and fear, i rise into a day break this wondrously clear. i rise bringing the gift my ancestors gave. i am the dream and the hope of the slave. i rise, i rise, i rise. meeting of the san francisco commission on the environment. the date is tuesday, january 7th. the time is 5:01 p.m. please note that the ringing and use of cell phones, pagers and similar devices is prohibited. please be advised that the chair may order the removal from the

meeting room of anyone using a phone or similar device. public comment will be available for each item on the agenda for comments on matters that are not on the agenda. there will be an opportunity for general public comment. participants who wish to comment will be asked to come, will be asked to come forward one by one and speak clearly into the mic. each speaker will be allowed three minutes to speak. alternatively, members of the public may submit public comment by email to environment at sfgov. org comments submitted by email will be forwarded to the commissioners and will be included as part of the official file. i will now call the roll president juan here, vice president sullivan here, commissioner ann here. commissioner bermejo is excused. commissioner hunter here. commissioner tompkins is excused. commissioner yuan here. president. juan, we have a quorum. thank you. next item please. the next item is the consent calendar. items two through three. item two is the president's welcome. item three is approval of the minutes of the december 2nd, 2024 commission on the environment

meeting. thank you. good evening. item two is the president's welcome. so on the on behalf of the commission on the environment, we acknowledge that we occupy the unceded ancestral homeland of the ramaytush ohlone peoples, who are the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsula. we recognize that the ramaytush ohlone understand the interconnectedness of all things and have maintained harmony with nature for millennia. we honor the ramaytush ohlone people for their enduring commitment to mother earth as the indigenous protectors of this land, and in accordance with the 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 the traditional territory. we recognize that we benefit from living and working on their traditional homeland as

uninvited guests. we affirm their sovereign rights as first peoples and wish to pay our respects to the ancestral ancestors, elders, and relatives of the ramaytush community as environmentalists. we recognize that we must embrace indigenous knowledge in how we care for san francisco and for all its people. commissioners, department staff, and members of the public. welcome. today's presentation docket includes a review and potential vote on two resolutions pertaining to bay rent business and energy, climate and transportation team contracts. a discussion on the department's fiscal year 2025 to 26 and 26 to 27 budget priorities. an update on sfmta's five year strategic delivery plan, and a review and potential vote on whether to approve the commission on the environment to 2024 annual report. so with that, let's get started. the final item in the consent agenda or consent calendar are the

minutes. fellow commissioners, we have an action item on the consent calendar. is there any discussion or changes to the draft minutes? if not, do i hear a motion to approve the minutes? so moved. second. second. thank you. so we have a motion by commissioner hunter and a second by commissioner yuan. and hearing no further discussion, we can open up to public comment. are there any members of the public who wish to speak on items two through three of the agenda? president juan, we have no speakers. okay. hearing no further public comments is now closed. please call the roll for item three. president juan. aye. vice president sullivan. i. commissioner. on. i. commissioner bermejo is excused. commissioner hunter. aye. commissioner tompkins is excused, commissioner yuan. i so the motion passes. next item, please. item four is general public comment. members of the public may address the

commission on matters that are within the commission's jurisdiction and are not on today's agenda. are there any members of the public who wish to comment on this item? madam president, we have no speakers. thank you. public comment is now closed. next item please. next item is item five. review and vote on whether to approve resolution file 2020 501 dash co resolution authorizing environment department energy team contract for baron business program. speaker for this item is lowell chew, energy program manager. explanatory document is resolution file 2020 501 co resolution authorizing san francisco environment department to execute a contract for baron business energy efficiency program. this item is for discussion and possible action. good evening commissioners. let me try to get the presentation automatically. okay. okay. well,

let me just begin. i'm lowell chew. i'm the energy program manager here at the environment department. and this evening i am requesting your consideration to approve a resolution authorizing us to contract with a third party firm to be the baron business new implementer. so, back in october, during the that commission meeting, my colleague kara presented an update on the baron business program. kara reminded us that the baron business program is an innovative program that pays incentives based on actual metered performance of the completed projects. this pay for performance approach critically relies on a third party to measure and verify those energy savings. kara also noted that through a competitive request for proposal, we intended to award the contract to a new implementer, alternative energy

systems consulting, incorporated, or asc. so with this slide, i would like to provide you with just a little background on asc and a summary of the contract. asc is a firm based out of oakland, has over 30 years of experience in engineering and renewable energy systems. asc is an expert, is an expert in pay for performance programs. currently, asa is implementing pay for performance programs for mce and pg and e, in addition to his experience, asc also has a proprietary software capable of measuring and verifying energy usage timely and accurately, thereby deducing the savings. therefore, this is a professional service contract that will be entirely funded by the bay area regional energy network. baron, via the state's public utilities commission, it has a three year

term with an option to extend, and a total budget will not exceed $2,143,600. asc scope includes enrolling in training and managing contractors that will be active in the baron business program. it will measure, verify and report energy savings from the completed projects. it will make incentive recommendations based on the energy savings and provide us with general program consultation. so that concludes my presentation. i'm happy to answer any questions you may have regarding this item. any questions or comments? yes, commissioner. thank you. lowell. my question is if there's an option to extend. is that something that the department could exercise unilaterally without coming back to the commission? and would the would the funds exceed the 2.1 million in that situation? great question, commissioner sullivan. so in the event that we need to

add more money to the budget, then we will come to you as required by the protocol. but if there is not a monetary increase to the budget, then we would just extend the contract. thank you. based on the terms we negotiate, of course. right. thank you. thank you. vice president, anyone else have questions or comments? okay, so do i hear a motion to pass to approve the resolution file 2020 501 dash co. i'll move to approve. thank you. i hear a second. second. okay, so we have a motion by vice president sullivan and a second by commissioner hunter. and let's open up for public comment. are there any members of the public who wish to comment on this item? madam president, we have no speakers. thank you. so public comment is now closed.

alice, please call the roll for item five. president. juan i vice president sullivan i commissioner on i commissioner bermejo is excused. commissioner. hunter i commissioner tompkins is excused. commissioner. yuan. i the motion passes. next item please. the next item is item six. review and vote on whether to approve resolution file 2020 5-020 resolution authorizing environment department clean transportation, climate and energy team contracts. the speaker for this item is lowell chew, energy program manager. explanatory document is resolution file 2020 502 co resolution authorizing san francisco environment department to execute contracts for, as needed, general consulting services and incentive administration services. this item is for discussion and possible action. thank you alice. hello again commissioners. for this item, i am humbly requesting your consideration to approve the resolution authorizing the

environment department to enter into three three contracts, three separate contracts with three separate firms to provide, as needed general consulting to climate energy and the clean transportation program. in this presentation, i will provide you with the background and scope of each contract, as well as as well as explaining the total budget. so to begin as needed, consultants are important to the success of our programs. they provide specialized expertise not available within our department, supporting the climate, energy and transportation programs with specific projects as needed. consultants provide flexibility, allowing us to adjust resources based on project needs and ensuring that we meet the deadlines. since 2017, the climate and energy programs have had contracts with various as

needed consultants. they were arab, dnv-gl and willdan. notably, our contract with arab supported the development of the climate action plan, also supported the biannual greenhouse gas inventory and mostly, most recently, the medium and heavy duty electric vehicle blueprint. the contract with willdan enables the energy team to develop a program to pass through incentives from pg and e to participants. the last, as needed contract expired in june. once we issued a request for proposal in july to find new consultants. this time, we added the transportation program to the request for proposal scope, and the rfp closed in september and we received ten proposals. the next slide provides an overview of the rfp scope. for simplicity, the rfp scope can be divided into four main categories research and analysis. conducting research analysis of policies,

regulations, and data. the next category is mapping and modeling. creating maps models to support various projects. the third category is project support, assisting the department in developing new policies, programs, conducting emissions inventory, and developing communications tools. the final category is program support, providing operational support such as issuing incentives, issuing incentives to participants in our programs. in total, this single rfp had nine discrete tasks. respondents are required to commit to at least five of the nine. now, i will present the top proposals of the ten. we received an independent evaluation panel was scored. these three firms the highest they are aecom, arup and frontier energy. therefore, this evening i'm requesting your consideration to approve a resolution authorizing the

department to enter into three contracts with these three firms. holding multiple contracts enable us to have a broad pool of expertise and gives us greater flexibility depending on project needs, as demonstrated in the past, this arrangement also provides us with access to more specialized skills and differing perspectives. in this slide, i'm providing a summary of the three contracts. scopes. as i mentioned earlier, respondents must commit to a minimum of five tasks and a top three firms all exceeded that requirement, as shown in this table. table one. aecom is committed to all nine tasks. arab is committed to six. frontier is committed to seven for tasks involving multiple firms. the program manager will gather responses from each firm and make a decision based on project requirements, pricing, availability, and other factors.

in this slide. i will present the contract summary. so again we are contemplating the authorization for three separate contracts one with aecom, one with arab and one with frontier energy. each of these contract is a p600 professional service contract. the funding sources for the contracts will vary. while the primary source is state funding, federal and local funding will also be included. each contract will have a term of five years, with an option to extend and the combined budget for all three contracts is 9 million. now for the final slide. i will explain the budget a little bit more. each of the three contracts has a set budget of 1 million for professional services. this brings us to the subtotal for professional service to 3 million. additionally, there is an incentive budget of 6 million. the incentives budget consists

of state and local funding that are paid to participants in this year's baryon business. berry refrigeration programs, as well as participants in the san francisco climate equity hub hot water heat pump incentive program. these incentives will be passed through from the department to the consultant, to then distribute to the participants. the firm responsible for processing these incentives will be determined during contract negotiations. as you can see in table two, arab declined this task so it could either be aecom or frontier energy, or the task may be split between the two depending on availability and other factors. so that concludes my presentation on this agenda item. i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. i do have a couple questions. yes. thank you for your presentation. yes. so just to clarify for my understanding, so it's $9 million across five years, but 3 million is allocated to the three contractors. that's right. and is that like a fixed amount or only as needed as needed.

it's like not to exceed 1 million professionals. so there's no full amount that commit per year to each of these contractors. and if they administer the incentives, would that be operating costs on top of the contract? and that would be paid out of the professional services? okay, yes. and also i see that the last contract expired in june 2024. yes. and we didn't issue an rfp until september 2024. was there like any gap in between? is that that's the intention or. yeah, yeah, we issued the rfp actually in july and then it closed in september. we got responses back in september. that's the it took a while to get three programs needs compiled into one rfp scope. so that was a little bit of lag. that was not intentional. it was just just busy. yeah sorry commissioner. any questions? vice president sullivan. yes. so most of the money here goes to these incentives. yes. million dollars. and who makes the decision about whether to award

someone money from the from the $6 million? yeah, that's a great question. sullivan. so, so the department cannot directly pay participants because we can't have a contract with everyone that participate in program, right? so we need a third party. and so right now i'll just give you an example for berry business, we the berry business approves a list of projects eligible for incentives and their payments. and we send that list to our third party. and then the third party gives us an invoice, and we pay that invoice, and the third party gets that payment and distributes to the participants. so maybe i wasn't listening carefully enough, but the participant gets the money and it's approved by by aecom or no, by the department. okay. yeah. we direct aecom or frontier energy to make the payment to the participant. i see, so you have the discretion to say yes,

this participant achieve the goal and that one didn't. absolutely. exactly. yes. okay. all right. thank you. yes, commissioner. sorry to ask a follow up question to commissioner sullivan's. so the flow you described originally was byron gives the information to the firm. yes. the firm pays out. yes. and then the follow up response said we also receive a copy from byron to approve. i'm just trying to square the two examples that you gave. yeah. so again, sorry, i apologize. i wasn't clear. so byron prepares the list for approval. then byron sends the list to the third party, the firm, and then the firm. based on that list, invoices byron based on that list. and then we make the payment based on that invoice. gotcha. and the department receives all of the materials submitted by byron to the firm

and provides oversight across the entire process. that's right, that's right. so in the example, using the business example and using the previous item, the agenda item asc will tell us, look, these projects save this much energy. therefore they're eligible for this much incentives. and this is the project the business. this is the amount to pay. we look at that list, we do our field inspections. we do our qa, qc for the invoice. and then we say to the third, the other third party e-commerce frontier, look, these projects are ready to go. we approve it. here's the list. invoice us please. thank you for clarifying. of course. thank you. i'll also follow up questions. so will the grant amount across five years distribute evenly like for example, each year a cap at one fifth of the total 6 million. regression. commissioner. what? no, i think it's going to be based on the. so for the incentives portion, there's no cap. this is going to be based

on the needs of the program. if we're really popular, there could be a you know, the flow could be much quicker. but there is not a annual set cap for the incentives portion. and does this set that once it's approved, how soon these three professional service companies will issue the check or the issue the payment? yeah, yeah. usually there is as i like the process i described. it's a little bit long. so like there are multiple steps of approval. so once they get the list from us then they give us the invoice. we pay them. then they usually within upon receipt of the transfer of funds, would begin issuing the checks to the participants. i see so but there's no term saying that how soon they have to release the check, like within a month or anything. no, that's a great question. the terms are actually established in our program manual. based on our program. we say to the participants, look, if you participate in a program, you install these led lights.

