we cause and impact them. the reason for it being in some procurements and not others is usually related to the complexity of the project and how likely we think there is potential for us to delay the contractor. i think that is as close as i could get to why we use that metric in our selection process. >> okay. thank you for that information. do we have any public comment on the consent calendar?

>> remote callers, raise your hand if you wish to comment on the consent calendar. do we have any members of the public who wish to speak? if so, please approach the podium. moderator. >> mrs. lennear, there are callers with their hand raised. >> thank you. >> thank you. could i have a motion and second on the consent calendar? >> so moved. >> second. >> thank you. >> president stacy, aye. arce, aye. jamdar, aye. leveroni, aye. the item passes. item 8, apoint president kate stacy to serve as commissioner on the san joaquin tributary authority commissions. >> commissioners, any comments or questions? any public comment on this

item? >> remote callers, raise your hand if you wish to comment on item 8. if there are any members present who wish to comment, please approach the podium. seeing none, moderator-- >> mrs. lennear, there are no callers with their hand raised. >> thank you. >> thank you. motion. >> make a motion to approve. >> second. >> president stacy, aye. vice president arce, aye. commissioner jamdar, aye. commissioner leveroni, aye. the item passes. item 9, approve contract number

wd-2868r. >> commissioners, any-- >> presentation first. >> good afternoon commissioners. division manager, san francisco water division. here today to seek your approval to extend 150 percent wd-2868r, the as needed paving program in city operations. may i please have my slides? first background information. the contract was issued may 2024. construction was the successful bidder. it was $13.9 million. 195 calendar days for pavement and sidewalk restoration within san francisco. a little history of what we do. what you see in front of you is the water main break at green and fillmore.

you may have seen this t made the news, september 2023. what you don't see in the picture is fillmore street with more damage done. we cleaned up sand whether the way down to lombard street. there was a extensive operation. what you see now is what it looks like today. accept for the brand new paving and sidewalks you never know we were there. next slide shows you a standard water service instillation on the 2300 block of [indiscernible] the right is restoration forced to do by dpw change in the excavation code. requires to expand. [indiscernible] to prevent subsidence over the years. our contract expenditure thus far as you see new services, $5

million, this year alone calendar 2024 we installed 628 new service lines in san francisco. main breaks. thish year alone, we repaired 120 main breaks which is below average and we are not complaining. we usually mid-200s for main break. service like replacement and leaks, 301 service replacement and leak repairs in san francisco this year. lastly, the other repair work from dpw, we call them x11104. [indiscernible] we restore and today and the calendar year repaired 588 of the violations. so, understand the consequence of paves cost. october 2022 we had a water

main break. the cost were $117 thousand. june of 2023, [indiscernible] the castro campus, we had a significant break and that was $265 thousand in pavement restoration. and lastly, green and fillmore, the previous slide. that was $1.8 million in paves restoration. unintended consequences. this is our 4th and final request on the contract. previously, in december 23, we extended our capacity by 1.1 million. it was under contingency so didn't require commission approval. in may of 24, we [indiscernible] quarter million dollars to get through until october of this year. as direct result of the main break at green and fillmore and related

activities to that, we had to seek commission approval back in june 25 for $3.9 million. so, we modified the contract currently up to $19.2 mill and total duration of 1283 consecutive calendar days. our final request is increase the capacity $20.8 million for duration of 1825 calendar days. our new as needed contract, is prepared. estimated to bid award march of 2025. with ntp of december 2025 and currently estimate the cost to be $17.1 million. that's my presentation. can i answer any questions?

>> thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioners, any questions or comments? >> question on we were just talking about the last where the contractor had a-if they were over the time period and we caused it there will be- >> can i ask you to speak up, i can't hear you? >> if there was a delay in the contract, is it ever reversed to where if the contractor is delayed through no fault of the sfpuc? >> i don't have the answer to that question. i can get it for you though. >> thank you. >> [indiscernible] yes, it is reversed. a lot of the time when we have

damages associated with that. >> thank you. >> commissioner arce. >> thanks for the presentation and thanks for looking forward until the potential for unforeseen situation where we need these resources and investment obviously for rate payers and residents. it is something they react to and thanks for being at the ready as in the past to address in the future until we can go back out. the question i have though is just in terms of changes in the industry with respect to the initial contract was 2021 i want to say. may 2021, the impacts coming out of the pandemic were starting to see the impact of supply chain, the years that fallowed, materials and labor increased, curious with the contracts with longer duration and the conversations with the

contractor, accommodate the potential for increase materials and labor costs in terms of some sort of working that into either the terms and conditions for the contractors, especially as it may impact subs they are subing out to. curious as general practice for this contract and others if that is something we consider when we add a change order puts off into several years into the future if we include those potential increase cost to the vendors and contractors we work with? >> going back to covid, our division never stopped. we do not close down, we did not work from home. cdd or what is called sfwd worked through the pandemic. we took full advantage of not having traffic in san francisco to get a lot of work done. hope that answers your question. >> it is more about the cost

when we add additional duration and funds to a contract that was executed in this case over three years ago since there is escalation for materials and labor since the initial escalation of the contract, is that escalation part of a negotiation with the contractor? is it incorporated? the margins will be different? >> we worked with our paves contractor on that. he wasn't going to do it out of the goodness of his heart. >> okay. >> so, we have year 1, 2, 3 big prices in the contract at that account for each year and for change order work it is for request for change order is for work exceeding capacity with what each bid item and we are asked to increase that and also asked to increase the duration of the contract. >> got it. thanks for the responses and also thank you for your commitment and working

through the pandemic. >> it was a lot of fun. >> commissioner jamdar. >> i have a clarifying question. this is ongoing kind of situation, right? >> we can't hear you? >> this is ongoing kind of- >> yes. >> approval. because this kind of work will continue. >> yes. it has and will. >> this is just iteration of it comes back before us? >> yes. >> okay, thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> do we have public comment? >> remote callers raise your hand if you wish to comment on item 9. do we have any members present who wish to provide public comment? seeing none, moderator-- >> mrs. lennear, there are no callers with their hand raised. >> thank you.

>> could i have a motion and second on item 9 please? >> so moved. >> seconded. >> thank you. >> president stacy, aye. vice president arce, aye. commissioner jamdar, aye. commissioner leveroni, aye. the item passes. >> thank you. next item. >> item 10, approve modification job order contract number joc-98. >> hi. good afternoon commissioners. general manager herrera. judy with the infrastructure division. today here to request approval for modification number 1 to job order contract number joc-98, electrical c10 license construction for the san francisco san mateo santsa clara alameda counties to electric technology

ink to increase for 3 years for total duration of 5 years and increase the contract amount by $2.5 million for a revised not to exceed contract amount of $7.5 million for additional time and capacity for facility and asset improvements. so, job order contract is an indefinite quantity task order based contract that enables the puc to issue task orders efficiently and to complete quickly. these task orders are issued on as needed basis using pre-published pricing. i hope the commission approves this contract modification to increase the budget capacity. this would allow the puc to

have additional capacity and time to make facility improvements. i'm here to answer questions. >> thank you. commissioners, comments or questions? >> [indiscernible] the original was a three year? >> original was two years. >> two year. we are increasing to five? >> yes. >> was that not to exceed contract also, or is it now going to the five year a not to exceed? >> it was a not to exceed $5 million contract and we are increasing through this request $2.5 million not to exceed $7.5 million. >> okay. thank you. >> alright. thank you. do we have public comment? >> remote callers, raise your hand if you wish to comment on this item. do we have any members present who wish

to provide public comment? seeing none, moderator, do we have any people with their hand raised? >> mrs. lennear, there are no callers with their hand raised. >> thank you. >> thank you for your presentation. do we have a motion and second? >> move to approve. >> seconded. f [roll call] the item passes. >> thank you. >> item 11, approval amendment 1 to pro.0183 and granlt agreement pro-0183g. >> good afternoon commissioners. my name is will log stn, watershed planner in the wastewater enterprise and today introducing two amendments that govern the residential

green infrastructure grant program. the pilot program provides construction funding to home owners and renters for green infrastructure improvements including rain gardens, rain water harvesting sis turns and permeable pave. ment. we have done projeths in the public right of way parks and schools and land use types so this pilot program is really small residential parcels with as all the green infrastructure is intended to capture storm water route away from the sewer system and provide a buffer during large storm evnlts. the program provides data on the lechbl of interest around green infrastructure at the residential scale and information on the technical feasibility of construction of green infrastructure on residential properties. we are also piloting a unique contracting approach by partnering with third party program administrator with this program. the two contracts that

currently govern this program serve two purposes. professional service contract for program administration out reach and technical support,b and grant agreement for the construction funds that are distributed. both were integrated in a single solicitation awardsed to [indiscernible] the initial set of projects fundsed with combination of add-back funding and wastewater oprating dollars. the original not to exceed amount of $300 thousand for the two contracts combined was limited to availability funding at the time of the solicitation. since the program was launched last year we completed construction of two projects and five in permitting and contracting phase, and launch of the pilot program we received significant level of interest. over 300 residents submit forms through the website and that demonstrated significant level of support

for this program and so in response to this earlier this year we put forth a budget proposal to fund the expansion of the pilot program and this commission approved $600 thousand in funding per year in the wastewater oprating budget for fiscal years 24, 25 and 25, 26. this additional funding will be used to expand the pilot and deliver approximately 12-14 additional projects in each of the next two years. today we are proposing to leverage the existing contract vehicles we have to continue this pilot program. today we are asking for commission approval to amend the existing professional service contract and grant agreement to increase the amount of the contracts commensurate with approved wastewater operating budget and extend the contracts through 2028. thank you for your time and happy to answer any questions. >> thank you. commissioners, any comments or

questions? >> on the amount of wastewater that it would be taking out of the system and putting it somewhere else back into gardens or whatever. is there a cal culshz on calculation on that? >> there is. off-hand and don't have that answer, but i am happy to give a summary of the specific numbers. we estimate for each project and so part of the information we are collecting through the pilot is around cost efficiency and how much storm water we can get out of small residential parcels but it is something we calculate whether a large capital project or small grant funded project like these ones. >> thank you. >> commissioner jamdar. >> thank you for the presentation. i have is a question. could you tell us about the two projects that have been accomplished and what were there and the outcome? >> we are hoping to get information on

a variety of types of green infrastructure and so the first two projects, one was a rain water harvesting system so with that project the home owner had a opportunity to collect storm water from the roof, captured in a secern and pipe for the back yard for irrigation so keeping out of the sewer system and off-setting potable water use. the second project is a combination of the small cistern to provide irrigation during the dry season and have a rain garden in the backyard that is taking the water from the roof during large storms and allowing to infiltrate the soil. then we have a couple other projects using permeable pavement is the third tucknology technology we are finding feasible at this scale. >> i just had a question.

i want to make sure that i understand how the two contracts work together. first, i want to say thank you for the quarterly update. that was helpful looking what we have done in the past with this contract. it looks like in order to qualify for a grant that an applicant has to meet certain kinds of water saving standards and also be eligible. i think the third qualification captured the 90 percentile storm, i wasn't sure what that meant. i wondered if you could explain that? >> yeah, so we have two separate programs that are both have the term green infrastructure grant in them. the quarterly report has a report on the large green grant program which is separate program. similar goals but that program

is targeted towards large parcels like parks and schools and churches and things like that, so a minimum threshold for that program and there are more specific performance requirements relate today how much storm water we capture so we expect them to design the project to meet the standards which is volume and 90 percentile storm is.75 inch depth rain event so that is what we use for performance and a minimum for that program. for the residential program, we don't have a specific required performance target but trying to meet the same performance. >> thank you for clarifying that. so, i assume that the professional services contract is to implement and work with property owners and to do the leg-work on the applicants who get a grant and what is recommended,

but the puc approves every grant that is given out? >> yes, correct. >> so, the grant portion of this item is all that money goes out in the form of grants and that the professional services contract pays for the services to help implement this program? >> exactly. that's correct. >> and for some of the sort of leg-work in the applications and reviewing the applications, does puc staff get involved in that at all? >> yeah, we are pretty-myself and one other staff person is closely involved in the outreach recruitment, the development of the projects and so with this being a pilot we are learning more about how all this works and so, we are working with them along the way and we have weekly meetings with our

program consultant that get updates on that. >> it is enough work you wouldn't-the puc doesn't have capacity to do the work in-house and professional services does? >> correct. they are augmenting the staff time we do have available. >> thank you. public comment please. >> remote callers, raise your hand if you wish to comment on item 11. do we have any members public present who wish to provide public comment? seeing none, moderator. >> mrs. lennear, no callers with their hand raised. >> thank you. >> thank you. could i have a motion and second on this item? >> motion to approve. >> second. >> president stacy, aye. vice president arce, aye. commissioner jamdar, aye.

commissioner leveroni, aye. item passes. >> thank you. next item. >> 12, public hearing to consideration and possible agz to adopt amendments to the san francisco public utility commission social impact partnership program rules and regulations. >> may i have the slides, please? good afternoon commissioners. my name is valerie and honored to be the member of the social impact partnership program. on april 11, 2023 i presented to this commission and unanimously approved the rules and regulations. building on the commission prior approval, i'm here today to address updates prompted by amendment to the ordinance. the board of supervisors and mayor recently passed a amendment to the ordinance which governs the program and go into effect november 18, 2024. the sfuc amended the rules and regulations to align with

recent legislative changes and today i'm here to seek approval so they take affect alongside the amended ordinance. today 's presentation i highlight the progress on accountability, fallowed by review of the amendments. the sip program is grounded in three agency wide policies, offering contractors the opportunity to align corporate social responsibility values with these guiding principals. our programs success best practices and earned the national association of clean water agencies community leadership award. what is sip? contractors of good business partners with the puc and sip allows them to be good partners with the community. through this program, the puc invite practors to commit donations and time to non profit and schools. began in 2011 and in the 112 contracts

with 70 firms making contribution to all most 200 non praft and schools across communities to bayview hunter point to sonora. since inception, the sip program delivered over a decade of meaningful human and environmental impact by focusing on four key areas, enabling contractor to support existing programs and services lead by non profits and public schools. sip commitments provide various opportunities to strengthen communities such as supporting job training to under served communities to create career pathways. one example i like to illustrate is the tuolumne community collaborative. through commitment to non profit firms supported a homeless young man in the tuolumne preapprenticeship program who became a home owner after graduating and entering the construction trades. by providing training stipends,

child care, dmv issues union dues and work tools remove key barriers to employment. prioritize cultural competency and accounts starting with submissions. to insure, we require contracts to demonstrate intention to deliver commitment within the specific geographic area of the project, assign two personnel responsible for accurately managing and reporting on commitments, provide detail information on the documented history and experience in social impact work community involvement and partnerships. articulate value jz naij relevant to the program areas and micro communities identified. outline clear plan for engaging communities and maximizing accountability to impacted populations and maintain sip system and documentation to accurately report completed commitments.

