is meeting to order. that evening. this is a meeting of the san francisco commission on the environment. the date is tuesday february 4th. the time is 5:03 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 comment 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 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 as a gov.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 one here vice president sullivan here. commissioner on here. commissioner bermejo here. commissioner hunter. yeah. commissioner tompkins there. commissioner yoon is excused. president juan we have a quorum. all right. next item please. next item is a consent calendar items two through three. item two is the president's welcome and item three is approval of minutes of the january seven, 2025 commission

on the environment special meeting. >> good evening. item two is the president's welcome the commission on the environment and knowledge is that we occupied and sea the ancestral homeland of the to which all only people who are the original inhabitants of the solar cisco peninsula. we recognize that the parameters along you understand the interconnectedness of all things and i have maintained harmony with nature for millennia. >> we honor the rahmatullah show not only peoples for the enduring commitment to europe mother earth as the indigenous protectors of this land and in accordance with their traditions the raw material tony has never seen it lost nor forgotten their responsibilities as the caretaker of this place as well as for all peoples who reside in that traditional territory. >> we recognize that we benefit from living and working on their traditional homeland as underpinned invited guests. we affirm the sovereign rights as first peoples and wish to

pay our respects to the ancestors, elders and relatives of the remote host community. as environmentalists we recognize that we must embrace indigenous knowledge in how we care for sara cisco and all these people. of commissioners department staff members of the public welcome especially in this kind of weather where you might say i really want to be here. today we have a very packed agenda including commission elections and we will and potential vote on a resolution authorizing siri contract expansion. >> presentations on the 2025 up day of summer cisco's climate action plan and the various rates planning process for the new reference rates period of october 2025 to september 2028 a review and potential vote on whether to increase safe drug disposal ordinance fees review and potential vote on whether to approve the employment department's fiscal year 2025

to 26 and fiscal year 2026 to 27. budget and overview and potential vote on whether to approve a letter regarding ongoing general fund support for enrollment department staff and programs with dallas guest audit. the final item in a consent calendar are the minutes so for all commissioners we have an action item on the consent agenda. a consent calendar is that any discussion or changes to the draft minutes that i hear a motion to approve the minutes. >> thank you. commission of a may on the second in seconds. >> thank you. >> we have a motion by commissioner bermejo and a second by commissioner on and hearing no further discussions and that's open. >> let's open up for public comment. are there any members of the public who wish to speak on items two through three only of the agenda?

president one we have no speakers or hearing no public comment. public comment is now closed. could you please call the roll for item three president one eye. >> vice president sullivan i commissioner on high commissioner bermejo i. commissioner hunter i. commissioner tompkins i. commissioner u.n. is excused. >> the motion passes the next item please. >> the next item is item four general public comment. members of the public may address the commission on matters that are within the commission's jurisdiction and are not already on today's agenda. >> are there any members of the public who wish to comment on this item? only? madam president, we have no speakers. >> all right. public comment is now closed. next item please. next item is item five nomination and election of the commission on the environment president and vice president. >> this item is for discussion and possible action.

>> three hours. could you please provide a summary of the process for commission elections? >> yes we will begin with the presidency and we will accept nominations for this position only following nominations and discussion there will be public comment and a vote. we will then repeat the process for the position of vice president including nominations, discussion public comment and a vote commissioners can nominate themselves and nominations do not require a second in order for the commission to vote on a nomination. are there any questions regarding the process for president and vice president elections. seeing no questions we will now entertain nominations for the position of president. >> i'd like to be recognized. >> i'll go ahead, commissioner. so as fellow commissioners have observed now over the history of the commission, we have now moved to two year terms for president and vice president of our body. commissioner one is served honorably by my estimation the

first year of a two year term so i would like to re nominate commissioner president sara one for you know a second two year term. i think more generally we live in dark times for the environment for the department, the commission there are a lot of challenges ahead and in my mind there are probably no better leader we could ask for in sara one in her dedication to communities particularly immigrant communities that are under siege by this administration. and i've always appreciated president one's understanding and stickler feel for how environmental policy can be connected to the grassroots. i think we need that more than ever to be able to tell the story of environmental and environmental policy in a way that relates to people will be the fundamental challenge of our department and commission ahead. so with that i'd like to submit that nomination. >> thank you for your kind words, commissioner. yes, commissioner. >> well i wholeheartedly agree with commissioner on and i like to second the nomination of sara wan to continue for a