you should expect to have your incentives 15 business days after we approve your project. and if they have any issues, do they go back to you or i mean to sf environment or do they go back to they go they go back to us because we're the program administrator because these the third parties are only issuing on checks and receiving our instructions. right. i'm just wondering what's the way to hold that. that's right. yeah. they'll contact us. yeah. one one more question. of course, the reason we're approving these contracts is because there were transparency issues in the past. so what i'm wondering is the $6 million that gets kind of approved and disbursed, kind of out of our sight. is there at some point, like transparency as to who it went to? if yes, if we asked, you know, halfway through the five years or six years, can you show us where the money went? yeah. you know, so that didn't go to someone's cousin, you know. right, right, right. reasons. is there that kind of transparency? yes there is. the short answer is yes, there is.

commissioner sullivan. so for instance, in byron, business, because we're receiving money from the state, from the state regulator, we keep a very detailed journal of our accounting, actually, there. the company that issues the payment keeps one journal. we keep one in the department. and then we actually reconcile it at a year end down to the penny. and based on that reconciliation, we also reconcile with baron funder, abc, also down to the penny. so each program will have their own journals. but to answer your question, we are we are accountable. we are transparent. if you ask us how much money you expend in this program, we're happy to provide you with that information. yes, pascal, no more questions. thank you. thank you. any other further questions or comments? all right. do i hear a motion to approve the resolution file 2020 5-02- co.

so moved. second, second. thank you. we have a motion by vice president sullivan and a second by commissioner nguyen. so let's open up for public comment. are there any members of the public who wish to comment on this item? madam president, we have no speakers. okay. public comment is now closed. please call the roll alice, for item six. president juan i vice president sullivan i commissioner on i commissioner bermejo is excused. commissioner hunter i commissioner tompkins is excused. commissioner yuan, i thank you. the motion passes. next item please. commissioners, if you if you please. charles sheehan, policy, public policy and public affairs

manager, our contingent is still not arrived. and so i'm suggesting that you call things out of order specifically, maybe calling number nine. and that will give us some time for the other folks to arrive. this is fairly standard. i see the board call things out of order all the time. so i know we don't usually do it, but it's not a big deal to do that. but do i need a motion or a second or anything? no, i don't believe so. i've never seen the board. they just call it out of order. it's your discretion at the chair. okay. next item is item nine. review on vote on whether to approve the commission on the environment 2024 annual report. speaker. it's alice, her commission affairs officer. the explanatory document is the 2024 commission annual report draft. this item is for discussion and possible action. the commissioners, as you know, there is a statutory obligation that the commission produce an annual report. the report serves

as a record of the commission's activities and achievements over the past year, and it can help set the stage for the year ahead. i'm going to go through the report page by page and if you have any questions, please let me know. before we get started, i want to thank mark nicholas, our graphic designer, who's helped create another beautifully designed report for us. so here's a draft of the commission's annual report for 2024. the structure of the report is someone's standard from year to year, even as the content evolves. so if we go to pages 2 to 3, we have the commission's mission. and as was our goal last year, we finally have a photo of all seven commissioners together. this photo was taken by our 2024 usf mccarthy fellow, nicole wilmont. and then on pages 4 to 5, we have the letter from the commission president. so this letter reflects on the achievements of 2024 and what's coming up ahead in 2025. on pages 6 to 7. talk about other

commissioner milestones. we detail the commission's focus on community building and climate action during earth month, and this includes commissioners presence at events such as the youth climate action summit and green business awards. so if we go on to pages eight through nine, we highlight the commission's top priorities during 2020. for some of these include community engagement and cbo relationships, as well as strengthening data driven reporting. and then if we keep going, there were also actions to streamline grant approvals and operations, as well as achievements in securing external grant funding. the commission also approved several key contracts, including the household hazardous waste facility agreement and an extension of the current landfill disposal agreement with recology. and then on these pages we have two commissioner highlights. one is commissioner

hahn for his graphic memoir advocate, and the other is commissioner yuan for his leadership at refuse, refuse sf. and then on pages 14 through 15, we discuss the work of the commission's committees, policy and operations, and then the results of the commission elections in which commissioner hahn was elected president and commissioner sullivan was elected vice president. we also talk a little bit about the commission demographics and the last biennial analysis that was conducted in 2023, as well as the different commissioner terms. and then on the topic of commissioner terms, commissioner bermejo was reappointed for a fourth term in october 2024, and then on pages 18 through 19, we detail the environmental service awards conferred by the commission over the previous year, and we were lucky enough to get some nice portraits of some of the recipients. and then we have this pretty lengthy legislative summary for the full commission, which includes all

the resolutions and reports approved by the commission. and then, for the sake of transparency, we've also detailed gifts to the environment department that were reviewed by the commission. and these gifts were also reported to the board of supervisors in july 2024 and to the comptroller's office. and so that is the draft commission annual report for 2024. i will pause now and see if there are any questions. any questions. commissioners. looking good. may i have a motion? can i actually motion to approve it. so move. thank you a second on seconds. thank you. we have a motion by commissioner hunter and a second by commissioner hahn. and let's open up for public comment. are there any members of the public who wish to comment on this item? seeing none. public comment on this item is closed.

great. please call the roll. public comment is now closed. president juan ii, vice president sullivan i commissioner on i. commissioner bermejo is excused. commissioner hunter i commissioner tompkins is excused. commissioner yuan i. motion passes. next item, please. i guess we can go back to item seven. so the next item is item seven. presentation to consider the department's fiscal year 20 2526 and 20 2627 budget priorities. the sponsor for this item is tyrone jude, director. speakers are leo chief deputy director joseph salem, finance program manager cindy comerford, climate program manager lowell chu, energy program manager, pali ohia, toxics reduction and healthy ecosystems program manager, soco made zero waste program manager. heather henton,

clean transportation program manager. lavanya deepak, senior racial equity coordinator. and charles sheehan, chief policy and public affairs officer. the explanatory document for this item is the environment department draft budget and priorities for fiscal years 20 2526 and 20 2627. powerpoint. this item is for discussion. all right. i think we can just start with the presentation. commissioners, this is the first of two hearings on our department budget. so we'll just jump right into it. as soon as charles gets the slides up. i do you want me to go up there. oh i can i'll do it for you okay. yeah. sorry. just a couple of slides to orient us. this is a two year budget and priorities presentation as required under san francisco law. let's go to

next slide. the agenda is as follows. you're going to hear a little bit about me and kind of the overview of what we're focused on in this budget. leo, our chief administrative officer and deputy director, will handle the slides on the budget process, kind of outlining all the steps we need to take and the priorities that have been already outlined by the current administration and expectations for the next administration. and then we'll hear from each of the program areas around what their priorities are for tir work. over the next two years. we'll wrap up with kind of our what's now become an annual tradition to talk about our general fund considerations and needs as a department. and then i know we have questions at the end, but i'm going to encourage questions in between as we go through program areas, because there's just a lot of information. and so this way you can ask questions specifically around each program area or the budget process or the overview. all right. so let's get started with the first couple slides. a

couple of considerations as we were pulling together this budget presentation. one we obviously had a change. we have a change of administration happening on the for the mayor of the city of san francisco. that change is happening tomorrow. as our newly mayor, soon to be mayor daniel lurie, takes office, we also have a number of changes on the board of supervisors. and i was just at the swearing in for supervisor melgar, who won reelection. but we have a number of new supervisors who are also going to be seated at the board of supervisors. so this will be the first kind of major reconstitution of the board in a little while. and so that's a consideration. we obviously have talked extensively at this commission and as a city, regarding the trump administration taking office and what that will mean as far as funding grants, other things that this department relies on. and then we have a budget deficit. we have a roughly almost $900,000,000 billion deficit. million dollar deficit.

sorry for this coming year. and the economic recovery is slow, as you'll see from the presentation from leo coming up on top of our normal budget process you heard last time around. we also have a refuse rate setting process that's happening in parallel at the same time. and so we're juggling both of these processes at once. and they both interconnect because our budget obviously is dependent on what we're able to get approved through that refuse rate process. and finally, we've talked over and over again, the last, especially the last couple of budgets around needing to address the climate budget gap that exists to implement our climate action plan. we've had a lot of successes, as you'll hear about from leo, but we know there's still a lot more. and so we started that conversation with the strategic delivery plan, which we'll go over in this presentation. but that really is signaling what our resource needs will be for the next five years in order to advance and meet our goals. we've continued to make progress

with the resources we've had you last year, our emissions, actually, for 2022, our emissions are down by nearly half. and so they've stayed flat since the pandemic year. but we have targets that we have upcoming by 2030 to get to a 61% emissions reduction goal. and our net zero goal by 2040. you've seen this slide over and over, but this essentially represents where we still need to tackle the sectors we need to tackle to get to our emissions goals. essentially, it's fossil fuel use in the form of natural gas in our buildings and gasoline and diesel in the transportation sector. the strategic priorities remain the same. and that's a good sign that even with the new administration, these priorities very much sync up to, i think what we're what we've been focused on as a department. and we've talked about the five year

strategic delivery plan, which will go over a little bit more in detail to just map out what we need in terms of resources and priorities over the next five years, aligned with kind of these goals in mind. we've revealed this the last presentation at the last commission meeting. but this these are the priority requests that have come up out of that process we've been engaged in over the last six months. it's really funding our climate action plan, focusing on our building and transportation sectors and on the electrification of those sectors. focusing just like the city's priority is on our small business and on workforce development, we do need to engage the public to begin implementing all of these improvements that we need behind the meter in homes and in businesses in our commercial buildings, and we will never forget our responsibility around equity and focusing on our environmental justice communities. so with this, i will turn it over to leo to handle the next couple slides to

give an overview of our budget and the next steps. all right, i guess i'll move over here. so i'm going to start and just kind of begin kind of at a higher level, just focusing in on some of the overall improvements that we're making in the way that we budget at the department. one, as ty mentioned, is that we have the refuse rate setting process now, and this is the second time moving forward, and the expectation is that it will be for three years. so we're increasing and working. we're increasing our efforts to align with that to the extent possible, even though they're not the same. their rate year is from october through september. and there's various other differences, but we're doing our best to coordinate. additionally, we're coordinating with the mayor's office and the comptroller's office in heavily

just making sure that they're really understanding what we're experiencing and working with a range of the groups in the comptroller's office to make sure that we're all on the same page. additionally, we've been continuing to work on making sure that we're continuing to get our work order, support from our partner departments, and making sure that we're continuing to be clear about what the expectations are, what work we're performing, and building those relationships on the fiscal side, along with the building upon the strong program side, relationships, i'm also working to help have us structure our budget just to increase some transparency and visibility so that program managers are able to more easily see their programs funds at a glance, and to also make our overhead model a little bit clearer so that external funders are are more inclined to be able to cover overhead when they see a model that meets, for example,

federal standards. we're working overall to. clarify exactly which positions we have and what roles, and making sure that we're carefully managing how we use temporary staff, making sure that we have the opportunity to convert people to permanent status, which is an exciting thing that went through labor this year. there will be the opportunity to convert more people to permanent civil service status. and then finally, we're also looking at building additional admin team capacity, developing some additional knowledge around budget, as well as just having a little bit more duplication, because right now there's a lot of people who are doing one off tasks with no backup for when they're on vacation. so with that, we have this slide that reminds everyone about the requirements related to san francisco's budget timeline. so we're required to have a public meeting to talk about our

proposed budget priorities. and so that's what this meeting today is. additionally, we need to have an additional commission meeting by february 14th when the commission can take action to approve san francisco environment's budget. the department. we need to complete our budget submission process to the comptroller and mayor's office by february 21st, and then the mayor has until june 1st this year to submit the full proposed budget. last year, there were some enterprises that we were actually grouped with that had our budgets on may 1st, but this year everyone's on the june 1st date because those other enterprises that have fixed budgets, their their fixe. and for us, they're hearing us in june like everybody else. finally, the board of supervisors needs to adopt the budget by july 31st. so that's kind of the high level cycle. so