the puc requires that a community member serve on the evaluation panel to score contractors sip proposals. reporting is backbone of sip insuring commitments delivered to the community at the start of a contract contractser submit projection plan forecasting financial volunteer commitments for the entire contractual duration and sip annual work plan outlining sip commitments with beneficiaries for upcoming fiscal year. rortding documents are used to verify fulfillment and accuracy. beneficiaries letters of ocknowledgement, proof of fund transfer and time sheet. contractors must report demographics age race gender zip codes and another program specific kpi. metrics collected for each program area such as graduation rates, barriers removed, number of and type of business supported, teachers and student served

as well as kpi related to food security and climate change education. we have streamlined integrated data system for enhanced accountsability and stronger governance and relaunched the firm convening and presented the registry. to support contractors we introducing use r friendly portal with low barrier reporting access and apply a two level quality assurance for accuracy and contractor communication. looking ahead we plan to host convening and early 2025 to share program updates and gather survey feedback driving our continuous improvement practice. our public dashboard is the tool to promote transparency and accountability displaying allficial and volunteer commitments to date. the dashboard published a few year evidence every contract every fiscal year, every project, every firm all the program areas and beneficiaries and any combination of these.

this year we introduced innovative tool on the sip portal registry with filters that enable firms to identify and connect with qualified beneficiaries. this platform gives beneficiaries equal visibility to sfpuc contractors and allow contractors to also locate community partners by county and zip code within the service areas. outreach began broadly through the california doj are site then focused on service areas, existing beneficiaries and invitation sent through local city departments to funded cbo. ongoing efforts expand registry outreach. please permit me to outline the legislative history and purpose of today's presentation. this commission first authorized the sip program october 2022. december 2022 all 11 board of supervisor cosponsored and unanimously passed the ordinance.

making effective april 22, 2023. last month the board and mayor recently expanded the sip program and amended the ordinance which i'll review next that goes into effect november 18, 2024. today we present for approval updated sip rule jz regulations to align with the changes so they too become effective the same day as the a-minded ordinance. the most significant update is related to sip amendments and modification. the board of supervisor and mayor a-minded the ordinance so any contract with sip and amended or modified in any amount the contract sip commitments are proportionally increased including contracts awarded before april 2023. building on the ordinance changes let us turn to the amendments made to the sip rules and regulations which include the significant update to rule 4.4 and other notable revisions. in rule 3 the sf rks uc has the ubltd

to include additional evaluation criteria subject to general manager's approval. rule 6, the general manager can approve contract amendments with exsemption or reduced requirement for the sip commitment. in closing, i like to acknowledge the importance of community feedback. it is essential for government to provide a space where the public can share thoughts and concerns. i respect everyone who attends these commission meetings. the public holds us to high standards and their voices drive us to be accountable and to be better public servants. i am part of several communities and have been taught by these communities. i heard their concerns and committed to creating clear pathways to community involvement in the sip program. please share contact information for anyone who would like me to reach out to about sip. i will insure they receive information and have a chance to provide feedback and available to meet or present as needed.

additionally, i invite anyone interested to be a panelist. we need community representatives, specifically from communities impacted by sfp rks crurks projects to par tis pit in the evaluation process. we respectfully request your support in the amended rule s and regulations and thank you supporting us to advance social impact partnership program. >> thank you for your presentation. commissioners, do you have comments or questions? commissioner jamdar. >> i have a quick question about just the outreach to community organizations. so, is that the decision of the contractor who gets the sip [indiscernible] is that the discretion at the discession of the contractor or the panel that decides who gets

chosen? i'm sure it must be competitive if it is a community, so how do you determine who gets it and who makes the ultimate decision? >> to address the concern because contractors try to ask to and we cannot tell them who to fund. what we did with the sip registry they go in and make the selection so they can use the filters whether they want to focus on age, a zip code, whatever it may be, ethnicity, they decide where they like to donate resources to. >> commissioner arce. >> just wanted to say thank you and also to the general manager, because really appreciate between the last meeting and this assistant general manager ordikhani and mrs. [indiscernible]

really helped provide very thorough understanding of this topic in advance so i feel any questions i had i was able to get answered prior and like to support the item moving forward. thank you. >> thank you for all of your work on this and engagement with the communities. i really appreciate now navigateable the dashboard is. it is easy to use on site, or on the website. it is easy to sift through the information and get the information and i really appreciate that. thank you. >> great. thank you. >> madam president. more to commissioner jamdar. i just want you asked that question and i think it is important and collectively we all think it is important that there never be looking at the history of how sip may have occurred here in the past and what not,

we never want there to be a question about impartialality or a wift that our team is conducting something not without the upmost integrity, so we do not participate and that is priority, transparency and the process because if there is ever a wif that it hurts the overall program and that isn't something of our program managers or myself are ever going to be involved in so we don't get involved picking winners and losers. >> thank you. thank you. >> could we have public comment, please? >> remote callers rsh raise your hand if you wish to comment on item 12. resa schwartz. >> public comment? >> hi, my name is resa schwartz

and representing the children's book project and at the end of two minutes if you like i can answer commissioner jamdar's question from the non profit perspective. i represent the children's book project which is a 34 year old children's literacy non profit headquartered in the bayview district. we recognize that reading and literacy attainment is directly related to academic achievement and good life outcomes. but we also recognize that children from economically disadvantage communities don't have access to books the way their more affluent peers do, stow the children's book project provide that access. we provide access to books and book ownership and we do it entirely for free. for free to children, parents, educators and community

organizations serving those children. it isn't free to us as a non profit, so how do we do that? we do that because of in part, sip and because of companies who are here today like emerson and parsons who are donating money to us and providing invaluable service to the community. what does sip and companies like emerson allow us to do? we put 140 thousand books in the hands of children annually for free through our book banks which you are all invited to tour. we do field trips with published authors and illustrators. provide art supplies. we have a read aloud program for professionals working with parents age 5-0. 0-5. and we go to neighborhoods with low book access and we buy and

build book houses and reg urally stock them and do the same with public health. thank you to sip for funding us. if you like me to- >> thank you. >> do a brief answer to your question. >> mr. schwartz if you would provide information from the non profit. >> from my perspective, emerson who is here as a example came with two people and conducted a extensive hour long site visit, so i know they are using the portal. we dont have access to the portal, but they came and they asked for written information, they toured our book bank in the bayview, they lifted our programs we offer, and made a decision based on finding a non profit that puts all its money to books and to children and if you come viz sit us you will see cardboard boxes.

we dont put money into furniture, we put it in books. parsons as well. we supply statistics for them and they did a site visit and so they knew who we are and we are taking their funds and putting it exactly where it needs to go. any other questions? >> i do appreciate that response. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> contacty bradley. >> good afternoon. cathy bradley, the senior account executive with emerson power and utwaer solutions. our firm commitmented to $1 million and community benefit donations through the db126 project at the southeast plant in bayview hunters point cht our contract began in 2017 and we have made over $400 thousand in contribution,

monetary and volunteer. our commitment has been mainly to help youth in the district 9 and 10 sectors of san francisco and areas of education, job alignment and internship support. some cbo emerson has chosen to donate to are mission hiring hall with cap program. a program afforded to disadvantage students the opportunity to learn soft skills necessary for job readiness. we hired two students from this program. construction industry workforce initiative, a program for college students to align with employers for summer internships and we hosted three interns in the last 4 years. the children book project as you heard, they help students of all ages to acquire books they can keep for free. since the puc has adopted the

social impact partnership program, i have seen a great shift in reporting process with newly adopted sip portal. the sip staff is always inquiring about our needs and how to make the process more streamline. this year they conducted the firm convening experience and we had a very good positive experience with them. they are a good team to work with. thank you. >> francisco decosta. >> commissioners, i don't think any of you all have read the emerson report, which was a 15 year contract. in that contract you would see the photograph of [indiscernible]

jones. i know valerie very well and she has very high standards. what valerie did was, take something that was given to her and put in elements of transparency and accountability. she did that on her own. not with some attorneys and all like the emerson group who put in the 15 year old contract without the community knowing anything about it. so, i'm here to tell you that valerie is like joan of ark. therefore, i have gone out of my way to sit down with valerie so she

presented to me exactly how the program as it stands today is run. anyone can say i don't want to do anything about the thing, you got to know about it. you got to uplift anybody who is involved with sip. don't stay away from it. if you stay away from it, you are showing you have some bias. we need to uplift one another. okay? i hope you commissioners get that clear. thank you. >> thank you. >> do we have any other members present who wish to provide public comment? seeing none, moderator. any callers with their hand raised? >> mrs. lennear, there are three callers with hands raised. >> thank you.

>> caller, your line is unmuted. you have two minutes. >> my name is lisa butteler, i work-- >> caller, you still there? >> i am. thank you. my name is lisa, i am from--i'm getting feedback on the line. the person that coordinates the sip benefits for tuolumne river county schools, in this role what i do is coordinate with the school district itself as well as the multiple firms that are affiliated with the sfpuc sip program and from there i am able to coordinate two major events in tuolumne county. one of them is called, engineers in the school week and that activity what we do is put together and match teachers, schools and volunteers frame each of

the individual firms that go into the classroom and do presentations and site visits for each to help students understand the benefits of engineering and science. it is a very interactive process and a very fun experience. one thing that we enjoyed about this is the volunteers the teachers and the students all get great benefit out of it. one of my personal pleasures is working with the volunteers and helping them prepare. sometimes it is very difficult with someone with ph.d to need to do presentation for a kindergarten class. in that event through the combination of all of the firms working together as well as local volunteers not part of the sip program, but people in the community water districts and so on so forth, we able last year to

reach 1 in 10 students in the entire county. the reach is really very very sig nificant and been doing this seven years. another big event we coordinate-- >> thank you caller. your time expired. caller, your line is unmuted. you have two minutes. >> hello. my name is nancy barnes and represent stantech today. sinsh 2012 when the program initiated stantech and partners pcl construction and joe hill consulting engineers have provided over $2.5 million in community benefits including half a million in direct financial contribution and 10 thousand hours of volunteer hours within the community and within schools. our outreach to different firms or

different beneficiaries are comprised of building deep relationships and long-term relationships in order to provide continuous service. we look for beneficiaries with proven performance and responsive and when possible for force multiplication and in that case we may work with teachers to reach additional students. we work hard to create a career pipeline that starts with promoting stem in schools to job training, to internships and that has been a benefit of both funneling talented individuals to jobs that improve overall economic outlook and provide firms like mine and sfpuc with future employees. we also receive a benefit ourselves of connecting with the community, which helps us provide [indiscernible] and align with our values of community

service, connectivity and racial social and economic justice. we also have a great benefit of the fact that our employees love to volunteer within the community. it is something that helps us retain employees and provide them with something that is more then just the sum of their jobs. thank you. >> thank you caller. caller, your line has been unmuted. you have two minutes. hi caller, you still there? moving to the next caller. caller, your line is unmuted. you have two minutes. >> good afternoon everyone. judith. [indiscernible] honored to share how the sip program enables us to help achieve our mission, which is drive equitable

growth, build communities and achieve transformative social good. [indiscernible] san francisco base non profit that empowers under served communities through culturally relevant support and resources. grateful to sip fundsing for enabling us to expand our work with local entrepreneurs and promote economic development. in the past year, sip fundsing enabling to positively impact over a hundred individuals through initiatives that foster entrepreneurship, skill building and cultural preservation. providing black entrepreneurs with access to resources, mentsership and business development opportunities helping grow and succeed in verchers. this year we are expanding food and beverage programming with the new food pavilion at indian basin water park and bayview hunter point providing

black owned food business access to license kitchen and opportunities to support their growth. sip funding helps us meet community needs and drives a more inclusive economy in the bay area, particularly the bayview and with your continued support we are creating meaningful change and i look forward to continuing to make progress together. >> thank you caller. mrs. lennear, there are no callers who wish to be recognized. >> thank you. >> thank you for the public comment. commissioners, any further questions or comments? >> i just want to express support for the program and contractors and [indiscernible] and community have spoken and great to see the impact of the program so happy to support. >> commissioner arce. >> yes, just another thank you

to staff, to our employer partners and community partners and everyone involved and i would also like to move that we adopt the amendments to the san francisco puc sip program rules and regulations. >> seconded. >> thank you. >> president stacy, aye. vice president arce, aye. commissioner jamdar, aye. commissioner leveroni, aye. the item passes. >> thank you. next item, please. >> item 13, sunset covid-19 pandemic procedures for water and sewer customer bill collection and amend wastewater and water shut off and lien policies. >> privileged to serve as it director of the sfpuc customer service

bruro to provide a brief update oen the customer assistance program and request to sunset the moratorium on collections and liens and return to full collection actions for water and wastewater accounts. next slide, please. in april at request of outgoing commissioners i provided a customer assistance program update. the bureau has been operating the program in the currents format for 15 months. the pre-covid enrollment of approximately 1200 customers has grown to over 6700 customers and we process average of 190 applications monthly. we began income verification at

application july 2023 and expect to begin post-enrollment verification for customers not verified at application with crollp soon. big concern for commissioners at april update was customers denied access to the program received notification in the preferred language. we were able to implement this practice in august of 2024. excited to report that we were also able to get approval for a dedicated resource for this continuously growing program. which operates from csb 5 member high bill unit. the dedicated resource will be the puc only dedicated cap employee. this pilot project is funded for three years. the temporary staff administrator will be financed with non revenue funds and will use data focus strategy to

explore option to support those struggling to pay their bills. including seniors and veterans. we also plan for this resource to explore how to insure the most vulnerable san franciscans are enrolled in this program. next slide, please. in 2019, the legislator adopted senate bill 998, the water shut off protection act amended the california health and safety code to provide urban water supplies and community water to adopt a written policy regarding the discontinuation of residential service due to non praiment. payment. required 60 days after a customer is delinquent before termination. this commission adopted the puc policy in december 2019. in march of 2020, all shut off and liens suspended in response to

covid-19 global pandemic. it is 4 years and 7 months. we are requesting to return to full collection activities outlined in the policy adopted december 2019. next slide, please. the sfpuc has over 14 thousand accounts in arrears. as outlined in the staff report, rate payers not paying bills can result in challenges, revenue short falls, service cutbacks and more. threatening the utility long-term financial stability. lack of consequence encourages poor customer payment behavior. you note that prior to the moratorium, we averaged 2700 accounts with arrears over 60 days. after the moratorium, may of 2022 when we received the state relief we had over 10 thousand accounts