we received from the mayor's office budget instructions in early december. they asked for an ongoing reduction to general fund spending of 15%, which for us is a $200,000 cut that they're asking for. and they are asking for that reduction to be ongoing. additionally, there's general guidance about eliminating vacancies and to not add new positions to the budget. they want us to consider slowing hiring further. the potential for a fee freeze. and they are looking carefully at community based organizations and grant allocations. so the mayor's office did call this out as something that they're particularly interested in, and that they're going to look at. but this is also representing the current administration. and so we'll see how that rolls

forward. but they do intend to try to understand whether departments are funding efficiently cbos and whether the work that they're doing is quality. so it's part of an overall theme that we're seeing. and finally, there's a ban on air travel and overnight travel, and it requires pretty significant justification if you need to travel overnight. so i needed to include this slide to show our trends related to general fund support over time. and, you know, i mean, when i look at the graph, it looks alarming. and the goal isn't to be alarming. it's really just trying to make sure that we're clear and showing and disclosing sort of the history of what's been happening with general fund support. so in fiscal year 2223, the cap climate action plan

funding, there was a package that was pitched and approved and was worth just under $3 million in that year's budget. in 2324, the number dropped to 1,000,439 395, and that number was there largely because there were funds that couldn't get out the door in the first year. so they felt like they could get an equivalent work program with less new money. in 2425, we received about $1.5 million, and that came with a clear commitment, reiterated that they were funding the 5.15 fte of the climate action plan that they had started supporting in 2223. so we do see, for the two budget years that there's pretty

substantial reductions, if the default were to happen. so if we comply with the budget instructions and reduce by 200,000, then our general fund support for fiscal year 2526 drops to 904,000. and then the second year of the budget would drop down to 601,000. the reason the numbers don't make obvious intuitive sense. if you're not a day to day budget person is. there were already a lot of actions taken to affect the second year of the budget last year. and, you know, we had done some thinking about how much to push back on that, and we felt like we could work on making those improvements. after demonstrating the work that we're doing in the current fiscal year. and my opinion is that the budget office put more focus on cutting aggressively the second year of the budget than they typically do. and so i was a bit surprised that they came back and basically told everybody to recut that second

year because of the ongoing cuts that they're requesting. so it's difficult. i mean, the. additionally, they they chose to eliminate a lot of ongoing add backs that had even preceded the 22, 23 year. there were funds that had continued to roll forward, and this budget office chose to eliminate all those other add backs for our budget. and i believe they did this for many departments, but that i haven't verified. finally, i'm flagging that the mayor's office directions to the whole city include direction to the department of public works, which we have an arrangement with, where they send us some dollars for our work and the reduction that's being asked of all departments for general fund

also affects public works and has the potential to impact us. so those are kind of the key general fund parameters that we're working with right now. switching gears a little bit. so we're also in the refuse rate setting process. and we'll spend a lot more time on this in february when the refuse rate administrator joins us. the refuse rate board is currently working to approve the allocation for the time period starting october 2025, going until september of 2028, which is three years total. and the current status is that they need to review and propose a rate order by may of 2025 at the staff level to their board, and then the board has until july to make any further adjustments to

accept the recommendations or make modifications to the refuse rate administrator's recommendation, and then that should be complete by july. there's a detailed calendar on the refuse rate administrator's website. if people want to see those specific dates in terms of the touch points that are formally there, they are coming in february and then they're scheduled to come back in april as well. so that would likely be a chance to circle back. on whether they're accepting what our proposed needs are within that budget and share some of their thinking around priorities for recology as well. it's also a chance for you all to ask any questions that you need. okay, so i'm going to hand off to joe in a moment, but just wanted to reiterate that for january, what we do is we really look at the kind of base situation. so we're looking at what's the current

known set of revenues and expenditures without putting in and adding the things that we want to have without assuming grants that are not realized yet. and so you'll see that this is kind of the starting point. and then in february, we'll come back with all of the detail which will address any imbalances that we see. we'll have more information about the refuse rate process and where we're going with that, and any adjustments that we're making. and so i just wanted to kind of put that overall context, which will run through the whole set of program presentations as well. great. do you want me to do this one? leo. yes, a question is this mine? yeah. okay. so the refuse rate dollars, it's almost 40% of the budget. i don't really understand, like the give and take as when we're discussing

with the refuse rate board how the funding is going to work. we would love to have more funding, presumably. sure. they have limitations. so how does that how does that conversation go? sure. i you know, this is new for me and it's new for the city. i mean, there's been one process before, and i think there were learnings from that two year cycle. and the refuse rate administrator has grown in terms of its staffing and has formalized some of the process a bit more. but i think to summarize what the process looks like, recology had to submit their rates that they're proposing to cover their costs and make the appropriate amount of profit by january 3rd. so we've received that information, we're reviewing it, and we're going to be meeting and digging into it further. we're going to make sure that the scope of work

emphasizes the things that our department thinks are most important, that i think alexa has presented in the past. we're going to. also be talking about our portion of what we're asking. so the department of public works, the refuse rate administrator, and san francisco environment put together our own three year proposals. then we actually. provide to recology the total numbers that are being asked for. and they have a row in their excel spreadsheet that basically adds solid waste impound account cost, and then that gets calculated into the rates overall. so the submission has just a kind of roll up of the city's ask. you can't even well, i need to look at it in more detail to be able to say

that you don't see that detail, but there's still. so now that the refuse rate administrator has that package, they'll be communicating with us and with dpw and i guess themselves about whether the resources that are being requested are appropriate. so we went in like what we indicated was we wanted to see an increase of $3 million of solid waste impound account funding for san francisco environment each year going forward. so that would that's a starting point for our next steps. communicating with j and the refuse rate team. and we'll have that detail laid out to meet his standards in advance of our next commission meeting, so that you can see how we would propose spending that money. all right. thank you. thank you. you're welcome. but then it does still have to cascade through many more public meetings. i will take this slide because i

realize that a lot of these are charles's afterward. and then joe can come on later. but this is the pie chart that we're used to seeing that we continue to refine. so again, you can see that general fund is 4% or less of our budget. and then you also see that the impound account is really substantial. and grants are about the same amount. one other thing i'll note about this slide is that this is an operating budget, and this is always confusing, but the aau budget is the budget that the city passed for the city every year, including our budget. but we also show things in an operating budget, and we try to show it both ways. and that's because of how much grant funding we get, for example. so if we showed all of the baron money in the first year versus the year that it is likely to be spent, then it looks really different. so in the operating

budget, it's more kind of the planned expenditures, which would include things like grants that were multi-year grants that we budgeted last year or accept and expend money that goes through those don't show up formally in the aau budget. they're in the operating budget. so i'm just noting that because the operating budget is a reflection of what we're actually spending each year and have planned, while the aau is what's formally in black and white and confirmed by the city as a whole. thanks. actually, leo, you can you can just take these two slides. so here we have our total grants that we're currently pursuing and the amount that we've requested. so you've seen again, this is just to really emphasize how much money and how active we are with fundraising. and you know, we

continue to get good news and are excited about the possibilities. so you can see we requested $128 million worth of funding. and so far here we've secured $67 million. and there's i don't is that 16 million, including a recent award from the last 20. oh no, that's not okay. so there's a lot of money that we're still waiting on and i. yeah. and i'll just jump in here. so we've talked about the current presidential administration trying to like expedite grants and decisions on grants and to get those out the door. we just received word yesterday that the ev grant that we submitted for, for the charging and fueling infrastructure grant, which was about $15.1 million, we are

being awarded that thanks to the work of hannah and the clean transportation team and all our city partners. so we're really excited. so this number doesn't even reflect that. and so by the time we get to february, though, we'll have kind of the total number. but we're really excited that we just we just got that award. yeah. and i would echo that's that's a great example of a place where we've been really working well with the comptroller's office and the mayor's office to really take a lead on making sure that the city's processes make sense, are legal and can work with circumstances that we're in right now. okay, so here are the tables that kind of roll up the do you want to. yeah, i can do this okay. this is usually where i quick question before joe gets started. so looking at the slides i just want to connect a few different concepts and ask a clarifying question. so in the director's priorities we say we want to reduce our reliance on

less stable funding sources like grants. and then looking at the bulk of our budget, it's still grant funding. at the same time. i'm curious then how are we going to square that circle if the mayor's office is also telling us, hey, you need to not rely on general funds as well. i think that's exactly why we've been going through this strategic delivery plan process over the last six months, is because we've gotten the initial kind of whatever stop, we call it, stopgap funding or starting funding so that we could advance some of the climate action plan work over the past few years. and we've brought that as far as we can. the funding, as you saw from leo's slide, is already starting to kind of go back the other direction because those sources are drying up or there's reductions planned. so now we're saying, okay, with that. here are all the projects, here are all the programs, here are all the things that we're responsible for that will stop. and that strategic delivery plan outlines all of those needs kind

of ongoing over the next five years. so that that's kind of the transition, if you will, that we always knew that the initial ask was kind of a bridge to get us to that next phase, to plan out a little bit further. and the last six months have been doing that exact planning exercise to get us to like, what is our actual need over the next couple of years. and the funding primarily would be requests for more stable sources of funding. and it's not saying, hey, there's all these grant dollars, let's fill in, you know, the $50 million over five years from grants that probably won't even be there, most likely over the next four years. and so it's predominantly asking the question of the city. these are all the things that are aligned with the city's priorities, that are also aligned with our climate action plan, also align with our sustainability goals. here's what our resources requested are not just from a year, just for the next year, but going forward multiple years. so that's the transition. we're underway right now. this budget, budget cycle. so i guess

this might be my own ignorance then. so looking at starting with the berkeley report and working our way forward from that. so the berkeley report heavily reliant on grants, the federal funds that we saw from the biden administration, then we transition into the current downward trend that leo put together. i guess i'm and maybe i should save this for agenda item number eight, but i'm still not seeing that vision. all i'm seeing is it's going to come to a head and we're going to decide we're either going to do this or we're not. and i don't see a plan b, and that's given me a lot of anxiety. and to be to be clear, there is no plan b at the moment. right. and i think this is why we needed to do our work in terms of articulating what is the need over the next five years. right. we knew from a macro level, from the cle report that, you know, and this is, again, implementation of the entire climate action plan is $22 billion. we needed to kind of do the work that we had to do as a department to identify what are the resource needs we

actually need over the next few years and identify specific positions, programs, policies, emission targets. and that's what we've we've done. and we've never had that level and specificity around the budget. right. so if we had gone forward saying, hey, there's a budget gap of $22 billion, i wouldn't have been able to tell you how much of that over what period of time. and so that's what we have crystallized now. and that's kind of what we're presenting openly with this commission. based on your desire to want to look further ahead to fund the climate action plan and what we're hearing from the public as well. so this is the start of that conversation. we're just opening that book, and we have the details to do. so finally. thank you. thank you. how do i move forward on this? it's the right arrow, but i can do it for you if you want the right arrow. oh. right there. okay, cool, cool. good evening commissioners. my name is joe salem. i'm the budget manager

for the san francisco environment department. before i kind of get into to the budget, to our draft proposed budget, i just want to mention that as a draft, it is going to change and change significantly between, you know, this presentation and the time we submit to the board, to the mayor's office in on february 21st. so i want to just make sure that that, that, that, that we understand that the figures that we see here are subject to change and more likely, a lot of them are going to change between now and the submission date. as leo was kind enough to go over the difference between the eo and the operating budget, i i'll leave out a little piece of this again. just to reiterate though, the annual appropriation ordinance or budget that we submit represents new funding for a given fiscal year, and our operating budget represents the actual sources

and uses that we intend to utilize in that fiscal year. and they can be very different. and i'm not sure how to bring this up. oh, there we are. thank you. so you know as this slide shows, this is a side by side summary of the current draft proposal and our current draft operating budget proposal. as you can see there's a $6 million variance between what we are proposing and new funding, which is what the proposed annual appropriation side illustrates on the left and what we are currently expecting in operational funding for the next fiscal year. and nowhere, of course, is this variance greater illustrated than in the grant revenue row. we expect to request about $10.3 million in our submission to the mayor's office, but we intend to we expect to recognize over 15.5 million in operating revenues from grant sources in fiscal

2026. and this is because, you know, approximately $5 million in grant revenue was either multiyear and thus previously approved through the aao process, or it was approved directly by the board of supervisors through an accept and expend process. you know, this side by side comparison, you see, is really just for illustrative purposes. it's designed to kind of hopefully demonstrate, you know, the magnitude of the variance and why we feel it's important to review our total operating budget as opposed to our total aao budget request. so every city department is required to submit a two year budget each year. but because of the nature of our funding and its heavy reliance on on grant sources, it's incredibly difficult to try and accurately forecast a budget for the second fiscal year of our submission. and because of this, we generally focus this presentation on, you know, the next fiscal year, in this case

fiscal 2526. so we'll be reviewing and what we'll be reviewing each program's budget individually throughout this presentation. at a macro level, our operating budget is essentially flat. it's increasing about 2% overall from the current fiscal year, and we currently have a deficit of about $526,000, which is almost entirely tied to the reduction in general fund support from the mayor's budget instructions, as well as some baseline reductions in general fund support for 2026. and with that. i turn it over to any any questions. thank commissioners. next we're going to go into each of the program areas. great. good evening commissioners. my name is cindy comerford. i'm the climate

program manager. so the next part of this presentation, each program manager is going to come up and talk a little bit about their program and their budget. and so for those of you who probably already know, the climate program works with different city departments and diverse partners to equitably and aggressively reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other harmful pollutants, while also advancing healthy ecosystems and environmental justice. and the climate program is made up of six different teams. and so we have a climate action team building decarbonization, building codes and standards, environmental justice, healthy ecosystems and a newly circular economy team. so we have over a dozen different funding sources for our program. we do get general fund support and also money from the refuse account. we also have a potpourri of different work

orders and grants. all the acronyms are listed on the slide. and i'm going to save you from painfully going through each acronym. but at the end of this presentation, there is a glossary of the acronyms that you can take a look at, and i'm happy to answer any questions about them. so the next part of this presentation is going to discuss what our core funding priorities are. i'm going to go from left to right, and then talk about some of the things that our corridor work but aren't funded at this time. so in february, you're going to hear more about our climate update to our 2025 climate action plan. so we've started that update that will be complete at the end of this year. while we have money to develop and facilitate the update to this plan, we don't have money to support the implementation afterwards. if you remember seeing one of leo's first slide with the big budget request, that budget requests

that we're able to get that $2.9 million. we had a lot of one time funding that supported the implementation of the cap. so we're able to do a big marketing campaign, and then we're able to do a lot of outreach around the plan afterwards. next are around a core funded activity is to develop and adopt a building performance standard. so this would be a policy to help large buildings decarbonize. we're really fortunate that we just got the grant from the department of energy that will help support this effort over time. we don't have money to continue our operations from the climate equity hub. this has all been general fund money that is dwindling down, or to continue to do the scale of outreach we need to do around building decarbonization and workforce development. for number three, we're continuing to work on our

environmental justice projects by implementing our department of pesticide regulation grant and also our epa grant. but after these grants end, we don't have money to continue our environmental justice grant program. next, i just talked about we added a circular economy team. and so this team, which is a team of one, is able to build off a lot of the great work that the department has already done from our zero waste program. and so we're able to start that work and develop a sector in our climate action plan. but we're not able to really develop the comprehensive program that both the city and the department needs to enhance circularity in our city. next, we're going to continue to work on our healthy ecosystems. we have a lot of work orders that support this work around

ecological stewardship and making sure that we're facilitating natural habitats on treasure island and yerba buena island, where we fall short, is that we only have part time funding for our urban forest coordinator, who does a lot of great work in ensuring equitable tree canopy distribution and also collaborating with other departments and communities on the ground. and lastly, we've talked a little bit about green finance. we talked a little bit about how we were able to do that uc berkeley report. that was one time funding, but we don't have the funding to continue with the comprehensiveness and diligent ness. we want to see around green finance to implement strategies that we know other cities are doing and that are required by some of the professional organizations were part of, such as c40, around climate budgeting. so i'll stop there, and i'm happy to answer any questions before i turn it over to my next colleague. just

a quick i would agree, cindy. the things that are unfunded is very unfortunate. do you have a list of the crs and the climate plan that these will directly affect by not being funded? i don't have that readily available, but it's something we could put together. thank you. so i'm happy to do that. and then i can turn it back to joe. and he can go through the operating the actual budget numbers. so for the climate and we couldn't fit all this on one slide. so the climate program is actually in this slide. and in the next slide with the grand total on the second slide. so maybe i'll move it there just so it's reflective of the total total. so for the climate program we're currently showing a deficit of about $225,000. and

this is mainly related to the general fund reduction. the biggest year over year changes we're seeing in climate include large decreases in the non-personnel services expenditures and the grant expenditures. and these changes are due to the elimination of a one time $250,000 board of supervisors ad back for fiscal 2025, as well as an environmental justice grant that is ending for in this fiscal year. i also want to point out that while you notice that you know the fte changes both both to the positive and to the negative on this and other program slides, this is typically related to staff like realigning their time to either available sources or different work that they'll be doing in the fiscal year. our total fte count is actually remains largely static.

good eveni commissioners, i'm hannah troon. i'm the program manager for the clean transportation program. so our program implements the citywide electric vehicle roadmap as well as the sustainable transportation elements of the climate action plan, and helps coordinate that across the city. we're funded by a mix of grants, federal and state work orders, and a little bit of general fund. so our core funded priorities right now are to seek funding opportunities to deploy ev charging across the city, focusing on underserved and disadvantaged communities, and finding ways to leverage community feedback and input into that site selection process. and we're doing that, for example, with our bayview-hunters point charging,

fast charging plaza that we're hoping to install this year. we're also working to advance and expand the size of our e-bike pilot program for delivery workers and develop resources and educational materials to help those delivery workers make informed decisions about which mode choice to use for their delivery work. and we finally manage city commuter benefits programs for city employees and process compliance with the commercial garage ev charging ordinance for large private garages that are mandated to install charging. looking ahead, some of our main unfunded priorities include developing an off street public charging master plan that's comprehensive and looks across different site types. so not just public sites, but also multifamily workplace charging as well, as well as advancing our curbside charging policy,

particularly to serve multifamily residents, residents that don't have access to off street parking, dedicated parking. second, we are looking to fund targeted outreach and education. we found that that's a gap in the outreach that we have been able to do so far. there's a lot of interest in incentives and charging technologies, but not a lot of understanding about where to get started or how to go through the process to access the funding, both for residents and drivers, but also for potential site hosts for charging and then also providing some ongoing support for charging developers that are going through the permitting process in the city or site. hosts who are looking to get started with the process. and then finally, we are currently in the process of finalizing our medium and heavy duty zero emissions vehicles blueprint. and in that blueprint, we have several strategies pilot

programs, potential policy recommendations, and planning exercises that we would need resources to advance to the next stage and go into implementation. and so that's a big set of priorities that could help be funded over the next few years to actually start to implement a lot of those strategies. so if there's any questions on the program. yes. so the curbside pilot, that was kind of announced in the media over the last week or two, that am i right that that doesn't involve the department's budget in terms of funding the actual installation or just is there anything in our budget that is kind of devoted to that pilot? no, there's not any specific resources with that pilot. it's been a collaboration across the city departments because it seems like there's overlap with the thing that you don't have funding for, which is the master master plan for off street ev

charging. but if the pilot goes well and the city decides, let's just expand it to the rest of the city. that could happen without the master plan. is that am i right about that in in some ways, i think the master plan is then focused more on kind of the off street side, whereas the pilot is looking at at on street. so curbside charging, which has a lot of different challenges associated with it about how you would site site those things. so part of the pilot program that's going on right now would help us learn about where the best sites for which types of technologies. that would be a separate planning exercise, but it doesn't mean curbside. that's what i yes. sorry off street meaning like yeah parking facilities off street. thank you. questions i'll pass it to joe for the budget. uyghur quick. so the clean

transportation budget is effectively balanced for fiscal 2026 and actually is showing a small surplus at this time. the major changes for next fiscal year are a decrease in the non-personnel services spending that that's happening on an existing ev grant, as well as an increase in the materials and supplies related to the emergency ride home grant. going forward. hello again. commissioners. i'm laura chu, energy program manager, and this evening i will be presenting to you the energy team's budget energy team supports the climate action plan by creating and managing energy initiatives that protect the climate and lower energy costs and energy burden,

and improve the health outcome for all san franciscans. the energy program's major funding sources include the bay area regional energy network, bay wren, the department of energy, and a private entity called cal next that develops new energy efficiency measures for implementation. and we also get funding from work orders such as cleanpowersf, department of public health and the airport. the funded priorities for the energy program include helping more small businesses enroll into our energy efficiency program, thereby lowering their energy costs, particularly those that are hard to reach and underserved. helping these same small businesses also switch to environmental friendly refrigerants. and finally, again, going back to lowering energy costs, lower energy costs, and improve health by increasing the use of heat pump

water heaters and energy saving measures. also, fixing lead paint in homes, especially in low income and disadvantaged communities. on the other side, we have the unfunded priorities. the energy team is mostly funded by grants, so one of the challenges is increasing funding to staff members who work full time on grants to cover additional department activities that aren't directly paid for by the grants, and secondly, to explore new climate technologies like a carbon trading market for homes and small businesses, and equipment that removes carbon dioxide from the air. i'm happy to answer any questions. okay, for an overview, joe. priorities. so as you can see here, the energy budget is balanced for the next fiscal year and is relatively flat. the

reductions in non-personnel services and materials and supplies are due to annual fluctuations in forecasting grant expenditures in these areas is also true of the increase in the other city departments revenue, as that's indicative of anticipated changes in the in the fixed lead sf spending for the next fiscal year. good evening commissioners i'm paul o'hara, the program manager for the toxics reduction healthy communities team. our team seeks to safeguard human health and the environment by addressing hazardous waste and also working upstream to reduce the sale and use of toxic chemicals. we, like many teams, were funded by

various sources. we do receive impound funding. we also receive work orders from the health department, public works, the mta, the port puc and rec and park. we do receive. we have been receiving for the past two years a little bit of general fund money for our healthy communities work, which is our implementing the gas powered landscaping equipment ordinance. we receive fees from the safe drug disposal ordinance. that's a stewardship program. and the stewardship organizations pay to have the city oversee the program. and we will be coming to you next month to talk a little bit more about that program, because we need to increase the fees to better recover costs for what it actually costs to run it. and we also receive some money from grants to. so in terms of the funded priorities and the

unfunded priorities, i'll start with what's funded. we seek to expand equitable access to and increase the use of residential and commercial household hazardous waste programs. we will be working on improving the collection of city department purchasing data so that we can better monitor compliance with the buy green ordinance, which you heard about last meeting, and we will certify 160 businesses through our green business program, including 40 businesses and historically underrepresented communities, while maintaining our existing rebate and rebate program. in terms of unfunded priorities, we would like to launch a public education campaign on safe disposal options for medium capacity lithium ion batteries and rechargeable devices. and this is because of the very high

fire risk associated with these types of batteries. we also have a funding gap in terms of continued implementation of the healthier, cleaner, quieter communities act. that is, the gas powered landscaping equipment ordinance. we as i mentioned, we don't have funding for that. past this june. and part of what we want to do with that is to create an incentive program to make it easier for small businesses to make the switch over to the electric equipment. so that's a big gap that we have. and then we would like to be able to double the amount of incentive dollars in our rebate and rebate program that are going to green businesses. we're seeing that businesses have a higher need. they they really need more resources in order to do all of the things that we're asking them to do to become green. and

so we want to increase that to $2,000. that would be doubling it and also increase the number of businesses that we serve to 60 with the incentives. and that's 60 annually. and any questions before i pass it on to joe? okay. thank you. so the toxics reduction budget is currently showing a deficit of about $12,000. the major changes for the for this budget include an increase in in both non non personnel services expenditures and grant revenue. and this is due to the fact that we are including two iterations of the used oil grant for 2026. we have our 2026 iteration and there will be they'll be utilizing part of the 2025 iteration of

the used oil op grant as well. so that's why they're showing a higher professional services and used excuse me and grant funding for toxics reduction. those are the major changes for the next fiscal year at this time. good evening commissioners i'm soko made i am the new zero waste program manager at the department. and our team works to reduce generation and reduce disposal to landfill by increasing waste prevention, reuse, recycling and composting. so we're funded in several ways. first and foremost, it's the refuse impound account. and then through construction and

demolition debris, transporter permit fees. also, the c and d work order through dbi. and then finally some state grants that we've received over the last several years in terms of our priorities, starting with the core funded ones, we want to continue implementing zero waste state and local policies, including the mandatory refuse separation, crv initiatives, edible food recovery and sandy recovery. we want to continue implementing reusable foodware programs and prepare for potential policy, as well as continued commercial reuse assistance and grant program. we're going to be working with our admin team to develop and issue an rfp for the new landfill contract this year. and then finally, we are working. the city government team is actually implementing the new city agency refuse collection