[indiscernible] after state funds were applied customer payment behavior declined further. in may 2023 we initiated shut off avoidance campaign an tisitation resuming in july. this compain caused a brief up tick in payment of arrears however prompted [indiscernible] note how customer payment behavior continued to worsen. spiking at $42 million and 15.500 accounts thrmpt is no more state arrearage relief and we are at 14.200 customer accounts and $25.7 million in arrears over 90 days. we must reinstitute consequence for non payment and insure everyone pays for the water and wastewater services they receive. next slide, please.

we designed and conducted customer outreach campaigns for targeted customer classes and plan measured to ease transition for staff and account holders. our goal is full resumption of all accounts types for all account types by january 2025 with deferral of instituting late payment until july of 2025. next slide, please. consideration of the concern for vulnerable customer populations, customers enrolled in the customer assistance program will be exempt from shut off provided they stay current with paying discounted bills. should they fall more then one year in arrears they lose that exemption. this commission adopted resolution april 2023 to establish a policy to temporarily exempt customers with exstinchuating circumstances

outlined here. customers receiving will be required to-to be on a pay plan and given the opportunity to apply for one time extension for maximum of one year exemption. next slide. in summary, requesting a restoration of pre-pandemic collection procedures including shut-off and liens. also requesting to establish $100 minimum account balance for shut-off or liens as outlined in the staff report. this is to align with the cost of service. finally, to formally establish exemptions for shut off and liens for customers enrolled in cap and those experiencing extenchuating circumstances by amending the rules and regulations governing for water service. thank you. >> thank you. commissioners, comments or questions?

commissioner jamdar. >> thank you for that presentation. how many of those 15 thousand or so accounts are part of the cap program? is that 6700 ish number i saw? is that right? >> the customers in cap are not necessarily a part of the customers in arrears. >> i guess for that is my question. what subset of the folks are vulnerable populations and--curious how that would be addressed. would they be enrolled in cap as part of the process? i'm it not very clear on how the two will work together. >> so, customers enrolled in cap could be exempt from shut off. what we are attempting to do is those customers who have adapted poor payment behaviors and no longer payer

their bills, they will-we'll try to change that behavior and get them back into a proper payment postture and if they dont pay they are subject to discontinuation of service. and shut them off. customers enrolled in cap program will be exempt from shut off, so wouldn't be impacted because they are most-vulnerable customers and struggling to pay their bills, however, everybody needs to pay their fair shares so those customers after a year, then would be-they lose that exsemption and subject to shut off if they continue to not pay their bills. >> you get your question answered commissioner? commissioner arce. >> i think that what the commissioner is getting at, what is the number of the people in cap that was what you were trying to get at, right? >>

[indiscernible] >> out of 15 thousand, how many are in cap? >> i don't have that number. >> okay. >> we can get that- >> i can get it for you, but i don't have it right now. >> thanks president stacy and thank frz the presentation director. i think again, thanking the general manager because we had a really great conversation and understanding the work across the whole bureau of business services, cfo hom and her team we got to hear an overview of the work of director anderson and the team, so again, thank you for that for helping us with on-boarding. being the new commissioners. and so i think what i wanted to ask, just in terms of due diligence as the commissioner rate payer advocate, i haven't gotten feedback one way or the other with respect to the proposal. it sounds like based on aging a lot of accounts there is expectation this is moment is coming. i know there was really good

job that the agency did with respect to the publicized kind of water bills that were some differed responsibilities that came all at once and questions and answers and payment plans offered, so that was my first-that is from this side of the work we do as commission and public to see the really great work you and your team do and the external affairs to publicize what those options are. i feel that backed into what is presented here and the fact that neither me and don't know any colleagues received feedback contrary to this proposal probably speaks to the fact that this is the appropriate path forward. my only question is in termoffs the landscape of other water agencies. are we similarly situated in terms of timing and let me just say, based on

our commitment to affordability, number one priority as outlined in the budget presentation to the city, i have to believe we are probably have been as accommodating about the financial challenges a lot of rate payers and people in society faced coming out of the pandemic. we have been even potentially more accommodating with our lead time then other water agencies so without kind of having to compare our agency and others around the state and the country, what is is your sense of our timing at this moment when we return to the pre-moratorium to the pre-covid policy established in 2019, have we given more runway then other agencies or the same or seen other agencies continuing these policies, if you have a sense? >> my sense is we are at the tail end of it. most of the water utilities i'm familiar with returned to full

collections--up to two years before that we will if we are able to get this approved to start by january. >> that was what i was expecting and consistent with the way that we are very customer focused as a agency, so thank you for that. >> thank you. could we take public comment, please? >> remote callers, raise your hand if you wish to comment on item 13. do we have any members present who wish to comment? seeing none, moderator, are there callers with their hand raised? >> mrs. lennear, no callers who wish to be recognized. >> thank you. >> thank you. commissioners, could i have a motion and second on this item? >> move to approve. >> second. >> thank you.

>> president stacy, aye. vice president arce, aye. commissioner jamdar, aye. commissioner leveroni, aye. the item passes. >> thank you. next item, please. >> item 14, communications. >> commissioners, any comments or questions on our communications? alright. seeing none, next item, please. >> next item is item 16, public comment on matter to be addressed during closed session. >> item 15, items initiated by commissioners. any commissioners have items to initiate? indeed. thank you. now onto closed session. >> public comment on matter to be addressed during closed

session? any members of the public who wish to speak? moderator, any callers with their hand raised? >> mrs. lennear, there is one caller who wishes to be recognized. >> thank you. >> caller, your line is unmuted. you have two minutes. >> thank you. this is peter dreckmyer. i want to had encourage the commissioners when you discuss the sf ep a lawsuit to ask what role the commission plays in lawsuits. my sense is very little and they are coming to you now post mortem this case is before the supreme court. it could end up getting clean water act and i want you all to protect your reputation, because people--if san francisco wins this case and the clean water act loses, people will be talking

about this like [indiscernible] versus ep a last year. it is san francisco versus epa and people wnder how did this happen and how did progressive san francisco become a tool of the supreme court and they will look to see who is on the sfpuc commission and you will be blamed unfairly. i really encourage you to get to the bottom of what role you play in these lawsuits. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you for your comment. mrs. lennear, no more callers who wish to be recognized. >> thank you. >> please read the next item. >> motion on whether to assert the attorney-client privilege regarding the matters listed below. >> so move. >> seconded. >> president stacy, aye. vice president arce, [indiscernible]

commissioner stepped away. commissioner jamdar, aye. commissioner leveroni, aye. the item passes. [meeting reconvened]

>> back in open session. the commission took action to recommend settle ment for item 18, the unlitigated claim file 25-00425. james horhan, versus city and county of san francisco. because items 19 and 20 were discussion items only, the commission took no action on those two items in closed session. do we take public comment on-no, okay. we-i am requesting a motion whether or not to disclose our discussions

during closed session. >> i move we do not disclose our discussions. >> seconded. >> thank you. >> president stacy, aye. vice president arce, aye. commissioner jamdar, aye. commissioner leveroni, aye. the item passes. >> thank you. and the meeting is adjourned. thank you. [meeting adjourned]

>> i sweep sidewalk i clean sidewalks in front of my place. drains get clogged. i adopted the drain. >> they do over flow. hee we had a drain issue a few years ago. our sidewalks like it is part of helping out. it is easy. and an opportunity to check out the neighborhood, my neighbors and that crazy guy that is always weeping the sidewalk and i'm okay with

>> we can sweep by in front of a house in a matter of seconds. the only people who don't like it are the people who get the tickets. >> this is a street sweeping sign. don't let it get you. pay attention. [♪♪♪] >> in the morning, when we first go out, we start at six in the morning or seven in the morning. we call that our business run. we sweep all the main arteries of the city. after 8:00, we go into the residential areas and take care of all the other customers. >> the idea with the street sweeping program is to get the leaves and the debris off the ground. >> we -- for not only appearance and cleanliness but safety as well. >> we will get anywhere from 2- 7,000 pounds per truck depending on the season and the

route. the street sweeper and the choice of the use right now is an error sweeper. they have a motor in the back and it blows winds down one side and carried by air into the hopper. what will mess this up is new -- large pieces of cardboard or sticks or coat hangers. anything that is more than 12 inches. the tube on the tracks is only 12-inch diameter. >> people asked what they can do to help to keep the city clean. there are people that letter. leaves are one thing. any of the garbage you see is from people being careless. [♪♪♪] >> one cars parked in the way, we can't sweep under the congress. to deal with this, we have

parking control officers that are provided by m.t.a. and they go in front of our sweepers and pass out citations to people that are parking the wrong way. once the sweepers sweep past in san francisco, you may park behind the street sweeper. we all know parking is a big issue. north beach hasn't been swept since the eighties because of opposition. but we are getting a lot of requests to sweep. basically our trucks are 10 feet wide. we stick the brooms out and they are may be 12 feet wide. >> there are a lot of blind spots when driving a large truck pedestrians and bicyclists and cars. and navigates this 22,000-pound truck through the city. >> we involve the public here -- to adhere to traffic laws. these routes were developed back in the eighties around the capability of the sweeper.

things have changed since then so we have to adapt. luckily, public works is embracing technology and working on a system to alter our maps. this is literally cut and paste -- cut and paste. we will have a computer program soon that will be able to alter the maps and be updated instantly. we will have tablets in the checks for all of the maps. we will send a broom wherever it needs to go and he has the information he needs to complete the safety. what is needed about these tablets as they will have a g.p.s. on it so we know where they're at. you do get confused driving along, especially the inner sunset. recall that to the be made a triangle. >> thanks for writing along with us today. i enjoyed showing you what we do and i urge you to pay attention to the signs and move your car and don't litter. with all. >> my name is jan an wong a

regional paralyzing in the bureau i did not see might have as at management in the beginning which my career i have a master in civil engineering i thought i'll follow a technical career path i scombrie being able to create a comprehensive plan implement and shape it into realty love the champs of working through cost quality schedule political and environmental structuring and finding the satisfaction of seeing the project come into fruition i've also take advantage of the sfpuc training program yunt my certification i see the flow from the pipeline into the tunnel one by one and i

also had several opportunities to attend and make presentations at conferences also as a tape recording san francisco resident authenticity rewarding to know the work i do contribute to the quality of life my life and those around me >> the time is 1 p.m. i will now call the roll. please respond with here or present. city administrator legg, here. board member herrera, here. board member bowdry, here. with three members present, we have quorum. we'll move to the land acknowledge. we acknowledge that we are on the unceded ancestral homeland of the ramaytush ohlone who are the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsula. as the indigenous

stewards of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the ramaytush ohlone have never ceded, lost nor forgotten their responsibilities as the caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. as guests, we recognize that we benefit from living and working on their traditional homeland. we wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the ancestors and relatives of the ramaytush community and by affirming their sovereign rights as first peoples. >> thanks very much. i like to welcome newly appointed board member, steve bowdry. it is the first time this new reuge rate board had three members and it is a pleasure to welcome you to the board representing the interest of the people of san francisco. steve rfx you want to say a few words about yourself and introduce yourself? >> sure. i am steve bowdry, i'm a

lifelong resident of san francisco. i am a cfo for a real estate management investment company, and i am looking forward to adding whatever contribution i can to this committee. >> thank you. please call item 2. >> item 2, opportunity for public comment on any matters within the board's jurisdiction that are not on the agenda. members of the public may address the board limited to three minutes speaking time per person and total of 20 minutes for the item. we'll take in person public comment. members who wish to comment on this item, please line up at the podium now. for the record, there are no inperson public comment. we'll take remote public comment. members of the public who wish

to comment on this item should dial star 3 or raise your hand in webex. please note you have three minutes. moderator, do we have public comments? for the record, there are no additional remote public comments. this concludes public comment. >> alright. please call item 3. >> item 3, discussion for refese rates administrate positive report. >> hello. good afternoon. refuse rates administrator. we have-i will give the rates administrative report today. before we do that, i want to introduce new controller and deputy controller and thank them fl support of

this work as they transition into their new roles. greg wagoner and-- and then we also want to welcome our new board member member bowdry, excited we have a full board. i have been able to connect with member bowdry a couple times before the item for what he brings to the table as a rate payer representative so thank you. lastly, i want to welcome michael nguyen to refuge rate administration, a san francisco fellow and excited for the support he can bring to the work, especially as the rate setting process gets going. we have two other items here, which include a update on the implementation of the 2023 rate order and then i'll go over the rate setting process, which was kick said off beginning this month.

so, the implementation of 20s 23 rate order is going well. i want to acknowledge recology, environment department and public works for continued collaboration making sure we are implementing what was laid out. for the impound account i don't have slides. there were two major implementation activities here. there was a general swap funds to alineg city work with rates getter and establish procedures and financial controls for dispersement and reporting. these are all been completed and the next rate plan memorialize these procedures. i'll give a brief update on establishing reporting requirement jz talk about the other rate monitoring activities. i'll do a overview of the enhancements that were included in the last rate order and of the projects dive

deeper into the banned material collection effort where we had a graduate student conduct a study on illegal dumping and how it is handleed by the city and looking how recology performed to the new service level agreements. then the next item here is performance metrics. [indiscernible] doing the work and he'll be presenting on a performance metric framework. look for comments or green light from the rate board to move forward with the framework in the next rate order. lastly, we'll have hsh give a status update on projects they have been supporting around the big is capital planning and how to approach priorities of the capal it needs. after this update on the implementation i'll talk more about the next rate setting process.