contract and hoping to increase city agency recovery by 5%. and then our unfunded priorities are to develop and adopt a deconstruction and building material reuse policy and enhance partnerships to advance reuse infrastructure. we also would like to develop and scale, repair and reuse networks and programs to reduce unnecessary consumption of goods by the public and normalize the reuse culture by providing robust repair infrastructure to increase reuse and durability of goods. so i'm sure you're aware of the fixit clinics that we've had over the past years looking to sort of expand on that in terms of reuse and then implement trash processing to enhance recovery of organics and recyclables, and finally increase local and state compliance for mandatory source separation and edible food donation through additional

assistance and enforcement. yes. just on number three. is that similar to the presentation given at the end of last year? yes. by alexa kielty. yes. any more questions? okay, great. i will turn it over to joe to talk about our budget. thank you. so the zero waste budget is effectively balanced with the current small deficit of about $2,000. the major changes we see in zero waste come from state grants. the 67% reduction in grant expenditures is due to the ending of the sb 1383 implementation grant, and the 49% increase in non personnel services expenditures. it reflects an increase in spending on the other sb 1383 food recovery grant. you'll also see

that there's an increase in fee revenue and that we see that's based on expense. excuse me. the expected cost of administrating the construction and demolition ordinance in the next fiscal year. good evening commissioners. my name is anna deepak. i'm the senior racial equity coordinator filling in for sharda mehta, who is the community partnerships and engagement program manager while she's out. so the community partnership and engagement program, cpap improves accessibility and awareness of the department's programs and policies by centering racial and social equity in its strategies. we have a few funding sources that includes the impound account, work orders by the puc, grants

from the epa and general fund for our corps funded priorities. first is create a diverse pool of community partners the department can fund to conduct deeper engagement across all program areas. the second one is partner with the school district and community partners on environmental education projects, including youth events, youth community impact projects, and youth led community outreach. the third one is lead innovative zero waste and toxics reduction campaigns that include community partners and promote language accessibility, and the fourth is create a volunteer program to engage a diverse group of community members in climate action efforts in our unfunded priorities, we added, made expanded language access ordinance requirements and best practices for reaching limited english proficiency populations

and applying a racial and social equity lens across programs. the second one was expand grassroots outreach campaigns and education to include the programs other than zero waste and toxics reduction, namely climate, clean transportation and energy, and the third one was expand funding for community based organizations and initiatives to provide outreach and education services focusing on underserved communities. a quick question for unfunded priorities. for our number one, the meet expanded language access ordinance requirement. does that mean that that that because it's unfunded priorities, we can't translate the materials to other languages that are on including like vietnamese? and also, i think tagalog or. yeah, so we already do translation in tagalog. it's part of the language access ordinance right now. but in 2026, we need to start translating everything in vietnamese as well. apart from

getting the translation done, i feel like that is a smaller part of the fund. but coordinating the translations, making sure that it is meeting our language access goals and standards, and not just like having a google translate, but like interacting with the contractor that does the translation, doing interpretation in language funding for staff that can do that language interpretation meetings. i think like that part is still unfunded right now. so currently we do have, i know, language access in terms of mostly spanish and chinese. we also doing are we also translating in tagalog as well for vital documents, which you know, our department does not have too many vital documents, but we are expanding the definition of vital documents to work on any document that affects someone's social standing or financial standing. so we do translate those in tagalog as well. and then we

also translate in other languages where we feel that there is a need. so our language access policy goes far beyond the city's language access needs. and so we provide asl and we provide tagalog, vietnamese, russian languages that are not right now required for a lot of our programs. when we see that there is a need or there is a community that really needs it in language, and so we are hoping to expand it with interpretation, because translation is one thing, you know, you can provide it, but then you know this, commissioner, you need someone to speak that language and have that lived experience. so all of that would be expanded language access ordinance. i'll pass it on to joe. the community

partnership and engagement budget is currently actually balanced, but you will notice that you see reductions in virtually every area of this budget. and, you know, that is because portions of this budget have been shifted into the new policy program. so some of the resources that were in this budget are now going to be in the in the policy. excuse me. yes, the policy program budget. and that includes the general fund revenue that you see going from, from 275,000 to zero. that's being transferred to the policy budget as well. but overall this this budget is, you know, very stable and currently balanced. and. speaking of the

policy budget, charles chen, chief policy and public affairs officer. we're going to talk a little bit about what joe just mentioned, but my team does provide kind of policy guidance. the our our grant writing operations reside on the policy team. we do robust ethics and education compliance. we try and ensure that the department is portrayed positively in the media. and the newest part of our team is our, you know, innovative and marketing advertising kind of little wing division that came over that was previously in the community engagement and partnership team, and that has moved over. and we talked about that a couple of times over the previous year, and that has had budget impacts. our sources of funding are the refuse impound account and kind of non impound indirect funds or overhead. and you'll see some of

the priorities have shifted as well, because we are now doing advertising and marketing on the team, and we want to continue doing that for the zero waste program area, doing innovative outreach campaigns to reach residents and businesses where they are. we want to continue passing cutting edge environmental policies and kind of promote a climate, no pun intended, that moves us closer to our goals, our environmental goals. we want to continue maximizing the acquisition of grant funds, grant funds. and while we may see a fall off from the amount of grant opportunities at the federal government level, we are still seeing lots of grant opportunities at the state level, particularly with the california energy commission. there are a number of grants that are forthcoming in the first six months of 2025, and so we will be working on those that are applicable. and we want to continue to talk to the media

and talk about the good work that the department, the commission and the city is doing on the environment. those are our funded priorities. our unfunded priorities relates to you've got the on the left side, you've got our number one there. and then on the right side, you've got kind of the converse, the other side of the equation. and that's doing those outreach awareness marketing campaigns to change behavior for our non zero waste initiatives. that's what's not currently funded. and that's, you know, building decarbonization evs, biodiversity, green business, etc. so i'll pause to see if anyone, anyone has any questions. and charles, that's just because of where the source of funding is coming from. yes. those are obviously reliant on non non zero waste funds. and so they've either got to be general fund grant something else charles. so the decrease in federal grants makes total sense to me. the potential increase in

state grants is interesting. how many people in the department's full time job is just grant acquisition, acquisition and research? we have for research, it's primarily we have a full time position. melissa fondakowski, who's been doing amazing work over the past year and a half. she's a full time kind of grants coordinator, and so she does the bulk of our research. and so she's kind of got a system when things hit the state's websites, when things hit the federal government's grant release pages, she sees them through listservs, she checks the portals. she's kind of got that system. so she's probably full time on research. and then she's our full time kind of grant writer and grant coordinator. but each grant we put together, she's kind of the overall project facilitator, and she'll work with the program teams. and so it's never just an individual effort, even though she's the lead of that effort. but that's kind of her mostly

full time job. and she also does some press and some media and some heavy duty blueprint stuff on the side. but she's essentially full time for grants when the occasion requires it. thanks, charles. any other questions? joe? so, you know, the policy program is a new program. and as such, we don't have, you know, a year over year comparison that we can make on this. so i'll just point out that that, you know, there's currently about $100,000 deficit. and again, that's related to some general fund reductions and the issues that we're facing in that area. but otherwise, you know, this is the first year of the of this program in its current form. so i don't have anything to compare

it to. all right. you've heard a lot from me today. i'm here to share the admin team's budget priorities. you know that we have budget and finance, which includes accounting and the rest of fiscal it contracts and grants, administration, office management and human resources. so our funding largely is the departmental overhead. so that comes from the solid waste impound account. and then it also comes from non impound indirect funds. and then there's a small amount of general fund as well. so the core priorities that we have funded are to support our program teams to meet their programmatic goals and navigate complex city

processes and requirements. so we're continuing to scale up our team and provide additional support and to grow our capabilities for the department. we are going to continue to demonstrate stewardship of the city's dollars by strengthening our internal controls and working to strategically increase our department's value to the city, family and the public at large. and then we will continue to emphasize prompt hiring, ensure appropriate use of job classes, and increase usage of permanent civil service positions whenever possible. so for some of the unfunded priorities, we would like to dedicate additional resources to comply with the city's expanded and evolving grant making and reporting requirements. we're seeing that there's a lot of central requirements coming out of the controller's office, as well as from other central departments,

including the mayor's office, the city attorney, the city administrator and other entities. and while the controller's office has pulled together the guidances, there's still a lot of work in development and a lot of the guidances are designed for much larger departments that have entire grant making operations that are doing kind of routine multi-million dollar grants over and over. so we have to be able to go through the guidances and understand when they apply to us and when they don't. how do we work in partnership with other entities? we might fund someone at the $10,000 level, but if they're getting $200,000 from another department, then it triggers going forward a whole new set of requirements that will have to follow. even though our grant might be $10,000. so it's tricky because there's been obviously a fair amount of press and publicity, and everybody

wants to demonstrate how seriously the city is taking accountability and trying to make sure that there's not a single dollar that is misspent and stolen. but people also do need to recognize that it takes a lot of work and energy from staff to be able to administer grants, and so that's something that's going to require attention in the next year. the other unfunded priorities that we're highlighting here are to continue to expand our evidence based performance management, including enhanced tracking and trend analysis of internal data. so we use salesforce as a tool, and the program teams use a lot of really valuable data in different places. and so, you know, i'd like to see my team do more to understand the full scope of what we have, making sure everyone has access to the tools that they need, including the right salesforce licenses, etc. additionally, the next one

kind of flows, which is to address expanding it needs. so we're also seeing a continued heightened interest in cybersecurity and making sure that the departments are making use of ai appropriately. so the city is like moving forward policies related to that. and then with the move, we're needing to purchase a fair amount of things like monitors and think about the technology that's the right technology for the right place. as we work in a very different setting, the fourth bullet here is to scale up staffing to address growth in our core work. so if we have an additional $40 million of program work, we're going to have to not assume that we can do it with our existing staffing. so we'd want to scale accordingly. so sorry, can i ask a question? yes, please. if you

can go back to the slide just for number three, according to mayor's instructions, there's a hiring freeze, right? so i assume that if there's any hiring moving forward is related to grants only related position. is that right? there's not a formal hiring freeze. and there's always a focus on general fund supported positions. so i mean, we are seeing a slowdown like we're in a back and forth with, you know dr. right now about three positions and not dr. with the mayor's office and hiring. so they're just taking an extra look at everything and with good intentions in mind, they don't want to aggravate any structural imbalances. and they also don't want to have layoffs in this cycle. but we're not currently under a hiring freeze. i think that if conditions were to worsen that that might be something that we would see. but

even then, i think most of the positions we're trying to move forward are to perform work that we're obligated to do for external funders. yeah. thank you. thanks. all right. yeah. please. so for admins budget, the first thing i want to point out is that this this information, this slide is, is really intended for just for informational purposes. all the expenditures and revenues that you, that you see here are incorporated into the individual program budgets as indirect. so this slide is really just to show you where that indirect that that's charged to programs is. utilized. so you know, you can see it's significant decrease in the ftes and their associated costs. and this is

because 3.9 ftes transferred to the new policy program. we also see a significant increase in non personnel services. and this is related to an increase in the department level training costs as well as the city's indirect that they charge the department. but overall you know the admin is showing a deficit of $200,000, which is entirely related to the general fund reductions that we're currently trying to negotiate. and here we are. right. okay. so we've been kind of diving into some of this already. but the key takeaways in terms of what are our ongoing conversations related to general

fund are one is that we saw that there was significant reductions in the base budgets over both years. and. the second year actually has what feels like a mistake. but last year when we felt like there were mistakes, we were told it was done on purpose, regardless of intention. money. that's the overhead that's associated with positions funded by the general fund that have always been in every calculation or spreadsheet we've had with the budget office fell out of the budget. so that's why you see the significant drop in the second year of the budget, all of the recovery that funds the admin costs that you saw there, that portion is essentially like not included within the budget. and so we've begun engaging the

current acting budget director and his team around the, the that that particular piece and things that we think arguably were potentially done unintentionally. but again, they're sort of viewing a very substantial city wide deficit as their core problem. and so they're not interested in addressing that at this time. and so that's something that we engage with them on that we felt like we were we had reasonable arguments about why it wasn't aligned with what they had previously intended, but we weren't able to get anywhere with that. so we did want to just daylight. that, and i guess for what it's worth, it seems like we're not the only ones in that situation. like just the

budget process is rushed and there's a lot of work that happens. and i know that the department of public works, other departments that we work with, you know, have similar kind of analogous situations. so i understand their reluctance to try to address our specific issues. but i do think that, you know, these are all things that we can continue to press for as we go forward. i mentioned public works and there on the slide as well, because i had flagged that there's a substantial allocation of general fund that goes to the department of public works, and a portion of that ends up with our department. and so if public works has to reduce by 15%, that allocation, then will either they'll have to absorb the cost or we'll feel the effect of a reduced work order to us. so we think that that should be addressed centrally by the mayor's office as well. so the

other key points. commissioner. yes, yes. yeah, i have a question. so when, if things co in the not so positive direction in terms of general fund availability, when does the 5.15 fte get hit? what fiscal year does 5.15 become something smaller? i mean, the city. counts ftes and positions in a very convoluted way. that would be horrible and boring for me to try to explain, but basically we have the authority for 5.15 positions and we're going to protect that authority. i'm going to try to make it as visible and obvious as possible in the general fund location. but there's continued kind of carving off of the dollars. so when you look at the equivalents of what's really being funded,

there's not five positions being funded anymore. even before the even before the additional $200,000 cut. so you could make an argument that the funding really only covers around three fte and then, you know, i mean, to fund a position that's doing the climate action plan. i mean, i believe that two of those individuals actually also were getting a portion of their full fte funding from one of the add backs that went away. so you stabilize this, but then this other piece fell out. right. and so again, some of it's just because the budget process is blunt. and they may have decided globally they're not going to continue everything like this or they're not going to do that, or they didn't check the box that said ongoing. so they made it one time or whatever happens. but you know this, we're

definitely seeing that we have to document everything. and, you know, and i think it's reasonable for, you know, we're making the situation public in sort of as fair and objective a way as we can. and i think it's up to you all and the public and, you know, us as staff to try to do the best we can to advocate for what we think is fair, while acknowledging the overall city climate. and i will say that other departments are genuinely, like, fearful about having layoffs for their staff and loss of really significant services. and i that puts us in a really specific place where we see a climate emergency and we see a minimum need of 50 million over five years, but that doesn't match up with tighten up and fix a structural deficit. so that's what we're managing. thank you. can i ask a follow up question. or maybe it's not the

right timing to ask, but i'm just wondering for through the presentations that there's like funded parties and unfunded parties. right. so the unfunded priorities were assuming if there's the same funding level, then we're able to touch on those priorities or we're expecting new funding, then we will do we will be able to fulfill the unfunded priorities. so i'm just trying to yeah, thanks for asking that. i mean, so we're today we're kind of focused on the default base position. if we comply with the instructions and things go as they go, things in that column do include things. for example, with the solid waste impound account rate setting process, we asked for 3 million more per year than what we have now. and while it doesn't track 1 to 1 to the five year delivery plan, much of it is overlapping, right? so if we were to get that, that would if we got $3

million per year, that would fund a substantial portion, right? three, 3 million over five years is 15 million. we have a $50 million program that we feel like we need to deliver impactful work. and a lot of the things that you saw on the right side of those slides are included in, in those proposals. so everything on the right are kind of like you could think of it as defined proposals that we would love to see funded if there were an opportunity. but we're not saying where the funding is coming from. it might come from $16 million of grants that we're waiting to hear back from. it might come from. some other source. maybe there's another department that wants to increase the work order scope to us, or maybe there's some other,

you know, maybe there's a foundation that wants to give us a substantial investment or some other mechanism. but i think we really felt like we need to understand, like what the needs would be, what the next dollar would be used for, and to be able to share that, especially because today's like the legal requirement is to focus on priorities. and so we're doing great work. but there's a lot of things we can do to take it to the next level. and actually, that'll feed in pretty well with the next agenda item too. as we talk about kind of what we have queued up and then like where we could go if we had the opportunities. okay, one more question. sorry, i think i have so many questions. so no, it's great. the other questions i have is so if there are funding coming back, let's say that the cut is not as drastic or you have money coming in, will the parties will go to the first area, the climate action plan, where you get the most substantially cut or versus the other areas. i mean, it will

depend on color of money, right? so in not that this is what's going to happen, but if we were to get everything we ask for from the refuse rate setting process but nothing else, then we will skew toward doing more zero waste related work, even if that's not the strategic approach. but if that's the funding we have and the work adds value, we'll do it right. but if we had money that was free and clear, like general fund or, you know, external money, then we would be more likely to assign it to whatever the top priority is. okay. and then one last question. so what is really the total reduction that we expect from general fund? is that 200,000 or more? i mean, so they're asking for let me can i go back to the graph. i'm sorry. so it's they're

they're asking for a $200,000 reduction compared to the second year of the budget from last year's process. so that's. that's confusing because they put in additional reductions in the second year. so that you see the drop from 1.5 million in the current budget. so the 1,508,547 is our general fund for this current fiscal year. if so, there's i'm showing $904,000 of general fund next year. that's basically saying that the default situation, based on what they already cut last year, would have put us at 1.1 million for next year. and now they're asking us to cut another $200,000 from that 1.1 million,

when we had been hoping we would be able to actually do some repair to the cuts that had happened last year. so and the way that was delivered was those add backs that relate to the landscaping work and the climate equity hub work that had been funded through a different process than the 5.15 ftes that are part of the climate action plan work. that's why i showed 600,000 difference. i'm sorry. say that again. that's why i showed a $600,000 difference right between well, so then the 2627 budget, it then goes down to the 600,000. and that that actually is due to the loss of them covering overhead for the general fund positions. so it goes from covering 5.15 full time equivalent positions and their benefits to an overhead that's associated with them to

just the position authority. so that's why it drops down to 600,000. so that's about three ftes worth of people. when you include benefits and everything else. and president juan, what makes it even more challenging is we receive so few general fund dollars. as it is, all of that goes towards primarily staffing, right? so like when you make those cuts, it's not like if your entire budget is general fund, maybe you have a chance to kind of like move things around. and that's kind of like the blunt instrument that leo was talking about, that they applied this, this blunt instrument to all departments in this case, but it really does affect us because these are paying the actual salaries for our staff. and so there's no way to there's no there's nothing to wiggle around and move around. right. and i mean, again, you know, this they have said as always that when they ask for proposed cuts that they need to

just understand the options they have available. and certainly more than ever this year, with a new mayor coming in, i mean, they're not going to decide which cuts to take or prioritize between now and inauguration. they're going to wait. and so presumably and then the one day they'll you know, i think that they need to see what they have as an option, right? i mean, if you look at the year over year trend, i mean, we were basically stable. we went up a slight amount right, this year compared to last year, but we had an instruction that was somewhat comparable to reduce, i don't remember, off the top of my head, maybe it was 10% in the first year and an additional 10% the second year. this year it's 15% ongoing in the first year. so you don't have to do another step up the second year. and again, like the overhead falling out essentially is the step up

that they didn't ask for. but it just happened either because they decided they don't want to pay for overhead or someone didn't check a box. so yeah. thank you. that's all for the presentation. i think we were very near the end, if not at the very end. other questions on fellow commissioners. yeah, i mean, we've talked enough about the things that have been removed. and then, you know, i think the slide is important just because this is recorded and for the public, like the reasons that general fund matter, it does increase flexibility and agility for the department. we spend a great deal of time worrying about how we properly charge all of our grantors. and when someone is 100% funded by four different grants, it makes it very, very complicated. if you have general fund to help deal with when you have, you know, a hiring process

for another team that you're helping out on, like that money helps let you do those sort of things in an easier way without worrying that someone would have grounds to sue you in theory, we leverage general fund to bring in additional dollars. you know, we're seeing right now as we work on accept and expense, how much interest the city has in, oh, like how you're going to get this money from the federal government. what do they expect from us? right. and there's always the desire by the city to get free money. but funders want to see match a lot of the time. and so if we have general fund dollars, we're able to leverage those dollars either through demonstrating through a pilot project how successful a program can be and then winning more money, or we're able to meet some percentage requirement that grants might have in place, and it lets us manage our overhead because it's core admin is an important thing that, you know,

is not sexy for funders. and then i mentioned legal risk. so just general fund lets us just reduce the amount of time spent worrying about whether somebody has spent an extra hour on a particular task or not, things like that. and then as many of you have pointed out, stable general fund supports and fosters effective planning and reduces time spent on securing resources. if there's a true kind of expectation and stability associated with it. so this last page is just a summary slide. and i believe that is the final slide. so i'll i'll leave it on that in case there's any questions. or if people have follow up for me or joe or any of our team, any questions. commissioners, thank you for the

presentation. and really that led me to understand the budget better. i guess we'll open up for public comment on this item now. one public comment was received by email and was posted online and circulated to the commissioners. are there any additional members of the public who wish to comment on this item? madam president, we have no speakers. thank you. public comment is now closed. next item please. next item is item eight. update and discussion on the five year sfe strategic delivery plan. the speakers are leo, chief deputy director and cindy comerford, climate program manager. this item is for discussion. okay, thanks. okay. good evening commissioners again cindy comerford, climate program managers. so i think i'm going to give the bulk of this

presentation, since leo has had the enormous task of putting together a budget presentation together. but i'll ask him at the end if he wants to say a few words, and if not, we'll team up in february to deliver our final presentation on this topic. so i'm going to give an overview on our climate ready 2025 project, which is our department's initiative to develop a strategic delivery plan to see what the necessary resources are to implement our climate action plan and other important department priorities. so here is our agenda. i'm going to recap from our december meeting. and then i'm going to discuss the progress we've made over the last month, and then discuss next steps at the end. okay, so in last meeting we came and kind of gave an overview of this process. so we started this process in may of 2024. and the

goal was to develop a plan with clear objectives and a vision of the resources the department needed for five years. so we've been working closely with all of the program managers to understand what are the strategic resource allocations that we need for each program to be successful. so we went through a prioritization process. the program managers first submitted a $96 million in budget line item request. and so then we went through a process to evaluate each line item based on four criteria. so we evaluated it on health, quality of life, greenhouse gas emission reductions and economic security, all grounded in a cornerstone of equity. so we shared the kind of the high level outcomes of that process. last meeting. and so through

that process, we identified $50 million over five years that focuses on funding key strategies in the climate action plan, mostly around both building and transportation, decarbonization, investments in small businesses and workforce development, public awareness, and also investments in communities that have been hit the hardest by climate change. we shared this slide with you, which is a slide that kind of reflects alignment between our climate action plan and strategic delivery plan priorities and what we saw being kind of the thematic goals of the city moving forward. so kind of aligning our vision for the climate action plan and other department priorities. what we see the city focusing on over the next five years. so this

slide depicts what we've collectively been working on since our last presentation. we have refined both our short term and long term actions. we have also identified the supporting resources we'll need to deliver those actions. so looking at what's the engagement staff and the marketing staff will need to support the delivery of what we need to do. we've also gone through and determined which actions could be impound funded and which would need other sources of funding, such as general funds and grants. and then lastly, we kind of recalculated and recalibrated the budget. so i'm going to first walk you through our short term and long term actions, and then i'll go through some detail on the remaining items on this slide. so i'm going to go through a series of five slides. these slides are very text heavy. so i'm not going to go into a lot of detail. but what these slides do is they align

with that city policy alignment. so they're kind of under one of those five categories. and what they show is what we're going to do within the first 100 days of this year. and this were the commitments that we made when we met with the mayoral transition team. so kind of showing what our foundation work is. and then if we were able to secure additional resources, what we'd like to do in fiscal year 25 and 26 and moving forward. so i'm going to start off with this first slide. so the first two slides are under the category of leading with climate action. so this slide is around expanding ev adoption and infrastructure. and so we are going to complete our medium to heavy duty electrification plan within the next 100 days. and you know what we hope to have is to build a team to actually implement that plan moving forward, along with making sure we're doing outreach around evs and deploying

important charging projects. so the next slide is around accelerating building electrification and climate action. so in the next 100 days, we're aiming to pass our major renovation ordinance, which is an ordinance that builds off of our all electric new construction ordinance. and as we move forward, we want to continue to scale our building decarbonization efforts and make sure that we're securing necessary resources to do more coordinated work on workforce development. so the next is around investing in small businesses. in the next 100 days, we want to certify 40 green businesses and provide businesses with $20,000 in total, not each in incentives to help their transition to sustainable practices. our long term vision is really to expand the green business program into new sectors and unlocking