so, establishing the rate reports just as reminder, the rate reports specified 27 different types of reports, 14 of it which remember new or modified. since we've approved of the rate order, we've completed the formats and come to agreement with recology on the formats are all the reports. all the quarterly reports are implemented, the annual reports wont be implemented till february when the annual reports come out. weal we'll see the annual reports february 2025. the last thing i wanted to note is that, as part of the refuge rate order and the previous settlement, we reached agreement around agreed upon procedures to help us reconcile the rate reports with the audited annual financial's. this allows us to have a lot of confidence in the rate reports we get

that that they have been tied to annual audited financial's in addition we come agreement for procedures for a third party to look at property revenues and costs and also to confirm a balancing account so the con fomation is to allow the proper line items eligible are included and not including anything beyond that. moving on to the rate order of monitoring, we have several services enhancements, and projects that were approved during the rate order. so, the first category and contamination mitigation and diversion where we had some changes to our contamination protocol. we also invested in a pilot of

on-board cameras to track contamination, so recology will talk about how this pilot has been going. in addition, we've also included some funding for trash processing pilot so this is a effort lead efforts where we are looking whether or not trash processing is a viable option for removing contamination and organics in the trash and getting those to compost. and then also organics preprocessing. we were seeing a lot of contamination in organics so this will remove some of the contamination before it goes to the organic site. we also had a couple approved studies. this includes a seismic study of pier 96 for recycling centers and

this study will likely not see the results until the next rate-setting process, but funding for the study was approved in the last rate order. in addition last march we approved of a waste characterization study to be performed and environment will be talking more about that. some other enhancements include, we had additional administrative supports, some additional analyst, help with the new reporting, and then we had some operational enhancements. relief drivers. a few two personal routes for safety issues and the routes where there were a high number of incidents. and lastly, clean streets. we enhanced public receptacle collection pickup, [indiscernible] increasing capacity by 20 percent so we'll look how the two programs are performing.

additional cardbord pick up and weekend cleanups as well. so, jumping into banned material collection. january we brought a graduate student claire wilson to analyze materials. we included a full report in the packet. we felt this work is important to be heard at the rate board hearing so i'll be presenting the summary of her findings and recommendations. our next step after this now is to review the findings and recommendations with recology, public works and 311 around feasibility and what the process looks like for implementing any or all of these recommendations. so, as part of claire's work, we asked her to map out the work conducted in the city around illegal dumping

which includes efforts by public work s and recology. i'll move over so i can see better. for public works, they respond to 311 requests. they have monday-friday proactive bayview sweeps they run with recology. outreach informent team volunteer clean up events. they connected 800 in 2023 and manage the public can censor pilot. on recology side they respond to 311 request. proactive bayview sweeps with public works. they have additional zone k proactive sweeps, which cover tenderloin, chinatown, north beach and financial district. they [indiscernible] bulky item recycling program and service 3 thousand garben can said. the chart on the right shows in the last year in 2023, it is pretty

eveningly split in terms of the number of 311 requests that recology or department of public works responds to in the last year. recology responded a letal more then half of those requests. so, the report breaks out findings and recommendations in three ways. first is around alignment, the second data collection and third around performance metrics. the first finding is the definition for illegal dumping and geographic boundsries. the first recommendation has to consenss for illegal dumping in san francisco and that includes the definitions for what materials count as illegal dumping and then, what the geo graphic boundaries are so she is recommending we are aligned

across this. san francisco does not have a effort to guide illegal dumping activities and what she is referring to is the [indiscernible] frameworks the eee, education, eradication and enforcement. the recommendation is organize the actirfbties around the framework with clear goals to advance current and future illegal dumping work. lastly, she notes that recology is required to report performance metrics. public works has no requirement under the rate order. in the next presentation, our analyst ben becker will be talking about the performance metric framework and it will include performance measures. the plan is to include performance measures relatesed to impound funded work so that includes public works measures here. we had initial conversations

with public work jz look to have a set of measures for the next rate order. >> since recology is already reporting on illegal dumping, is the public works reporting requirement function going to be similar to that and is there any reason why they have to wait until the next rate ordered to view equivalent reporting on illegal dumping? >> i don't think there sh a reason to wait to the next rate order. a metric will be similar, it is just we haveants talked through the details what would be reported to us and there is nothing requiring them to do so in the rate order and so, for the next rate order we want to memorialize that and spell it out. to your point, we could do something now. >> i think anything they are able to do

in advance following the setting up-it will be informative for the next rate process and i don't want them to jump into doing things they can't do yet, but don't see a reason why they can't start the reporting. >> from the initial discussion they have metric similar to the ones we track for recology so i think we can do that. >> thanks. >> the second item is data collection protocol. the first finding is, 311 tickets are not updated after on-site personnel respond to tickets so what she is referring to here is, requesters to 311 may not accurately input information and so, when on site personnel

come to collect illegal dumping they don't update the tickets and there needs to be a protocol. the second is updating or labeling notification service can overflow and 311 is misleading and so we have a public cans pilot and those in 311 are being treated the same as a 311 requester putting into 311 there is a overflowing bin, and so the recommendation here, which is the third recommendation is basically separate those out. they should have its own type of ticket, rather then the same as the overflow ticket to make the distinction. the last finding was that there is little data available of where

illegal dump material is coming from in the city, and yet evidence is anecdotal and not collected through 311, and so she is recommending creating a source category for on-site personnel input whether or not it is residential, commercial or other when completing tickets. the idea i think in the recommendation is that it helps the city to understand where it focuses efforts around mitigation and enforcement. the last finding here is around performance metrics. so, her first finding is recology is generally meeting the requirements of the fla and service level agreement track performance adequately. she suggested a few miner adjustments. the first one, if we go to the recommendations, report the abandon

material customer calls come directly from recology and for the [indiscernible] they are currently combined with some of the street sweeping tons, so it is hard to disaggregate some of the data. lastly, is adjusting the daily limit. in our service level agreement we have some daily limit standards and this is to make a distinction between the overflowing request and censor request and to prioritize completing the over-flowing requests from people actually requesting in the 311 app. the second finding is around bulky item recycling. she is is noting it is minimally reported and under utilized compared to prior years and largely used by single

family residents. requiring recology report to a number of requests for bulky item recycling by account type and participation rate and require annual outreach. lastly, she makes recommendation around --sorry--she is saying performance metric cover material collected from 311 request and public resepical programs and so more resources are needed:she is recommending adding budget in the next rate order for? illeem dump pilot projects to be agreed upon before the next rate setting process. for example, this report looks at-there is a lot of analysis around which months, which days in the month, which days in the week illegal

dumping and bulky item requests happen and by neighborhood as well so based on these analysis she is recommending that we can possibly do a pilot that targets certain neighborhood and do a proactive illegal dumping pick up maeb the last saturday of the month when you see the spike in illegal dumping usually due to move-outs and then or possibly beginning of the month when people are moving in and kind of getting rid of excess belongings. this was a high level summary of the report. it makes very specific recommendations we feel are actionable and improve alignment data and tracking and how we measure performance. the report does note that public works and recology do a good job of responding to request for 311 and do good job with the proactive routes. the emphasis here is really the need for more targeted approach and

if the city wants to reduce illegal dumping more resources and programs are needed. as i mentioned earlier, we are going to take this report, talk about the report with recology, public works and 311 about these recommendations for how we might implement some of these in the next rate order. and then, with that, i think i'll turn it to ben to talk about our proposed performance metric framework. >> good afternoon city adman strairt legg, board member herrera, board member bowdry, ben decker, the principal analyst for the refuge rates administrator. i will present the performance metric programs that were developing in collaboration with cs a perform nsh, sf environment, dpw and recology. proposition f created our office requires that we establish and monitor

performance standards. today i present the first stage. this board the public and stakeholders like recology and city departments will remain engaged as we make progress. our objectives are [indiscernible] collection and can disposal, including city department activity. monitor and analyze these activities and report our findings in a manner that is publicly accessible and understandable. we already established new reporting requirements in the current two year rate order and will improve them in the upcoming cycle. we compiled require rate report metric into a data which covers 2019 toprint. the data base a is the foundation of the work moving forward. we engage stakeholders it discussing the data available or currently unavailable. what questions will the public most want answered. how can we best measure our work and different roles and what

improvements do we need to make in our future data collection processes? we propose these products from this work will be internal database of all rate related reporting. series of public facing online dashboard and detailed report of rate monitoring which include broad scope and city use of impound account funds. the online dashboard are maintained with cs a performance, host [indiscernible] hosted on sf.gov and digital accessibility and inclusion standards. on all metrics need to meet critear for inclusion. specific and measurable, adquit qut relevance, time bound interest to the public, aligned with city goals, feasible to measure and work wg recology and city departments to define metric and meet criteria.

we also propose the framework of metrics for evaluation be based on proposition f goals. goal 1, rate fairness and stability. focus on cost of service from refuge and general utility. reliability of services focus on customer satisfaction and support. third is environmental goals, focused on tonage and greenhouse gas emissions. fourth category is rate monitoring. this is ongoing work and analysis which can't be summarized in simple dashboards. some of the proposed metrics, rate fairness and stability, might include metrics such as our refuge rates compared with cpi. other utilities and those similar jurisdictions. reliability of service might include metrics such as on time collection, customer service call wait times and dropped calls, in language

support, and annual customer satisfaction survey which we will propose to include in the coming rate order. environmental goals might include our land fill recycling and composting rates, mandatory composting compliance rates, outleech contamination charges, reusable foodware. and finally rate monitoring consist of ongoing work and aanalysis that can't be summarized in the dashboard. i did want to mention department of public works and sf environment are already reporting some metrics in the same line. they are not available to the average rate payer in one singular place, so when we talk about some of the performance metrics, this will be a opportunity to consolidate some of the work other departments have been doing so it is more easy for folks to

find. we currentsly plan to continue stakeholder indpaijment in developing the on-line dashboard. to return to the board in the spring with products for review and propose to launch the metric in conjunction for the next rate order. thank you for your time and your feedback is greatly appreciated. >> i think there are no questions on that. we will have hf & h talk about some of the analysis they have been helping us with. >> good afternoon city administrator. members of the board. good to be with you. rob, hf & h consultants. as jay indicated we are here to chat with you about few things we have been working on.

the most significant of which dollar wise and impact to the community is the capital planning that is for the upcoming rate order as well as looking into the future beyond that. we are also working with recology on the cost allocation that shows up in the rate application and looking into some common practices in response to interest areas from the stakeholders we met with and the refuge rate administrator. and then lastly, we will give you a quick preview of upcoming stuff that may impact rate payers around sb54. so, for the capital planning, where we are is we have conducted a stakeholder engagement process with a number of different stakeholders within the city as well as with recology to understand what the upcoming needs of the system are, particular to those capital requirements that you will have those more significant things that we may want to do long-term planning

and saving for. met with each group individually then met collectively and shared the results and discussed the results, discussed the project and developed a framework we'll talk with you about today. before the next time we come to you, we will apply those valuation criteria and put planning level cost estimates tothose capital items and then during this next rate order it is anticipated that some engineer ing level cost estimates in particular sequencing and timing for those projects would need to be developed. i won't spend long on this chart, but this chart reflects the result of the stakeholder engagement process and we tried to understand across political economic social technology legal and environmental axis what the various factors were that we will be influencing the upcoming rate

orders and trying to understand what the customer needs around that were. the customer both the rate payer directly and the city as a customer. so, that helped to frame 9 key capital planning areas that we need to go into. the first center around post-collection processing of material. there is a trash processing pilot that was approved in the last rate order. it is under way and results are imminent around that and we are looking forward seeing how san francisco works and cost effectiveness. >> it is great to see-i have to tell you, that was the most confusing slide i have ever seen. i dont know how that framed anything, so i think it is great to have something that frames a debate. i think be helpful if you have something a little bit clearer

that i could- >> it all boils down to the 9 bullets. we took a lot and digesting it down is the point. trash processing to understand the potential of recovering material from the black containing stream in san francisco and the cost effectiveness that is. looking at any potential changes to recycled processing, particularly as a result of the pier 96 seismic study. any look at the facilities at tunnel avenue require a look at all of what is going oen there, particularly if you look at doing trash processing there it may displace other activities so looking at the need to have construction and demolition waste processing at tunnel avenue and what other process needs to happen at that sime. recology identified a number of penl

needs related to tunnel avenue site, particularly facility related things. they acquired that site and accumulated that site over time and so some of the buildings are fairly old and they are looking at a site master plan to rationalize the space as well as the next item is the zero emission vehicle transition. you may be aware the california resources board passed regulations requiring heavy duty fleets to transition to zero emission. recology has had a chance to pilot some that technology here, but we need to look at a full scale transition to that over the next 10, 12 years. that will be a significant capital item as the trucks-lect trucks are twice the cost of conventional trucks and you have to think about charging infrastructure and maintenance. >> can i ask a question about the transition? i understand

[indiscernible] requires new purchases zero emission. now it is 50 percent of the fleet, in a few years it is hundred percent of new purchases. they don't prohibit repower of trucks and extending the life 06 the vehicles. is that part of the analysis? >> there are two different sets of rules and 50 percent and hundred percent you are talking about effect city fleets. there is a milestone program for private heavy duty fleets, and i believe recology is opted for the milestone option at a particular time line you need 25 percent of zero emission fleet and get to 50 and they have dates and rates. under that program, it is a requirement that that percentage of your fleet by that date is electric. there are exemptions for it. >> or hydrogen? >> or hydrogen.

zero emission in any that. powering zero emission or electric drive train is up for discussion. so, by those dates, they need to achieve those percentage targets and it gets fairly complicated with different classes of vehicles, so in the early years, you may be able to accomplish a significant portion of with pickup trucks and flatbeds. in the outyears we have to figure out the class 8 trucks and that is where a lot of expense really starts to come in. relating these two things together if recology sets up charging infrastructure or alternative fueling infrastructure at tunnel avenue it will require redoing that site to trench and set up the fueling infrastructure for that, so they are looking at a overall site optimization when that needs to happen. those two are certainly the largest dollar wise. we are talking 8 figures

certainly for each of those items. the next four are a bit smaller. contamination monitoring, you are aware of contamination monitoring pilot for the refuge trucks authorized under the last order. that is a ongoing need and once that has been determined what the right technology is, the right approach, there needs to be scaling to that and that may have some significance to it. oerganic processing is ongoing discussion. a number of different attempts handling that contaminated stream. you aware through the last rate order some work was done to clean that up, but that is still under discussion and the future of sort of how to handle all that material and what will be allowable may be changing and require some processing upgrades. looking at it up grades, this

is much smaller then some of the others we have been talking about, but it upgrades allow performance tracking and customer accountability and customer reporting that is being looked for as well as security issues to fortify the systems and protect them from cyber security issues. and then lastly, there are projects like the waste characterization study and others that environment will be looking for over time to monitor the waste stream and look at evolving trends in the industry and in san francisco's particular waste make-up to understand what to approach next. pause and see if there are questions on the capital items specifically? okay. so, as we go through these various capital items, some of them are necessity. there are some things needed to

comply with law. other things, there may be discretion about what to do and when to do them. we want to set up an evaluation process for these capital items to figure out how to prioritize. so set up a series of criteria that we want to apply to these various funding items, so as we come back to this board we got a rationalized recommendation. so, we are thinking about things like city goals and regulatory compliance. if it is not needed to meet one of those two things, may not be something we promote to the next level of evaluation. we want to look at cost effectiveness. if this is something we have to do for regulations or meet city goals, we want to stack rank based on cost effectiveness towards that goal. then we want to understand things like accountability and adaptability. can the progress around this be tracked? is there clear line of sight to you and regulating this and to the

refuge rate administrator moner tg over time? what is the rate payer impact. ? not just day one but is there volatility to this over time if we enter it and what is the administrative burden as the last filter? for each of these things we can put them into the set of criteria and we intend to come back to you with some preferred ranking of them based on that. we intend to do that in 3 year chunks thinking about potential rate order horizons, so the immediate rate order or the next and one after that and may allow for longer term savings profile. that's the capital planning. the next item is around cost allocation and as you are aware, there is discussion during the last rate order for example about what preoperative allocaturs are for various cost

categories. so, we have been working to understand with recology what appropriate allocaturs are for separating the commercial versus residential, as well as rate versus non rate allocations. i'll illustrate that here in the sample approach, where we have these total dollars in recology's income statement, and for each of those we need to be able to separate them out to different activities. and depending on the type of cost, different allocateer are appropriate. for example, we might distinguish between lifts, accounts and volume because one account may have multiple lifts, so if we bill them it may be appropriate to allocate the cost based on the number of accounts because everybody got one bill, but if we are doing based on some truck wear and tear or driver time, accounts isn't

a good reflection, because there are many times the number of accounts and lifts and potentially many times in volume. we want to align each of these potential allocaturs appropriate to the cost category allocated. next thing we have been working on when we came to the rate board last time we talked about a survey we are doing and there is concern expressed about the idea of a broad reaching survey and what do we get out of this? based on the feedback we got at the last meeting, we pivoted that surveying efforts from a broad surveying effort to something very focused looking at key issues to understand what are common practices in other places around these issues that you may be looking at. the first two around regulatory issues, how do others regulate rates in their community and with their

service provider? and then how do you do general oversight and performance management? and then around sh of the specific issues that are coming up in the capital planning or allocations, what are others doing around zero emission fleet? how is contamination monitoring work? how do others deal with the differences between single family residential, plexes, apartments, commercial generators and how do those rates get structured? trash processing and how other communities are handling that and then the regulation of the construction and demolition debris system. so, hopefully the surveying we are doing is more focused there on these particular issues you are wrestling with. related to rate regulation, i won't read all this to you, we are finding that there are a variety of mechanisms out there, the different agencies use,

ordinances, rate manuals, contract exhibits, operating procedures, and they occur in all sorts of different environments. open market, exclusive environments, but the prevalence of specific rate regulation methods and formalize rate regulation method where there is monopoly is all most universal throughout the state. so, as we see that in these other places, we are seeing that the rate reg ulation includes some disaggregation of costs as well as transparency on revenues. you got performance metric. you got the cost allocate the cost out using defined allocation methods like we just talked about. and then you got ability to benchmark for efficiency and productivity to say over a certain point we are not

paying for inefficiency. we will come with other details how this might work and alternative approaches used in other places. along the lines of general oversight, again we see a greater degree of oversight in those more exclusive systems, because the rate payer doesn't have the ability to call up and change service provider if they dont like the rate or don't like the service, and so that's typically governed by either a contract or ordinance. something in law that defines that rate regulation or that performance regulation. so, going forward, we know that one example of this is the land fill agreement is coming up soon, environment will be working on bidding that out and a logical next step may be to include some of the post rate regulation for some of the other post collection services like organics. any questions on that before i

get into the last item? okay. so, last item we were asked to give a preview on sb54. sb54 is a law passed couple years ago that establishes what is called a extended producer responsibility system over packaging in california. what extended producer responsibility programs do is they shift the burden of cost from the rate payer from the local agency to the producer of those products and the consumer of those products and says if you are making this thing, we want you to be responsible for the cost of dealing with it at the end of the life. this is broadly applied in california to hazardous and hard to handle item because the costs are so much more dramatic. this is the first example of it touching something we are used to see

as a consumer item and typically in our programs. the thing that is interesting about this, the law specifically says it intends to relieve the rate payer of these obligations and intends not to burden rate payers and service providers for these costs. so, the key goals, reduce the amount of packaging generated, make sure all packages or sold in california is either recyclable or compostable by a certain date, and then about 65 percent of it is actually recycled or composted. they want to shift as i said, the cost from local jurisdictions and rate payer ers to producers and consumers and wants there to be clarity and consistency throughout the state what is and isn't recycle. they don't want daly city to

have one and san francisco have another. they believe that will stimulate investment into the infrastructure needed to hit these yield targets and to fund the cleanup efforts around them. these are the rates and dates. hundred percent of single use packaging needs to be recyclable or compostable. 65 percent of single use packaging needs to get recycled and they are looking for a 25 percent reduction through source reduction in the volume and weight of the packaging. ithaalso established early mile 37 stones de facto bans for certain materials. things like styrofoam, flex package and film packaging are not likely to hit recovery rates by required dates, mostly because the producers are not required to fund the system by that date, so they think it will

automatically fail and be out of the system within the next couple years. the obligations of the city under the law are relatively limited. the obligation is that you accept all the materials oen the state's list into your program and you already do. so, san francisco is pretty well covered. there may be additional handling required to separate one material type from another, but you currently accept everything on the list. the other thing about this bill that is important is, it requires interaction with local agencies and it specifically in the legislative text respects your relationship with your service provider, and says the producer cannot establish separate collection systems that compete with your collection system. how that gets set up and how you work with your service provider and the pro to decide whether others may be able to play in the system is really something that they are resting in your

control, not at the state level. we received one draft of the regulatory text on 54 and probably only get one last revised draft before they go to final regs because it needs to be done by the end of the year. the big issue in play is what is the scope of the cost they will cover? who are they going to pay? how is the payment mechanism dpoeing to work and what transparency will we see around the system? for example, if the producers write a check to recology to improve their infrastructure, will that be clear to you and regulating the rates here that they received some subsidy from some other source? similarly, will there be money flowing for example to department of environment to fund their cost of educating the community about these materials? as the final draft of the regs

come and they have a comment period that will be a focus for local jurisdictions on those areas and making sure the reimbursement comes. we talked a fair bit with jay and ben about how to engage in this process as it comes up and if the city is interested, how to get your ore in the water. this is the time to make sure the rate payer gets what they are promised through this thing. i'm available for any questions you may have. >> board members, any questions? thanks. any comments or questions that you have? okay. i think jay, are we done with this item and can we- >> we have one more bit of presentation about the next rate setting process. >> okay, great.

>> so, we have a upcoming rate setting process and why we have hf & h help understand our capital priorities and what the costs look like and also to sort out the cost allocation methodology and then look at common practices for things we may include in terms of controls for and monitoring for next rate order. for next rate setting process, we break into three phases. the first is application, which we put out september 1, and we are-it includes shared rate model, which is what we have last time. we were included supplemental schedules for additional revenue and operational validation, and then something

really new is a program cost forms. we are asking recology to break out cost by various programs so we can look at the deltas for enhancements or reductions in those programs. the second phase is the rate order development, so once the application comes to us, we will do our rate review, we'll do the record building we did last time, and then we will have also rate payer input. i'll talk about new things there in terms of rate payer input. and then, the last phase is the rate board hearings where we have the proposed rate order and then the refuge rate board hearings to consider our proposed rate order and prop f written objections and prop 218 protest determination. this is--i'm going to talk a little bit about this, but this is just the general timeline so the first

chunk through december is phase 1, the rate application phase. the next chunk, the green dots are developing our rate order and the last phase is the rate board hearing and we'll plan on working with your calendars on establishing those hearing dates. so, we made several improvements to the next rate setting process, and 2023, that rate setting process we focused on created a new transparent process prior oratizing transparency and accountability. we were focused on establishing financial controls and reporting requirements and investing in operational and investment neetds. the next process we have several improvements i'll talk during

the next slide and the themes will be focused around addressing capital needs and how to mitigate long-term costs. talking about improvements, so we after our last rate setting process talked to several stakeholders to get feedback on how we might be able to improve process. the biggest thing that comment we got was, there was too much time pressure. it was a very truncated rate setting process, 6, 7 months to set rates. we added 4 months to the rate setting process. we also have done prework in terms of determining city priorities and initial cost estimates through the reapplication period and before then we have done some that work. and then, we are planning through the rate application to outline service level agreements for each of the programs, so we are not trying

to modify those last minute during the rate hearing process. we are viim rate payer outreach engage. ment this is something from the rate board we needed more robust outreach and engagement so we have a few new outreach channels including the board of supervisor news letter, recology news letter and targeted e-mail campaign. what is new also is stakeholder meetings, meeting with small property owners in san francisco and department association after the application comes out. and the one thing we are most excited about is the focus groups. we've work on contract with [indiscernible] to help us facilitate some focus groups with rate payers to get more insight into what they feel is important in terms of investment through the rates. we also have improved rate review, we have a shared rate model.

this time we had separate rate models that caused discrepancies and made setting rates a struggle. we have new supplemental schedules to give us more ability to validate the numbers and applications and then the program forms allowing us to disstill cost by program. lastly, rate monitoring improvements will-the last rate order was a report and we are doing as a separate report from the rate order. the rate order will be in a form prioritizing implementation. we found the last rate order was difficult to implement. searching through a report for kind of the different provisions we included in the rate order. and then we are including more comprehensive performance tracking. outlined the framework that we are going to put forth in the next

rate order for the rate board to approve and also improve customer service monitoring and other larger focus in the next rate setting process. i wanted to talk about rate impacts that we will spect in the next rate order. from external factors, we have this business tax reform, which will be on the ballot november. if it passes, we are expecting that will increase rates in terms of the tax obligation by the rate recology. economic factors, controller's forecast, not expecting robust economic growth and so that will impact revenues coming through the rates. and sb54, that just mentioned could have impact and possibly

lowering rates if the reimbursement rules are written in a way that covers the cost of processing those materials. and then the ev requirements, which i think is going to be one of the larger costs that we will look to mitigate over the next few years. one time savings. these are things we were in the last rate order we won't have this round and rate expenditures come includes capital needs, city priorities and new projects and impact of the balancing account. just briefly--i think this is talked about already, but some of those new expenditures, capital needs and long-term cost, including the advance clean fleet, post collection process, investment and it infrastructure modernization.

city priorities and new initiatives, so environment department, we asked them not to just give a update but also talk about what they are hoping to see in the rate order so there may be new priorities from environment as well as public works and our office, which was previouslyfunded by impound account balance is now in the rates so our cost are part of the rates and then, we'll probably need-may need additional rate monitoring support and looking for -looking to do a customer satisfaction survey as well. lastly, we approved a balancing account that increase or decrease based on profits earned or loss incurred during the rate cycle, so the amount in the balancing account is 50 percent

of estimated profits above or below the target profit that is earned based on the 91 percent operatings ratio. any balance at the end of the rate cycle positive or negative can be al located [indiscernible] we are anticipating a negative balance in the rate cycle and so that is something that we'll talk more about in the next item in terms of why that balance will likely be negative. any questions? okay. i think that end this item. >> then we are ready for public comment on this item. >> we will take in-person public comment. members of the public who wish to provide comment on this item, please line up at the podium now. please note you have three minutes. for the record, there are no

in-person public comments. we will take remote public commentment. . members who wish to provide comment dial star 3 on the phone or click raise hand in webex. please note you will have three minutes. moderator, do we have remote public comments? for the record, there are no remote public comments. this concludes public comment. >> alright. let's call item 4. >> item 4, action item, vote on proposed rate reduction and rate 2025 and rate credit for rate year 20 24. >> so, i will say a few introductory words and recology will go into details, but we made significant improvement in rate monitoring, especially around rate reporting requirements and invested in analytical staff at recology to support this additional rate monitoring and reporting so the good news is

that is working. i think the q2 rates reports we flagged variance in the new reports and reviewing recology discovered material mistakes, one being related to overstated lease cost related to revenue projections under estimated anticipated revenues. they combined errors are approximately $10.8 million in the first rate year, and $13 million rate year 2025. in terms of mitigating this, our new rate setting application and process help mitigate the errors in revenue and we are working with recology for additional validation interest lease cost. recology proposed action movaling forward is issue a credit adjustment retroactively and adjust rates downwards in the upcoming rate year down to what they have been had there not bine the material mistakes. we agree with these actions and will be asking the rate board to vote

to endorse these actions and lastly, i want to note that in taking these actions, we will likely end the rate cycle with negative balance in the balancing account, because recology will likely not meet their operating ratio and they will be below the allowable process. 50 percent shows as negative balance in the balancing account and at the end of the rate cycle [indiscernible] i'll have recology present the details around this item and afterwards we outlined a slide for the rate board to vote on. >> jay, will recology be talking about why the material mistake made it through the process and then through the rate review process? which is on the city side.