opportunities for more industries to adopt the sustainable practices. we also this is a great opportunity to leverage expansion to drive economic growth, while also advancing our climate action goals. so next is around growing our climate tech ecosystem. so san francisco will once again host sf climate week this april. this is a really great opportunity to highlight our leadership in climate innovation. we are also going to have a symposium later in the spring, which will focus on ways that we can have a improve our regulatory environment for climate tech companies operating in the city moving forward. you know, we would like to build a climate tech fellowship. and while this might seem extra, you know, we're not going to be able to really meet our climate

action goals through nature based solutions. so technology is going to be a really important part of this process, and we want to be able to make sure that we're deploying cutting edge technologies and solutions in our climate action plans. next is around streamlining permitting. we're hoping in the next 100 days to develop an over-the-counter permit for heat pump water heaters to simplify that process. and in the future, we'd like to secure more resources to support streamlining, permitting. it's really not kind of a one and done deal. we really need to have continuing education and flexibility to make sure that we're meeting the needs of both residents and businesses, and last and obviously not least, making sure that we are engaging communities hit the hardest by climate change. we're excited that we're going to be hosting the annual

climate action youth summit, which is a great platform for empowering youth. our next generation of climate leaders. the department has also just recently launched its youth climate talks, which gives an opportunity to have our youth discuss climate issues and get questions answered in the future. we really love to expand these efforts, along with our environmental justice grants, and making sure that we're really cultivating the youth leaders of tomorrow. so those are kind of some of the highlights of the next 100 days and how we want to move this forward in the future by securing more resources. this slide kind of shows some of the additional resources that we will need to kind of move that body of work forward. this includes five new positions, as well as funding for grants aimed

at community ambassadors, youth engagement and also neighborhood activations. so after going through that process of kind of looking at the additional resources, refining your actions and removing what could potentially be shifted to impound funding, you know, the budget is still around $50 million, so that would be about $10 million a year. the $50 million is for five years. however, this does not include overhead. so kind of our next steps in the process are going to be looking at this budget, analyzing the impacts and overhead, making sure we have the necessary administrative backbone to make this all move forward. and our goal is to put everything that you've heard in december and today into a report that we will have to you for our february commission meeting, which will be timed with the

last budget commission hearing. so i'm happy to answer any questions. but before i do that, i'd like to see if leo would would like to say any words. thank you. okay. thank you. yes, vice president cindy, i don't know who this is best directed at, but this is the five year kind of look forward. and so we have a new federal administration arriving. and i think we all expect that funding for san francisco environmental priorities may not be, as you know, a high priority for that administration compared to the present one. so when does that start to hit the department? is kind of the 26, 27 kind of covered with grants. and it's after that that we and so when does it hit us and what what parts of the department's work is it likely to hit more. maybe it's less the zero waste because that's funded. so when does it hit us and what will it if it if

it does become a problem, when does it hit us and what will it hit? so according to colleagues that we've spoken at with different federal agencies, all of the grants that we've received and signed, that funding should be secured. i can never guarantee what's going to happen with the next administration, but that funding should continue to the end of the funding agreements. i think we'll anticipate seeing less federal grant opportunities. so as you can see, we have gotten millions and millions of dollars of grants, and that might not continue in the future. and then, you know, it remains to be seen what parts of the inflation reduction act get repealed. and i think we won't know that until the next couple of months. and so that could impact implement that could impact, you know, tax credits, different state programs that trickle down. so i don't have a specific answer, but i don't know, tyrone, if you'd like to add something.

yeah. it's i mean, even if there wasn't the next administration coming on board and it was a continuation, it's kind of hard to forecast, as you heard from joe, like what grants will be coming up and when will they be coming up. and so we're always in this kind of dance, if you will, of looking as, as melissa does to every available opportunity state, federal, even philanthropic and just seeing kind of matching things together of what aligns with what we're trying to do in the department. that would that would continue. and so it's really hard to say exactly what will dry up. we do know that given all the kind of announcements we should expect, that there will be no further grants of the sort that we've even just recently got around, like ev charging, the building performance standards grants the stuff that we're moving forward right now, unlikely to see any future grants like that. but fortunately, those grants are multiyear grants. and so they'll provide some funding. but it's kind of hard to exactly show

when, you know, we fall off a cliff because the grant isn't there. got it. but is it fair to say that 2627 is unlikely to be impacted? is that is that fair? that's just one year out. i would say we know we know what we know as far as the grants that we've applied for and that we've received word back from. and so that's why we can look with clarity of knowing what our operating deficit will be based on the budget instructions from the mayor's office. thank you, commissioner hunter. cindy, great work as always. i appreciated how the last presentation flowed into this one around the unfunded items and the priorities for 2526 regarding the report for february, i feel very well informed that we do not have money. i would be curious to see in that report your ideas on how we could close that funding gap. i think we are at the point where we understand the amount of money we need and why we need that money. i don't think anyone here thinks we don't need that

money. what i am curious is if we want to move away from less reliable funding sources, like we don't want to pursue grant funding. i. that sets off alarm bells in my head. if we are losing general fund money, we can't rely on that either. how are we going to get this? $50 million is the thing that's going to keep me up at night from now until february. okay, i don't want to say don't lose sleep, but i think that's that's a fair comment. and we have been brainstorming about talking about this for a while. and i think that's, you know, we can include a portion of that report in some of the ideas that we've discussed. all right. any other comment questions. thank you. let's move to the public comment. are there any members of the public who wish to comment on this item? madam president, we have no speakers. thank you. public comment is now closed. next item i believe is item number ten. item ten is the

director's report. speaker is tyrone june, director. this item is for discussion. commissioners very brief director's report and it really piggybacks on what we've already heard about. so two new grants that we just received in the last few days. one was the phase two of the building up prize for an amount of $400,000. and so credit to lowell and melissa and the team for successfully getting that phase two funding. and then we talked about the ev charging $15 million grant, which we just announced or received word that we were getting awarded as well. so hot off the press as far as grants, but obviously it's going to be very helpful for advancing some of the work we need to do. tied tying that together, given the very short time frame we're operating in, with a new board coming in, being sworn in tomorrow, a new mayor and administration, i really want to sing the praises of alice

pieszecki and charles sheehan. we've been really working with the clerk of the board, the city attorney's office, the mayor's budget office, the comptroller's office on making sure that we can get everything aligned, which is a usually a very multi-month process through our legislative processes of and accept and expand. and so we've been hard at work at this for the past several weeks, and doing this on behalf of the entire city, so that we're not just saying, hey, let's just get our grants and then be done with it. we've actually been figuring out a process that will help other city departments that are in a similar position, receiving federal funding, that need to get these same approvals by the board to improve their chances of keeping those awards. and so i really want to credit the team for taking this leadership role, and it shows the important role that our department plays in the city ecosystem, because no other city department is leading this. and we are, even though we could just worry about our own grants and get that through the legislative process. so shout out to them, as we're

undoubtedly aware, mayor lori will be sworn in tomorrow, january 8th. as i mentioned, there will be a department head meeting on january 9th. and so at the next february meeting, i expect to have more instructions. and we'll obviously be engaged with not only the mayor, but the new policy chiefs that have been announced for the various tents or groupings of departments that are going to be reporting up through this new structure for the city. the new policy chief for infrastructure, climate and mobility will be alicia jean-baptiste, who is the executive director of spur. that was just announced. i think it's a great hire. she used to work at the planning department and mta at senior levels, understands the city, but also has the perspective of working for a third party organization that has been looking at how we can improve government and the efficiency of government. and so i think it's actually a perfect

match for what we want to try to advance, and aligning all of those different departments that are under that vertical. so public utilities commission, mta recreation and parks department, public works and us and the port, those are all the departments that are outlined in our climate action plan that we need coordination with from the executive level. and we're excited to see what unfolds in the coming days and weeks. and finally, just we had our annual tree chipping press conference. as you can see, i managed to escape unscathed. and so i did manage to chip a few christmas trees. and so for those members of the public that are watching, you still have until the 17th to place your unadorned christmas tree out on the sidewalk next to your recycle and compost bin during your normal pick up days. and our lovely recology service workers will pick those up on their route. and with that concludes my director's report and happy to answer any

questions. any questions, commissioners, i just say big shout out to the team. it's a challenging time right now with the transition. thank you. let's open up for public comment. alex, are there any members of the public who wish to comment on this item? madam president, we have no speakers. all right. public comment is now closed. next item please. next item is item 11. new business and future agenda items. the speaker is charles sheehan, chief policy and public affairs officer. this item is for discussion. good evening commissioners. thank you. the next commission meeting is scheduled for tuesday, february 4th. we've got a very packed agenda already for that commission meeting. there will be a crv related contract for your consideration. i think a contract extension. we will, of course, have the second and final portion of our budget presentation and our budget for your approval. february is when we also do our commission

elections. so we'll have that. we will have a presentation from the refuse rates administrator about what they're thinking for the next three year rate cycle. we'll have a presentation on kicking off our inaugural, what we're going to do to update our cap and what that 2025 process looks like, and we'll want to solicit and get your feedback on that. we will, as our my colleague paulie noted, bring forward to you the increase for our safe medicine disposal ordinance, the increase in fees, and that will be something for your approval as well. that is the february meeting. it's there's a lot going on. in fact. any questions commissioners. all right. let's open up our. oh thank you. oh let's open to public comment. are there any members of the public who wish to comment on this item? madam president, we have no speakers. thank you. public comment is now closed. next item please. next

item is item 12. adjournment. the meeting is adjourned. the time is 7:26 p.m. thank you for joining us. >> in the bay area as a whole,

thinking about environmental sustainability. we have been a leader in the country across industries in terms of what you can do and we have a learn approach. that is what allows us to be successful. >> what's wonderful is you have so many people who come here and they are what i call policy innovators and whether it's banning plastic bags, recycling, composting, all the different things that we can do to improve the environment. we really champion. we are at recycle central, a large recycle fail on san francisco pier 96. every day the neighborhood trucks that pick up recycling from the blue bins bring 50 # o tons of bottles, cans and paper here to this facility and unload

it. and inside recology, san francisco's recycling company, they sort that into aluminum cans, glass cans, and different type of plastic. san francisco is making efforts to send less materials to the landfill and give more materials for recycling. other cities are observing this and are envious of san francisco's robust recycling program. it is good for the environment. but there is a lot of low quality plastics and junk plastics and candy wrappers and is difficult to recycle that. it is low quality material. in most cities that goes to landfill. >> looking at the plastics industry, the oil industry is the main producer of blastics. and as we have been trying to phase out fossil fuels and the

transfer stream, this is the fossil fuels and that plastic isn't recycled and goes into the waste stream and the landfill and unfortunately in the ocean. with the stairry step there will be more plastic in the ocean than fish. >> we can recycle again and again and again. but plastic, maybe you can recycle it once, maybe. and that, even that process it downgrades into a lower quality material. >> it is cheaper for the oil industry to create new plastics and so they have been producing more and more plastics so with our ab793, we have a bill that really has a goal of getting our beverage bottles to be made of more recycled content so by the time 2030 rolls around t recycle content in a coke bottle, pepsi bottle, water bottle, will be up

to 50% which is higher thatten the percentage in the european union and the highest percentage in the world. and that way you can actually feel confident that what you're drinking will actually become recycled. now, our recommendation is don't use to plastic bottle to begin w but if you do, they are committing to 50% recycled content. >> the test thing we can do is vote with our consumer dollars when we're shopping. if you can die something with no packaging and find loose fruits and vegetables, that is the best. find in packaging and glass, metal and pap rer all easily recycled. we don't want plastic. we want less plastic. awe what you we do locally is we have the program to think disposable and work one on one to provide technical assistance to swap out the disposable food service to reusables and we have

funding available to support businesses to do that so that is a way to get them off there. and i believe now is the time we will see a lot of the solutions come on the market and come on the scene. >> and is really logistics company and what we offer to restaurants is reasonable containers that they can order just like they would so we came from about a pain point that a lot of customers feel which wills a lot of waste with takeout and deliver, even transitioning from styrofoam to plastic, it is still wasteful. and to dream about reusing this one to be re-implemented and cost delivery and food takeout. we didn't have throwaway culture always. most people used to get delivered to people's homes and then the empty milk containers

were put back out when fresh milk came. customers are so excited that we have this available in our restaurant and came back and asked and were so excited about it and rolled it out as customers gain awareness understanding what it is and how it works and how they can integrate it into their life. >> and they have always done it and usually that is a way of being sustainable and long-term change to what makes good financial sense especially as there are shipping issues and material issues and we see that will potentially be a way that we can save money as well. and so i think making that case

to other restaurateurs will really help people adopt this. >> one restaurant we converted 2,000 packages and the impact and impact they have in the community with one switch. and we have been really encouraged to see more and more restaurants cooperate this. we are big fans of what re-ecology does in terms of adopting new systems and understanding why the current system is broken. when people come to the facility, they are shocked by how much waste they see and the volume of the operations and how much technology we have dedicated to sort correctly and

we led 25 tours and for students to reach about 1100 students. and they wanted to make change and this is sorting in the waste stream they do every single day and they can take ownership of and make a difference with. >> an i feel very, very fortunate that i get to represent san francisco in the legislature and allows me to push the envelope and it is because of the people the city attracts and is because of the eco system of policy thinking that goes on in san francisco that we are constantly seeing san francisco leading the way. >> kids know there's a lot of environmental issues that they are facing. and that they will be impacted by the impact of climate change.

they will have the opportunity to be in charge and make change and make the decisions in the future. >> we are re-inventing the way the planet does garbage founded in the environmental ethic and hunger to send less to landfills. this is so many wonderful things happening in san francisco. i feel very fortunate and very humble to live here and to be part of this wonderful place.