>> yes. >> great. >> good afternoon. chair legg, member herrera, member bowdry. john braslaw, director of business process improvement for recology and work with the san francisco team on the rate setting process. as you heard, the current rate order includes a number of new reporting requirements in financial controls. in order to fulfill the new obligation, recology made significant improvement in the internal review process. the discrepancy discovered during review of is the draft third quarter reports are a result of those expanded processes. as soon as we discovered the discrepancies and did due

diligence to insure we understood the issues, cause and impact we requested meetic with the rf a and itisy attorney office and met and explained what we discovered and talked through potential remedies and did this in a effort to be proactive, fair and transparent. as jay mentioned, there are two discrepancies we are working to address. lower revenue at current rates and higher projected lease expenses. revenue at currents rates is key input in rate setting. it is the base from which the rate increase percentage is calculated. the revenue at currents rates for rate year 24, was calculated based on the rate year 2023 revenues, which included a cola adjustment on january 1, 2023. when the rolling revenue forward for rate year 24, the impact of this cola adjustment was not fully

considered. revenue at currents rates for 24 should have used the rates in effect from january 1, 2023 and projected those rates over the entire rate year 2023 year to obtain a correct base for the revenue at current rates for 24. the second issue was related to lease costs associated with fixed assets used in operations. there were a number of leases that should have terminated at the expiration of the lease terms and inadvertently extended. the primary issue is extection of leases to deprecation lives instead of terminating at the end of the lease lives. for example, vehicles are leased over a 7 year period while the depreciation is 9 years. in addition, facilities at rsf we leased over a 20 year period were set to expire at the end of 2023

and extended through the end of the rate payer. to address these calculation discrepancies, recology san francisco company proposed to provide credit adjustments for rate year 24 and to reduce the rates for rate year 25. the difference for rate year 24 are proposed as credits since the rate year ends today. the adjustment to rate year 24 include reduction to the tipping fee of 1.78 percent or $4.29 off of the 24109 set in the rate order for 2024. that represents total adjustment of approximately $2.4 million. the majority that adjustment is incorporated into the collection rate adjustment since rsf drives

most of the tipping fee revenue from the collection operations. the amount represent ing public and account customers is approximately $235 thousand. the tipping fee change along with reversing the impacts of the revenue and lease differences within the collection companies result in a 1.91 percent reduction in rates from their 2023 level. the credit adjustment for rate payers would be 1.91 percent for the period from october 1, 23 through december 31, 2023 and 3.24 percent so the period from january 1, 24 through september 30, 24. the difference in these credit amounts is due to the timing of the last rate increase on january 1, 2024. because rates were held constant in q1 of 24, the credit adjustment is

minus 1.91, because the rates had increased on january 1, the credit adjustment is the larger adjustment of 3.24 percent to offset that increase. for a typical residential customer, the credit for the entirety of rate year 2024 would be $18. for rate year 2025, the company is proposed to reduce the change in the tipping fee from a planned increase of 3.08 percent to increase of 1.39 percent. the new tipping fee would be $244.44 rather then the planned rate year 25 tipping fee of $248.52. the collection rates would decrease by 1.01 percent instead of planned increase of 2.47 percent.

even prior to the discovery of these discrepancies, recology san francisco companies have been working enhancing rate application review and dpuver nns process. some steps we will be taking to insure more accurate submission include, expanding our third party review of rate models and data. we engage with rate consultants to perform comprehensive review of rate application and all supporting documents. included in the effort is engagement of third parties to assist in development and review of key assumptions including inflation and growth. in addition to expanding our third party support, we are increasing our support from our corporate team, including help from project management office and documentation support from our internal audit team. who has expertise in creating document controls.

finally, we plan to manually recalculate all of the key schedules in the rate models in our submission. this step further reduce the chance of miscalculations. as we did in the last rate cycle, we will continue to work with the rr a and his team providing detailed support and responding to questions and inquiries throughout the rate review process. we are committed to making every effort to provide clear accurate and focused information to facilitate that process. let me now address your question mr. legg. the 2023 rate application process as you heard from the rra was somewhat compressed. in addition, another one of the challenges that we faced was most of the participants were fairly new to this process, because we had moved

regulation to the controller's office and the rra position was created. some of the process included kind of essentially a education process going over the history of rate setting and how we went through review. from the recology perspective, this is a-errors that occurred in the schedules that were looked at were reviewed by a number of people. we even in the last cycle hired outside consultants that did review. we had a lot of internal review. unfortunately, the discrepancies we discovered came as a result of looking at not only the variances, but some ways of lack of variance in the quarterly reporting. as the rra mentioned, i think

the report process worked. unfortunately it is comprex complex process with a lot of data and sub-schedules and this is one that quite honesty we missed and i missed. i have been involve in the rate-setting process for many years, and looked at those schedules and this is something that got by myself and got my other members of our team. >> committee members, i will recognize mr. herrera first then mr. bowdry. >> thank you. i think i understood at the beginning of the presentation you said youz shared with the city attorney's office the discrepancy, number one. and presumably did you share with them the proposed credits scenario

you laid out for us today, and the mitigation procedures that you outlined? >> that is correct. >> is that your understanding? >> yes, it is. >> thank you. >> mr. bowdry. >> i have one question. i like to understand little more detail maybe at a later time the accounting here. just to understand that. i understand there is a lot of different schedules and things that goes into the calculation, but my question is, how long will it take rate payers to be made whole of the discrepancy? >> we plan to issue credits for rate year 2024 with the november bills, so it the first focus of our team and our technology our it team is to reset the rates for the rate year that is starting tomorrow. so, that's more time sensitive.

those adjustments should be in place in the next week, so that everything from 10-1 forward reflects the new rates, and then we'll move to calculating and applying the credits to customer accounts. >> thank you. >> i appreciate the--i been briefed what happens and appreciate the companies coming forward quickly working with rate administrator and city attorney's office. i feel like it is what the entire oversight process is designed to do, and so i do feel it worked in this case, and i want to commend everybody fl the work you have done. i know it is really disappointing to run into something like this.

i'm glad we were able to correct it quickly. i am curious if this discrepancy with explorations, if we went back and took a backwards look if this is problem in past applications or have you not-have we not done that backwards look? we are not required to at this point. >> actually, i did a bit of investigation on my own. it is one of the areas that i historically had spent a lot of time on and we spnt a lot of time in hearings discussing the lease process and there is a very detailed prescribed way that we set lease rates and we have been following that since inception in 2006. really the lease error came as a result of transition both like i said

both in san francisco, but also in our corporate office. it really was a result of pulling a report that covered the lease data, but was template was depreciation report that had different lives for those assets and so, the subsequent calculation was a result of using those deappreciateable lives. i went back and i looked at data from 2013 cycle and didn't see anything in my review that was out of the regular 7 year cycle. again, primarily related to vehicles. that was the bulk of the difference came in. >> okay. thanks very much.

so, we have before us-are we doing the motion first or going to do public comment first? okay. let's do public comment. >> we will take in-person public comment. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item, please line up at the podium now. please note you have 3 minutes. for the record, there are no in person public comments. we'll take remote public comment. members of the public who wish to provide remote public comment on this item dale star 3 on the phone or click raise hand in webex. please note you have e32 minutes. moderator, do we have any remote public comments? for the record, there are no remote public comments. this concludes public comment. >> thank you.

jay, we have a proposed-went over action we need to take and you have a- >> we have a slide that outlines the proposal, so we can put it up here. what we are asking the rate board to vote on endorsing is the following actions. issue a retroactive credit for golden gate customers, equivalent to 1.9 percent to all rate payers between october 1, 2023 and december 1, 2023. [indiscernible] between january 1, 2024 and september 30, 2024. recology will be issuing credit adjustment to all customers equivalent to 1.78 percent of the total

tipping fee paid by such customers on tons delivered to transfer stations. if the rate payer is eligible for credit is provided and no longer has account with recology or recology golden gate will use good faith efforts to locate the rate payers and refund them at equivalent amount. if a self-haul customer no longer has account with recology, san francisco recology san francisco will use good faith efforts to identify and locate the self-haul customer and refund them. the second action would be recology reduce the plan october 1, 2024 increase so the tipping fee changed to adjustment to the tipping fee

from 3.08 percent to 1.89 percent which lowing the tipping fee from $248.52 to $244.44 effective october 1, 2024. the adjustment to anticipated rate changing for collection fees from 2 pote 47 percent to negative 1.01 percent effective october 1, 2024. >> alright. members, can i have a motion? >> mr. chair, i move to approve the credit and rate reduction detailed on slide 25 titled, credit and rate reduction approval including a credit for rate year 2024 and reduction in the change of tipping fee and collection rates for rate year 2025. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. can we have roll call, please? >> on this motion, city administrator

legg, yes. member herrera, yes. member bowdry, yes. with 3 votes in favor, the motion passes. >> great. we can now call-thank you very much. we can now call item 5. >> item 5, discussion item for recology and city department status updates. recology will begin the presentation. >> >> good afternoon city admin stairt leg, vice chair and board member bowdry. we appreciate the opportunity to provide a update to the rate board on recology performance through third quarter of rate year 24. for the agenda today, our team

will provide updates on year to date financial results, status of program enhancements implemented under this rate order, city wide weekend cleanup events, hydrogen powered truck pilot, update on our contamination program and monitoring technology, update on organic processing enhancement and diversion initiatives and studies we are currently performing. a brief facility assessment and modernization update and lastly, a high level summary of year to date performance. without further delay, i'll ask terry dawn, regional controller to present on year to date financial results. terry. yoorks good afternoon. terry dong, the regional controller of the san francisco companies.

i will speak it our q3, 9 month ending june 30 rilt results. in the table to the left, our adjusted revenue for 9 month is $10 million then projected revenue. this is due to adjusting for revenue projection discrepancy along with lower revenues transfer station as a result of our lower volume. the 9 month year to date expenses were approximately $5 million behind projection and this is largely due to the lease projection discrepancy john mentioned earlier. timing of the seismic study and facility monernization work and lower cost driven by lower volume. lower then projected expenses are offset by payroll and related cost which includes health and welfare cost experiencing double digit inflation. if you focus your attention to the table to the top right, after

adjusting for the customer credits,b the 9 month net profit is approximately $18 million, with eligible operating ratio expenses at $238 million, the target process to get to a 91 percent operating ratio needs to be $23.6 million. this result in short $91 percent operating ratio needs to be $23.6 million. this result in short fall of 5 million and 2.7 is attributed to the balance account. the table on the bottom right we estimate full year rate 24 shortfall is $6 million. $3 million atrbted to the balancing account and rate year 25 shortfall will be $23.8 million. that is additional 11.9 million to the balancing account. rate making includes up and down measuring the actual to projections. when the rates are set, we had

growth assumptions in both years worth about $15 million that did not materialize for 24 and don't expect to materialize for 25. the expectsed rate year 25, $23.8 million short fall is a hult of the overall rate not set as level efficient to cover the cost and generate the allowed profit at 91 percent operating ratio. i know that is a lot of information and i'll pause and take any questions. >> i assume the larger short-fall in rate 25 is largely reflection of the credit, the credits we just voted on as well as the revenue reductions? >> actually, that's just partially the reason. as i mentioned, in both rate years we have growth built into the projection and that's about 7 and $7 and a half million each year, so about $15 million for both years.

the rate decrease will attribute to some that $23.8 million short fall in 25, but i think the main reason is also our rates are just not set at a level that will cover our cost. decreasing our rates for 25 and reducing the rates for 24 also doesn't cover the inflation that we have been experiencing in the economy. >> thanks. >> you're welcome. now i'll pass the mic to anthony our senior general manager of sunset scavenger to talk about our program enhancements. >> good afternoon. anthony, senior general manager, sunset scavenger. as part of it rate order several program enhancements were made to support cleaner streets throughout is san francisco and implemented them this rate year. those included additional ban material

routes, two new cardboard collection routes, and two additional dedicated public receptacle routes. the first 3 quarters of the rate year, our abandon material crews collected 3500 tons of material from the street. that is increase over last year. during the same time we received ov73 thousand calls for materials via 311 system and represents 10 percent decrease over the same period last year. this shows the additional zone provided has been effective getting trash off the streets sooner and leads to less complaent calls from the public. our compliance, service level agreement compliance is improved significantly to 86 percent and continues to climb. for the new cardboard routes, they have been operating across the city in major commercial areas. so far collected and recycling additional 471 tons of material.

next, the public receptacle routes collected over 4 thousand tons thus far. while receiving over 13 thousand over flow calls via 311. compared to last year over flow calls are down more then 8 percent demonstrating the additional routes provided or continue to have a positive impact on street cleanliness. compliance for public cans is 86 percent, with preliminary q4 results in the mid-90 percent range. in total hard working employee owners collected over 8 thousand tons of material from our streets across these three programs. aortenhancement for the rate order was the weekend cleanup events. throughout the year recology coordinated 11 events across the city to allow customers to bring material as well as donateable items for good will. over 3 thousand residents attended the events and 41 percent of the material was diverted from the landfill.

we also offered a total 99 tons of finished compost to residents free of charge. we look forward to the rate year and another 11 events. next recology was the first waste hauler to test the hydrogen power vehicle and san francisco was the first on the street. a major milestone for the city and cower company. [indiscernible] provided valuable data hydrogen effectiveness in reuge collection. driver and customer feedback was overwhelmingly positive and concluded quieter operation, able to handle the terrain and the distance across the city. sf environment joined for a ride along to see the truck operating first hand and in the next rate order and into the future, recology looks forward continuing to partner with the

city to explore this and other potential altenative fuels to minimize carbon foot print and delivering our services. now i'll turn it over to kevin flanagan general manager of golden gate to discuss our contamination programs. >> good afternoon. my name is kevin flanagan, the general manager for recology golden gate. over the next several slides i'll talk about our contamination program. the rate order included funding for cameras that use a i. the systems installed late february this year and we have been testing the units the last 6 monthss. also included a new contamination protocol that clearly defined the process of win wh and how we address the contamination in a effort to change our customer's behavior.

funding for one additional staff person was also included to assist in managing the contamination zero process. advantsage we found is allows our auditors to see the entire contents of a container as it is emptied into our trucks, versus when they are on site just looking at the top layer of material through on-site inspection. the image quality significantly emproved over the last version and currently at the level we expected. the system is also able to receive updates by the vendor online and result in timely resolution on some issues we have been faishing during the testing period. a i is still evolving. it is important to note the technology is versatile though. for example, this vendor is using the same technology to identify over-loaded

containers. this particular system is fully developed and currently installed in over 25 thousand trucks across the county. also exploring a system in residential situation. so, some of the challenges we experienced obviously the system is still in the beta stage, so we have and will continue to work with the vendor through the different challenges we have been experiencing , but again the system is evolving. a frequent challenge we experienced is location of the cameras. these are located in the hoppers of the trucks, which allot of material is dumped inthat area and damage the cameras and knocks out of alignment so from a maintenance standpoint, that is a very frequent visit for maintenance technicians to adjust the cameras, clean them, potentially repair

a damaged wire. a bigger challenge is having to man wale process the data the a i systems are generated. this is a area more development is needed with the software to support more efficient and accurate reporting. this is a pretty big hurdle for us. we also have the same challenges with customer association. essentially the gps coordinates of the truck during collection may not match with the address of the customer and an example of this is a customer's account address is not on the same street as say, like the dock where we service the bin. we are having to manually match those two to insure we are charging the correct account for the contamination. again, the a i technology is promising, but not a point to start scaling at this time. this next slide highlights the quantity of tags our drivers generated

compared to number of events the 6 camera systems jen raitded through a i over the last 6 months. the a i is generating expotential number of events over the drivers tagging and reporting contamination, however we see half reviewed events resulting in false positive, which is contributed to fewer notice letters sent out as you can see on the slide. as mentioned, the a i generated events must be individually reviewed to verify contamination and the customer location determined before moving on in the process, versus the driver reported contamination which is validated by the driver aroung with the account that generated the contamination. additional the phase of est iting our focus is on the functionality and the internal process to utilize the systems and not on charging contamination fees. the review and validation of

the a i generated events is a manual process that will again require additional headcounts and system improvements to scale the technology. the new protocol has been effective changing behavior. we see roughly 70 percent reduction of contamination from those who received notice letters pertaining to contamination. again, we do not feel this technology is at a point to move forward in scale, we feel it is promising and we should continue to explore this system and other a i technology so it grows into a viable solution. there are not any questions, i will pass the presentation to general manager, recology san francisco. >> before you leave rfx i have a couple questions. have you been thinking about what the best way-it seems like the thing that is most of interest to the rate

board is driving changes in behavior. i think rate board has expressed in the last meeting anxiety about sending penalities and fines to residents. are you thinking about what the best ways to drive those changes in behavior are as you implement the technology? >> yeah. so from our experience, the protocol that was developed in the last current rate cycle is working. that requires us to go through a series of touch points and communication with the customer before they start getting significant charges. it also allows them to reverse those charges by cleaning up their streets. we feel that things are effective in that regard. it is more on the front end when we identify the contamination and working through that process. >> and, would separately would having

some kind of bar code or qr code on the cans--instead of relying on gps. >> there is technology out there. yeah, and it is something we will propose likely in the upcoming rate cycle and tags for containers. >> thank you. you can pass it on. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. maurice quillen the general manager for recology san francisco. this afternoon i will provide the rate board updates oen the deployment of arganic process equipment at the tunnel avenue site, trash processing test, city wide test characterization study, seismic evaluation and tunnel avenue facility modernization project. recology requested the

procurement of processing system to reduce level of contamination in the organic and rates submission. thedition was made to procure a [indiscernible] to reduce contamination. a trommel screen ordered september 20 23 and made operational beginning this year. the screening operation spans two shifts 5 days per week and one shift saturday. recology received approximately 500 tons of source separated organics daily and the operators are identify the process the dirty loads. we believe is the main source of contamination. our efforts identify prautss nearly 46 percent of the tonage on daily basis. 22 percent or 110 tons of volume is removed as contamination. within the following weeks we will work

with sf environment and conultant to analyze the effectiveness. we are confident the trommel screen is doing a good job removing trash and plastic from the organics and deployment of the trommel is approved the quality of the material we are delivering to the compost facility. this is a image of the trommel screen at the transfer station. a fairly simple piece of equipment. we load the piece of equipment in the middle off to the right, the clean 4 inch arganics are transferred after running the trommel process, and to the left the trash is extracted from the system. to the left is sample picture of what the organics look like and represent a commercial load and has quite a bit of contamination and the right is what the

process organics look like after they are throw the trommel. the refuge rate provided funding for trash processing pilot test. identifying the viability of removing recyclables and organics from the san francisco trash using a full scale recovery system. recology is working with sf environment, industry partners to conduct trash processing tests. june 1, recology delivered over 100 tons of trash to transfer station to green waste recovery in son jose. the tonage was a bit challenging to process as it contained commercial and residential material and the outcome of the test yield lower recovery results then what the facility acustom to receive from local jurisdictions. the organic was delivered tew the composting facility in hollister, composted for 14 weeks and

cured 2 weeks and recently screened. hdr participated in the green waste test and produce a report to formalize the test results. recology and sf environment where working delivering a smaller prackz of the organic rich [indiscernible] in fresno. later this fall. this processing test will imploe a modified food depackager. colony will compost recovered materials on site. in a similar fashion, hdr will observe the test and issue a independent analysis of the process and outcome. recology continues to explore additional trash processing efforts on site as a central component of the tunnel avenue facility modernization efforts. remain committed helping the city of san francisco achieve the climate action waste reduction and

landfill disposal reduction goal of 50 percent by 2023. an action ited item was to reallocate trash processing to perform a city wide waste characterization study which was the last was in 2020. covid and the economy we believe the information is outdated. recology is working with cascadeia consulting to perform a detailed city wide study. the study structure is based on identifying the composition of waste stream by customer type. looking at understanding the waste composition of residential multifamily customer. split side louder rates that collect plastic carts as proxy for residential and small multi-family

customers, front end loader and commercial loader that service the metal containers are the proxy for the commercial and large multifamily customer types. the roll off trucks hold metal compacters and serve commercial and large multifamily customers. the project started monday september 16 and run through october 11. over the 4 week period 515 distinct samples will be collected and sorted. samples sorted by hand in 90 specific categories and weighed. the result will be used to assist with design of future recovery programs as well as equipment design procurement decisions. this slide here shows a sample load that was identified by the cascadeia consultant. the pink tag is our chain of custody which tracks that route into the transfer station, and then tracks the

material into the sorting area. to the right you can see the cascadeia subcontractor sky valley sorting a 200 pound sample of trash into 90 different categories. failly elaborate and time consuming process. [indiscernible] finding for the pier 96 seismic study, tunnel avenue facility modernization conceptual design: [indiscernible] from the port of san francisco and the lease was renegotiated and requires recology to conduct a seismic study issue facility retrofit report with cost estimates and conduct a facility assessment. recology has worked closely with [indiscernible] the company that designed the pier 96 facility to produce the required reports. in september recology started the field work for seismic evaluation.

includes a geotechnical study and assessment of the building foundation, super structure and sheet pile sea wall. completion date is september 2024. upon completion of the study, a retrofit report will be drafted, outline the scope of the rehab project and the associated cost. we expect the retrofit report will be issued march 2025. the facility condition assessment will be completed by the end of the rate year. the rate application submission also included funding performed conceptual design for tunnel avenue facility modernization, trash processing, fleet electrification and environmental review. recology conducted a solicitation to select a vendor to work on the tunnel modernization project. we selected rrt design and construction. rr it rks is engineering construction company with expertise in solid

waste field and recycling industry and resume with over 400 projects to their credit. rrt will be exploring near term as well as long-term trash processing options for the tunnel betty site and consultant will continue on establishing fleet wide electrification requirements identify power availability and make recommendations on our on-site power transmission. the fleet electrification and material processing rrt will work with our legal team on tunnel baity environmental impack report. [indiscernible] facility and vehicle, on site parking, traffic flow and storm water management will be studied to inform the environmental rue and permitting work for the modernization. if you have questions, i'm happy to answer them. i now will turn the

presentation over to evan boyd, the san francisco regional manager to summarize and conclude our presentation. >> thank you. in summary, and as you heard from members of our san francisco team, recology is successfully implemented enhanced service. many of those you can see here. year to date financial results after adjustments were $5.4 million short of projections. asia heard from terry, this is largely driven by economic growth that did not materialize this year. we continue to work closely with city departments to implement enhanced services and improve financial and operational reporting. we worked test the first of its kind hydrogen powed collection vehicle and more excited to be able to test this technology in san francisco. the first city in north america to do so.

we are pretty bullish on this and pretty excited about that. lastly, we wanted to provide you with a glimpse into program enhancements and up grades you can expect in the next rate order cycle. those enhancements include, trash processing so looking at options to repurpose areas of our site to do trash processing. alsternative fuel collection vehicles, so looking to transition our fleet to alternative fuels per the state regulations you heard about. implementation of additional a i technology. there was a question about is there other technology out there, rfid, bar coding, certainly those technologies, but there is technologies we also believe are out there that can help us with route efficiency and routing in general that we like to explore. engineering work for facility modernization. as you heard about from mo.

upgrades to it infrastructure. so making our systems more durable, more reliable and more secure. certainly something that we would like to propose. and increased outreach and education to our customers and this is key to a successful and sustainable program as you all know. greatly appreciate the opportunity to provide you with updates on our business and our performance through the third quarter relative to the rate order this year. we thank you for your continued support and partnership and we are happy to answer any questions you may have. thank you. >> thank you. board members, any questions? thanks very much for really good presentation. >> thank you. >> department of environment is coming up next.

>> good afternoon refuge rate board. residential zero waste senior coordinator at the environment department. my presentation has three parts. the first part i will talk about our zero waste goals and where we are currently at. next i will talk about our policy priorities and end with some highlights from the last refuge rate year. work the environment department has been working on so three separate parts. getting right into zero waste. here is a picture of the landfill rate over the last 20 years and what i want to point out here, we have been on a downward trajectory which is the goal. back in 2000 we were closer to 900 thousand tons of material going to landfill annually. now we are closer to 500

thousand tons. this is due to pioneering and innovative programs that have been rolled out in partnership between the city and recology and funded by refuge rate payers and this is really made us san francisco a leader in zero waste policy all over the world. all my colleagues get calls from countries and cities from all over the world asking how did we get here and that's because of our innovative programs. speaking of one of our innovative programs, our composting collection-f - >> curious you see from 2000 to 2012, you continue to go down. goes back up. what was the spike for? >> that is economic growth. a lot of bumps you see along the way is economic growth. as the economy goes down, tiply our landfilling goes down which is environmentally great, but we are also

in a recovery period, so thanks for pointing that out. speaking of one of the innovative programs thrks food composting program, which we are one of the first cities in the world to roll out such a composting program in 1999. we have been in a continual upward cycle of collecting at the peak. we were at 700 tons of organic material collected per day and that big drop is covid. we are still in recovery period now. some is due to economic growth. we are not fully back, the city isn't back, some has to do with some of our recycling composting program s dropped off as well because we are in the post-covid era so we need to increase outreach and education to the public. we have a codified goal of cutting land fill rate in half by the year 2030. mentioned earlier by maurice.

if you just look at recology's portion of the pie, they are touching 70 percent of what we are landfilling is handled by recology. if we just look at that, if we want them to reach their 2030 goal, they need to find a home basically recycle or eliminate all most 170 thousand tons of material per year, so that is a lot of material that we need to recover by the year 2030. that requires some significant program development in the next 5 years. if you look at this through the greenhouse gas lens in our department is shifting looking at greenhouse gas to more consumption based inventory model, but for this presentation i wanted to just focus on landfill and 5 percent of our emissions city wide are coming from what is out of the landfill, and that's equivalent to all

most 45 thousand gas powered vehicles on the road annually, so that is the 186 all most 187 thousand tons of co2 emit from the land fill which is primarily organic material. i will switch gears and talk about our priorities for recology in the next rate cycle. we have been talking to them, so this wont be brand new. we hope to implement our reuse program and bulky item pickup program. bulky collection landfills 8 thousand ton a year of material, and we believe that that number can be reduced dramatically through implementing reuse program. we have consultant out there now with recology looking at what is the potential reuse volumes. which equate to how many routes

would we have to roll out and the cost, so we are hoping recology that into their next rate cycle. we also want recology to look at a dimensional lumber reuse program into the local economy. right now much of the wood is getting hauled to mulchers which is over 60 miles a way and green waste. we believe there is a cheaper option if we look at local reuse markets for dimensional lumber and i'll get to that, but we just opened-reopened our building material reuse center that is very close to recology, which we are hoping will potentially be a market here. we also want recology to update and strengthen our current incentive rate structure, so we believe this will drive behavior change for the

generators. the accounts are going to be more incentivized to recycle and compost when we strengthen this rate structure. this will only work if recology also hires additional fte, waste zero specialist to change the service levels over. this isn't just a raise the base rate, but also to-you have to switch folks over from landfill to recycling to make this make sense. we also want recology to consider adding medicine collection at district cleanups. this was a local ordinance that was passed by our toxic reduction team that requires pharmaceutical companies to take back their medicines from san franciscans, so this is a fullyfunded program and zero impact to rate payers, but this is basically creating another option for san franciscans to get rid of their medicine and the projth pays for this, so we like them to

work with the district events. in addition we like recology to look at including residential properties 1-5 units to do additional auditing, outreach and contamination charges. this sector has been kind of ignored. we focused more on commercial and multi-family with contamination charges, but we do need to spread out the contamination charges to also include the smaller properties. we want recology to adequately fund outreach to meet community needs and we want that in commercial, multifamily, single family and cover toxic reduction. this is required by law through sb1383 through that state law we are required to conduct annual education and outreach as well as monitoring

and compliance in summary for recology, we would like them to improve source separation compliance and investigate trash processing options. we believe this is the only way we are going to get to our 20 30 goal. the right is a quick shot at how much is currently still being landfilled that is compostable and recyclable and at least 40 to 50 percent going into our residential stream is still recoverable. so, highlights, now i will switch gears and talk about sf environment and highlights from the last refuge rate cycle. so, maurice covered it extensively, but we worked closely to roll out the trash processing pilot, a expenditure you all approve in march. it was a 50 thousand dollar expenedture. we completed the first to green

waste and as maurice mentioned we are going to work with colony in fresno and i just got hot off the press here is the result from hdr. we had third party consultant doing analysis for us on the potential here and basically in summary, we sent 102 tons of material. that was-forgot how many that was. but lots of tractor trailer roads to green waste and recovery rate is around 39.11 percent, so some that went to recycling and some went to composting facility. the green waste composting facility in gilroy and they isolated our material and that is the total recovery rate. i think that is pretty good. i think we can dramatically improve this because this material was pulled from the pit directly and i was there watching and a lot of was mattresses,

potentially homeless encampments where we could be isolating more organics rich loads and get a much higher diversion. the waste cut characterization studsy was approved $400 thousand expenditure you approved in march. maurice went into it in great detail, but this is going to provide us a report that will inform our policy, our programs and infrastructure development for both the department and recology. it is a very extensive report with a lot of detail. our toxic reduction team has been busy in the field certifying 97 businesses and to maintain very high stringent environmental projects, including high diversion rate, toxic reduction goals and recovered about 22 tons of material in the last year.