>> working with kids, they keep you young. they keep you on your tones -- on your toes. >> teaching them, at the same time, us learning from them, everything is fulfilling. >> ready? go.

[♪♪♪] >> we really wanted to find a way to support women entrepreneurs in particular in san francisco. it was very important for the mayor, as well as the safety support the dreams that people want to realize, and provide them with an opportunity to receive funding to support improvements for their business so they could grow and thrive in their neighborhoods and in their industry. >> three, two, one! >> because i am one of the consultants for two nonprofits here for entrepreneurship, i knew about the grand through the renaissance entrepreneur center, and through the small business development center. i thought they were going to be perfect candidate because of their strong values in the community. they really give back to the

neighborhood. they are from this neighborhood, and they care about the kids in the community here. >> when molly -- molly first told us about the grant because she works with small businesses. she has been a tremendous help for us here. she brought us to the attention of the grand just because a lot of things here were outdated, and need to be up-to-date and redone totally. >> hands in front. recite the creed. >> my oldest is jt, he is seven, and my youngest is ryan, he is almost six. it instills discipline and the boys, but they show a lot of care. we think it is great. the moves are fantastic. the women both are great teachers. >> what is the next one? >> my son goes to fd k. he has been attending for about two years now. they also have a summer program,

and last summer was our first year participating in it. they took the kids everywhere around san francisco. this year, owner talking about placing them in summer camps, all he wanted to do was spend the entire summer with them. >> he has strong women in his life, so he really appreciates it. i think that carries through and i appreciate the fact that there are more strong women in the world like that. >> i met d'andrea 25 years ago, and we met through our interest in karate. our professor started on cortland years ago, so we grew up here at this location, we out -- he outgrew the space and he moved ten years later. he decided to reopen this location after he moved. initially, i came back to say, hey, because it might have been 15 years since i even put on a

uniform. my business partner was here basically by herself, and the person she was supposed to run the studio with said great, you are here, i started new -- nursing school so you can take over. and she said wait, that is not what i am here for i was by myself before -- for a month before she came through. she was technically here as a secretary, but we insisted, just put on the uniform, and help her teach. i was struggling a little bit. and she has been here. one thing led to another and now we are co-owners. you think a lot more about safety after having children and i wanted to not live in fear so much, and so i just took advantage of the opportunity, and i found it very powerful to hit something, to get some relief, but also having the knowledge one you might be in a situation of how to take care of yourself. >> the self-defence class is a new thing that we are doing.

we started with a group of women last year as a trial run to see how it felt. there's a difference between self-defence and doing a karate class. we didn't want them to do an actual karate class. we wanted to learn the fundamentals of how to defend yourself versus, you know, going through all the forms and techniques that we teaching a karate class and how to break that down. then i was approached by my old high school. one -- once a semester, the kids get to pick an extra curricular activity to take outside of the school walls. my old biology teacher is now the principle. she approached us into doing a self-defence class. the girls have been really proactive and really sweet. they step out of of the comfort zone, but they have been willing to step out and that hasn't been any pushback. it is really great. >> it is respect. you have to learn it. when we first came in, they knew us as those girls.

they didn't know who we were. finally, we came enough for them to realize, okay, they are in the business now. it took a while for us to gain that respect from our peers, our male peers. >> since receiving the grant, it has ignited us even more, and put a fire underneath our butts even more. >> we were doing our summer camp and we are in a movie theatre, and we just finished watching a film and she stepped out to receive a phone call. she came in and she screamed, hey, we got the grant. and i said what? >> martial arts is a passion for us. it is passion driven. there are days where we are dead tired and the kids come and they have the biggest smiles on their faces and it is contagious. >> we have been operating this program for a little over a year all women entrepreneurs. it is an extraordinary benefit for us. we have had the mayor's office investing in our program so we can continue doing this work.

it has been so impactful across a diversity of communities throughout the city. >> we hope that we are making some type of impact in these kids' lives outside of just learning karate. having self-confidence, having discipline, learning to know when it's okay to stand up for yourself versus you just being a bully in school. these are the values we want the kids to take away from this. not just, i learned how to kick and i learned how to punch. we want the kids to have more values when they walk outside of these doors. [♪♪♪] - >> tenderloin is unique neighborhood where geographically place in downtown san francisco and on every street corner have liquor store in the corner it stores pretty much every single block has a

liquor store but there are impoverishes grocery stores i'm the co-coordinated of the healthy corner store collaboration close to 35 hundred residents 4 thousand are children the medium is about $23,000 a year so a low income neighborhood many new immigrants and many people on fixed incomes residents have it travel outside of their neighborhood to assess fruits and vegetables it can be come senator for seniors and hard to travel get on a bus to get an apple or a pear or like tomatoes to fit into their meals

my my name is ryan the co-coordinate for the tenderloin healthy store he coalition we work in the neighborhood trying to support small businesses and improving access to healthy produce in the tenderloin that is one of the most neighborhoods that didn't have access to a full service grocery store and we california together out of the meeting held in 2012 through the major development center the survey with the corners stores many stores do have access and some are bad quality and an overwhelming support from community members wanting to utilities the service spas we decided to work with the small businesses as their role within the community and bringing more

fresh produce produce cerebrothe neighborhood their compassionate about creating a healthy environment when we get into the work they rise up to leadership. >> the different stores and assessment and trying to get them to understand the value of having healthy foods at a reasonable price you can offer people fruits and vegetables and healthy produce they can't afford it not going to be able to allow it so that's why i want to get involved and we just make sure that there are alternatives to people can come into a store and not just see cookies and candies and potting chips and that kind of thing hi, i'm cindy the director of the a preif you believe program

it is so important about healthy retail in the low income community is how it brings that health and hope to the communities i worked in the tenderloin for 20 years the difference you walk out the door and there is a bright new list of fresh fruits and vegetables some place you know is safe and welcoming it makes. >> huge difference to the whole environment of the community what so important about retail environments in those neighborhoods it that sense of dignity and community safe way. >> this is why it is important for the neighborhood we have families that needs healthy have a lot of families that live up here most of them fruits and

vegetables so that's good as far been doing good. >> now that i had this this is really great for me, i, go and get fresh fruits and vegetables it is healthy being a diabetic you're not supposed to get carbons but getting extra food a all carbons not eating a lot of vegetables was bringing up my whether or not pressure once i got on the program everybody o everything i lost weight and my blood pressure came down helped in so many different ways

the most important piece to me when we start seeing the business owners engagement and their participation in the program but how proud to speak that is the most moving piece of this program yes economic and social benefits and so forth but the personal pride business owners talk about in the program is interesting and regarding starting to understand how they're part of the larger fabric of the community and this is just not the corner store they have influence over their community. >> it is an owner of this in the department of interior i see the great impact usually that is like people having especially with a small family think liquor

store sells alcohol traditional alcohol but when they see this their vision is changed it is a small grocery store for them so they more options not just beer and wine but healthy options good for the business and good for the community i wish to have more

>> this is one place you can always count on to give you what you had before and remind you of what your san francisco history used to be. >> we hear that all the time, people bring their kids here and their grandparents brought them here and down the line. >> even though people move away, whenever they come back to the city, they make it here. and they tell us that. >> you're going to get something made fresh, made by hand and made with quality products and something that's very, very good. ♪♪ >> the legacy bars and restaurants was something that was begun by san francisco simply to recognize and draw attention to the establishments. it really provides for san francisco's unique character. ♪♪

>> and that morphed into a request that we work with the city to develop a legacy business registration. >> i'm michael cirocco and the owner of an area bakery. ♪♪ the bakery started in 191. my grandfather came over from italy and opened it up then. it is a small operation. it's not big. so everything is kind of quality that way. so i see every piece and cut every piece that comes in and out of that oven. >> i'm leslie cirocco-mitchell, a fourth generation baker here with my family. ♪♪ so we get up pretty early in the morning. i usually start baking around 5:00. and then you just start doing rounds of dough.

loaves. >> my mom and sister basically handle the front and then i have my nephew james helps and then my two daughters and my wife come in and we actually do the baking. after that, my mom and my sister stay and sell the product, retail it. ♪♪ you know, i don't really think about it. but then when i -- sometimes when i go places and i look and see places put up, oh this is our 50th anniversary and everything and we've been over 100 and that is when it kind of hits me. you know, that geez, we've been here a long time. [applause] ♪♪ >> a lot of people might ask why our legacy business is important. we all have our own stories to tell about our ancestry. our lineage

and i'll use one example of tommy's joint. tommy's joint is a place that my husband went to as a child and he's a fourth generation san franciscan. it's a place we can still go to today with our children or grandchildren and share the stories of what was san francisco like back in the 1950s. >> i'm the general manager at tommy's joint. people mostly recognize tommy's joint for its murals on the outside of the building. very bright blue. you drive down and see what it is. they know the building. tommy's is a san francisco hoffa, which is a german-style presenting food. we have five different carved meats and we carve it by hand at the station. you prefer it to be carved whether you like your brisket fatty or want it lean.

you want your pastrami to be very lean. you can say i want that piece of corn beef and want it cut, you know, very thick and i want it with some sauerkraut. tell the guys how you want to prepare it and they will do it right in front of you. san francisco's a place that's changing restaurants, except for tommy's joint. tommy's joint has been the same since it opened and that is important. san francisco in general that we don't lose a grip of what san francisco's came from. tommy's is a place that you'll always recognize whenever you lock in the door. you'll see the same staff, the same bartender and have the same meal and that is great. that's important. ♪♪

>> the service that san francisco heritage offers to the legacy businesses is to help them with that application process, to make sure that they really recognize about them what it is that makes them so special here in san francisco. ♪♪ so we'll help them with that application process if, in fact, the board of supervisors does recognize them as a legacy business, then that does entitle them to certain financial benefits from the city of san francisco. but i say really, more importantly, it really brings them public recognition that this is a business in san francisco that has history and that is unique to san francisco. >> it started in june of 1953. ♪♪

and we make everything from scratch. everything. we started a you -- we started a off with 12 flavors and mango fruits from the philippines and then started trying them one by one and the family had a whole new clientele. the business really boomed after that. >> i think that the flavors we make reflect the diversity of san francisco. we were really surprised about the legacy project but we were thrilled to be a part of it. businesses come and go in the city. pretty tough for businesss to stay here because it is so expensive and there's so much competition. so for us who have been here

all these years and still be popular and to be recognized by the city has been really a huge honor. >> we got a phone call from a woman who was 91 and she wanted to know if the mitchells still owned it and she was so happy that we were still involved, still the owners. she was our customer in 1953. and she still comes in. but she was just making sure that we were still around and it just makes us feel, you know, very proud that we're carrying on our father's legacy. and that we mean so much to so many people. ♪♪ >> it provides a perspective. and i think if you only looked at it in the here and now, you're missing the context. for me, legacy businesses, legacy bars and restaurants are really about setting the

context for how we come to be where we are today. >> i just think it's part of san francisco. people like to see familiar stuff. at least i know i do. >> in the 1950s, you could see a picture of tommy's joint and looks exactly the same. we haven't change add thing. >> i remember one lady saying, you know, i've been eating this ice cream since before i was born. and i thought, wow! we have, too. bogus. commissioner. fisher. here. commissioner. kim. here, commissioner. lamb. here. commissioner. sanchez. vice president weisbord and president alexander. here. thank you. thank you. for those watching child care. will, will. excuse me. i need to speak clearly here. child care will be provided from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. for children ages 3 to 10. the