lithian ion batteries are proliferating everywhere. you may hear there is quite a bit of risk associated with the batteries because they are burning down recycling facilities. there is a case in san mateo rolling out a comprehensive education programs to property manner ands with battery buckets teaching residents how to properly dispose of these safely. procure adnew manager for building reuse center at 71 amador. san francisco environment holds the lease on that port property, so we got a new manager to do building material reuse. we are at about 602 tons of material. not sure if you know, but 67 percent of litter on city streets is food services ware and related and our commercial zero waste team is swapping out

businesses for their disposalable to reuseable. this is our department plan to turn down the faucet of consumption so less material is rolling into the refuge stream which will lower rates for refuge rate payers. the rate paid for 450 inspections to food services businesses to bring them into compliance with sb1383, getting them to donate their edible food, and in the last year that we tracked we did 4600 tons of food distributed to folks in need in san francisco. my last slide is we rolled out 13 clinics in the last year. this is free to san franciscans. we repaired over 346 bikes and articles of clothing and once again, this is what we call source reduction, turning down the faucet, so less material is

rolling into the refuge rates. thank you and happy to take any questions. >> thanks alexa. any questions? thanks. mr. robertson. >> good afternoon refuge rate board commissioners. bruce robertson rkss deputy director of financial management of public work jz will give the last presentation on the item talking about the refuge rates as relates to san francisco public works. the over arching goal of the rate process for public works is pretty clear. just to enhance the cleanliness of san francisco. to the rate process we do through a couple ways and in the last rate process in particular it was continue key city initiatives. i will go into more detail.

the first is what is called the outreach enforcement team. i will go through the role in more detail. litter patrol. the rate fund staff for litter patrol in the public right of way. monthly can steam cleaning. there is 3 thousand public city cans and we get funding through the rate process to fix and clean and improve the trash cans. as also mentioned we do bulky item pick up in the bayview and removal of illegal bumps and hot spot in the bayview and we do if you look at the bottom right corner, mechanical sweeping throughout the city on a regular basis. we get funding through the process for that. finallyx trash cans. there is 3000, and we work to maintain and improve the trash cans. to put the work in money in the current rate process it was $14.6

million. you can see top to bottom starting with mechanical sweeping, litter patrol. those are funding staff in public works. the bottom few items around basically refuge and trash cans are external funding sources and additional staff. i will go through each in more detail and highlight numbers and successes we have seen with those programs throughout the past refuge rate year. labor represents about $12.7 million that $14 million mentioned earlier. you can see about 10 of the staff are for what we call the one team. earlier in the presentation today we talked about behavior modification. that is key component of what the one team does. there is 10 of the staff. started all most 10 years ago now and they try to work with residents, businesses, throughout the city of san francisco to talk to them about what the rights and responsibilities

are in terms of cleaning outside their business. they also work to enforce sanitary and standards to make sure they are met. a key thing the staff does, they go through illegal dumping and look into bags and look for addresses or names. if you look at the photo, this is story covered by cbs national news basically that followed them looking at the staff going through illegal dumping, looking for identification within the illegal dumping. it is something we try to issue notification to the people if we find it or, severe cases, penalities and tickets, but that is something-it is trying to identify the behavior. we have 31 staff for various elements. a trash can manager that helps analyze the best placement for trash cans, cleaning schedule for trash cans and additional staff that go out and do

litter patrol, and drive the mechanical sweepers that mentioned earlier. a total of 31 staff. we produce many reports on our effectiveness and use of our staff funded through the refuge rate process. this shows the 10 one team staff. you can stee the significant increase in fiscal year 24 to all most 11 .million outreach. in the blue is largely outreach for staff are talking to residents and commercial owners throughout the city trying to enforce sanitation laws. they are responsible for cleaning the public right of way outside the building, but also letting them know if they find illegal bumping and the ramifications. the yellow is notice of violation and that is letting them know they have broken the law and have a certain amount of time to correct that. that darker orange is where we had to

issue citation. that is usually the result of many visits, many public outreach with these individuals, and actually issuing several nov, as we call them. then i think it is interesting to see what they are doing by zone. so, as mentioned, there is a big challenge around illegal dumping in the bayview. we see evidence where construction contractors are driving up from the peninsula and dumping in the southeast part of the city. we installed illegal vending cameras to capture license plates to see if we can capture the people that do this. >> what's your success rate? have you gotten a lot of guys? >> we haven't gotten a lot of guys. we just rolled thought out. we are seeing some suck res rate. part of the recent ballot measure by the voted for approval by city and county of san francisco and looking to see if we can collaborate with the police department putting up cameras in

those hots spots as well. we know where they are, it is trying to find a way to get them and change behavior. that is what we are doing. later on during the process, be happy to report successes we have and what the impact that is. >> i would just say, changing behavior, that is one thing for residents, but when you have folks driving up and consciously making a choice, i don't think that is change in behavior, i think the only thing they understand is something more punitive, so that is something i just keep in mind. >> it our plan to issue tickets for those folks, especially the ones coming up from the pulens nu. >> how do you know who is doing the illegal dumping? how do you know it is construction companies or from the peninsula? how do you know that information? >> a few different ways. one is, we have actually photographed evidence of where we have seen the general contractor truck in the name and license plate that lets us know it

is a company from the peninsula and outside the sitee city and county of san francisco and through the one team efforts, going through the garbage, we found evidence where it is billing information, pg&e bill or other information that identifies and we do investigative resrs. >> that being said, does that give you the power to go back to those different companies? >> it does. >> have you done that? >> we have. we started to be more aggressive rsh but as you can see we issued the citations numbers of 847 on the previous slide. i don't have off the top of my head the number of citations contractor in the city or outside the city. i can provide that information at a subsequent information or off-line. >> very well. thank you. >> moving on just to show the ever-it is go to show the sheer number

of tons that public works collects annually. you can see we have broken down by sweeper, non sweeper so sweepers you see driving throughout the city on a scheduled basis. non sweepers are people you see with brooms and pickup trucks. i will highlight for fiscal year 24, there is bit of data gap of few months. we project the number out that totals over 27 thousand tons so more in line with fiscal year 2020. moving on to the other non labor components of the funding. most of it goes to steam cleaning public trash cans that you see currently in the upper right. that is done currently by non profits, cyc. we do also get funding for repair of pieces for the existing trash cans. so, wapping up the presentation, wanted to highlight what we were

planning to think through and discuss with the refuge board an administrator and recology. we want to continue focusing public works goal of clean city-clarify and memorialize the expectations to help improve cleanliness throughout the city. that is memorializing along the lines of trash can pickup. we do have trash ca [indiscernible] we are in the process of trying to implement that all 3 thousand trash cans. as we continue with that process, we will be able to get more robust and real time data. we want to as mentioned by rate administrator improve performance metrics to insure goals are being met. we have detailed metric i didn't want to put in the presentation. one thing we are looking at is the causation or correlation

between the one team effort and illegal dumping. we also want to track trash can maintenance and repair to insure timely and efficient within the service level agreement already included in the current refuge rate ordinance. we want to formalize the process of deployment of trash cans. right now it is a meeting that happens with recology and it is tracked but we want to just make sure that process is memorialized in the refuge rate ordinance that comes before this body. we want to also explore additional potential afternoon services for abandon materials and just improve self--haul language. the agreement has language around self-haul. want to memorialize and be very clee what is included in the self-haul to insure recology and city family are on the same page. pretty nominal request from public works side and with that, happy to answer any questions you have.

thank you for your time. >> any questions? thanks bruce. with the trash can monitors, are you seeing a decrease in the overall number of 311 calls? as a result-and realize it sound like you got about a quarter of those cans covered. does it mean we are getting fewer 311 calls or not really? >> very good question. we are seeing a decrease in 311 calls in a varietyf oareas. we are trying to figure what is driving it. it appears so but we are analyzing the data to determine if the censors are having a impact on that. we are looking and doing analysis around the trash cans with the censors and the trash cans that dont have the censors, because city wide we actually

are seeing a slight reduction in the number of calls related to this. we are looking to see if we can pinpoint a correlation between the cans that do and dont have censors. >> were the cans that had censors ones that you were getting the most calls from initially or are they more centered around certain areas for convenience of pickup collection? >> i would say generally speaking, yes. but the censors are generally in some of the hot spots midmarket, the tenderloin, parts of the mission, so likely for a variety of reasons getting more calls in those areas. >> thanks. >> thank you. >> um, i think that concludes all the presentations for this section. let's see if anybody has shown up for public comment. >> we will take in person public comment. memberoffs the public who wish to provide public comment please line up at the podium now.

threez note you will have 3 minutes. for the record, there are no in person public comments. we will take remote public comment. members of the public who wish to provide remote public comment dial star 3 on the phone or click raise hand in webex. please note you have three minutes. moderator, do we have any remote public comments? for the record, there are no remote public comment and this concludes public comment. >> thank you. we have one final item number 6. >> item 6, opportunity to propose future agenda items discussion and possible action by the board. would any member of the board like to propose future action items? >> mr. bowdry. >> i would say at this time, no. >> okay. do you have-this is your first rodeo here at the refuge rate board. are there things that you like

to share with staff or the refuge rate administrator team that would be helpful in the future or do you want to think on that for a while? >> i'll think on that. i think this has been a interesting meeting and the chance to meet sort of get my feet wet so to speak. so i'm listening and taking notes and understanding the process. i will reserve now. >> great. the chair has nothing to add on this item either. so, i guess we have to take public comment on this item, number 6. >> we'll take in person public comment. members of the public who wish to comment on this item, please line up at the podium now. please noteyou will have three minutes. pr fr the record there are no in person public comment. we will take remote public comment. members of the public who wish to

provide comment on this item star 3 on the phone or click raise hand in webex. please note you have three minutes. moderator, do we have any remote public comments? for the record there are no remote public comment and this concludes public comment. >> alright. well, there being no further business, i want to thank everybody for all the hard work to get ready for this meeting and the presentations and it being about 313 p.m. the refuge rate board is adjourned.

>> the bicycle coalition was giving away 33 bicycles so i applied. i was happy to receive one of them. >> the community bike build program is the san francisco coalition's way of spreading the joy of biking and freedom of biking to residents who may not

have access to affordable transportation. the city has an ordinance that we worked with them on back in 2014 that requires city agency goes to give organizations like the san francisco bicycle organization a chance to take bicycles abandoned and put them to good use or find new homes for them. the partnerships with organizations generally with organizations that are working with low income individuals or families or people who are transportation dependent. we ask them to identify individuals who would greatly benefit from a bicycle. we make a list of people and their heights to match them to a bicycle that would suit their lifestyle and age and height. >> bicycle i received has impacted my life so greatly. it is not only a form of recreation. it is also a means of getting

connected with the community through bike rides and it is also just a feeling of freedom. i really appreciate it. i am very thankful. >> we teach a class. they have to attend a one hour class. things like how to change lanes, how to make a left turn, right turn, how to ride around cars. after that class, then we would give everyone a test chance -- chance to test ride. >> we are giving them as a way to get around the city. >> just the joy of like seeing people test drive the bicycles in the small area, there is no real word. i guess enjoyable is a word i could use. that doesn't describe the kind

of warm feelings you feel in your heart giving someone that sense of freedom and maybe they haven't ridden a bike in years. these folks are older than the normal crowd of people we give bicycles away to. take my picture on my bike. that was a great experience. there were smiles all around. the recipients, myself, supervisor, everyone was happy to be a part of this joyous occasion. at the end we normally do a group ride to see people ride off with these huge smiles on their faces is a great experience. >> if someone is interested in volunteering, we have a special section on the website sf bike.org/volunteer you can sign up for both events. we have given away 855 bicycles,

376 last year. we are growing each and every year. i hope to top that 376 this year. we frequently do events in bayview. the spaces are for people to come and work on their own bikes or learn skills and give them access to something that they may not have had access to. >> for me this is a fun way to get outside and be active. most of the time the kids will be in the house. this is a fun way to do something. >> you get fresh air and you don't just stay in the house all day. it is a good way to exercise. >> the bicycle coalition has a bicycle program for every community in san francisco. it is connecting the young, older community. it is a wonderful outlet for the community to come together to

have some good clean fun. it has opened to many doors to the young people that will usually might not have a bicycle. i have seen them and they are thankful and i am thankful for this program. >> why does it been a process and celebration standing up together a difference luther against deliberation and i think justice and. freedom and love over the decades more and more people are standing up against bigotry and hate a media to celebrate love and resilient of our community. now over 5 hundred on people to

anti legislation introduced across the country many targeting trainers youth to me not just a month but drawing how ethnicity say fighting for justice everyone person to celebrated for who they are this is a reunion time to lift up our voices and shower our community with love and appreciation. pride month so showing up confidently in myself i love to have ethnicity and solid a dart anyone's our community and to jose for the indulgence and more. >> our city has a rich legacy of queer and transand occupy myself we are the history and the strulgsz the triumphant and the resilience of our community.

in san francisco throughout the country and all over the world especially where we face persuasion this fried let's stand together in solidarity and justice and celebrate love. >> happy pride month san

>> turning on the microphones everyone. >> oh, on the whole time. >> no it was not. >> the mics were off. >> i'm on, i'm on. >> now you're on. >> mic is on now leave it on

for roll call. >> okay. >> take it out of the best practices. >> how to fix it. >> okay. >> okay. thank you. >> sfgov we're ready to begin. >> okay. >> okay. welcome to the city and county of san francisco abatement appeals board meeting this morning at 10:30 am., wednesday, november 20, 2024. i'd like remind everyone to mute yourself if you're not speaking first agenda is roll call. >> president chavez here. >> vice president neumann here. >> commissioner alexander-tut here. >> commissioner meng. >> commissioner shaddix here and commissioner williams we have quorum and next, we have

our land our land on the unceded ancestral homeland of the ramaytush (rah-my-toosh) ohlone (o-lon-ee) who are the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsula. responsibilities as the caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. ramaytush ohlone community and by affirming their sovereign rights as first peoples. . thank you. >> um, next for members of the public that are to raise your hand for public comment on a specific agenda item press *3 (star three) when prompted by the meeting moderator. at this time i'll

moisture the altogether all parties please stand any members on line press tar 3 to unmute if you plan to speak. >> looks like hands raised all right. >> again, if there is someone on line to speak could i please press star 3 to raise your hand? >> yeah. >> hello caller can you

steamed or state your name the person online state your name? >> i think he's probably confused and okay. >> is thank you for everyone here and hand do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth? okay. thank you. >> you may be seated. >> can we figured out i think the view on the screen?

>> we're not sure we'll try to get someone to fix it. >> okay. >> hold on (rustling of papers.) um, so the next item on the agenda is (discussion and possible action)discussion and possible action to adopt the minutes for a meeting held on: october 16, 2024. public comment. motion to approve the minutes? >> do i have a second. >> seconded by - is there public comment on the motion to approve the minutes seeing none, all commissioners in charge. >> any opposed the minutes are approved. um, next, we will have