second term as our president of the commission and the environment for all the reasons that the commissioner has stated. >> thank you. i just want to chime in. in addition to what the other commissioners have noted, these are dark times and this is going to be a tough year and i think someone with commissioner one's experience and especially the experience and the operations of this of this commissioner will be really welcome in the year ahead. so i am happy to support the nomination. >> thank you. thank you for nominations. i will have to say that i'm glad you accept the nomination but then also i want to take this chance to say that it's really my great honor to be working with very competent department staff as well as where we're always who always put the committee interests in front that would four commissions that always work on agenda for the best of the committee interests. so i really it's really my honor to be on this commission and thank you for everyone. >> i don't know if there's any

other discussion or questions. >> if not, then we're open for public comment. >> are there any members of the public who wish to comment on the nomination of commissioner one as president? oh okay. >> madam president, we have no speakers. the public comment is now closed. please call it a roll. president one i. >> vice president sullivan i commissioner on i. commissioner bermejo i. commissioner hunter i. commissioner tompkins i. >> commissioner uno's excused. thank you. and with that the motion passes and again once again thank you for everyone's nomination and thank you for all your great work serving on the commission . >> we will now entertain nominations for the position of vice president. and of course i would like to bring my really my better partner on this commission, vice president sullivan to

accept this nomination to be my vice president once again for the commission. >> any other comment? >> oh, okay. i do as as one of the newer commissioners i have appreciated the leadership of commissioner sullivan as our vp and with all the transitions happening both at the federal and local city level now more than ever we do need this steady leadership most knowledgeable and experienced leadership as well. and i know in his role of vp of the commission commissioner sullivan has brought this exact leadership up upon commissioner sullivan's appointment to our commission. he remains laser focused on addressing what is required to help san francisco reduce its climate impact and enhance energy efficiencies as well. he supports the san francisco department of the environment's diversity and equity goals. additionally, he has recognized

us as the commission's champion for urban forestry reining true expert on trees and the only tree author. for these reasons it's my pleasure to nominate him for a second term. >> thank you. thank you very much for the nomination and the kind words. i joined this commission shortly after president trump took the country out of the paris accord and i guess that was 2017. and i just thought i needed to do something to contribute. and now here we are again some years later. so this is going to be a year where it's more important than ever to double down on environmental goals and especially climate goals. so i'm very happy to be able to do my part for that in the year ahead. >> thank you. vice president sullivan is there any other discussion to open up the public comment? are there any members of the public who wish to comment on

the nomination of commissioner sullivan as vice president? madam president, we have no speakers pick public comments now closed. please call the roll. president one hi. vice president sullivan. hi commissioner on hi commissioner vermeil i. commissioner hunter. commissioner tompkins. >> commissioner u.n. is excused. great. and with that the motion passes and we have our commission vice president sullivan. >> congratulations. thank you. >> next item, please. >> the next item is item six review and vote on whether to approve resolution file 2020 5-03- co a resolution authorizing our planet recycling crv contract extension. the speaker for this item is elina beckerman crv zero waste coordinator. the explanatory document is resolution file 2020 5-03- chloe resolution authorizing our planet recycling crv contract extension.

this item is for discussion and possible action. >> good evening commissioners and director joo thank you so much for hearing this presentation. my name is elina beckerman. i am the sierra bees zero waste coordinator and i'm here representing the residential team to discuss the san francisco beverage container recycling program and our contract extension for our program operator i. our planet recycling has been the program operator for the last three years coming on three years and since the initiation of the program the city which had experienced a

desert of redemption sites in san francisco has turned around crv redemption around the state has slowly been decreasing over the last decade and since january of 2022 the bottle buying program an innovative mobile and cashless crv redemption solution has been operating in the city in almost all districts and has returned over $500,000 to residents to date thousands of residents are using the program and it has received initial funding from the state and is currently also going to have funding through the annual city county payment program an annual allocation from the state. so the contract amendment that we're seeking your approval on is to move the contract from its current state of 500,000 up to a million with this contract

our intention is to expand access for crv redemption to more san francisco residents through innovative solutions and collaboration with san francisco residents. >> the modification of the grant will help us enable more hours of operation collaboration with partners like reverse vending machine operators as well as consideration for reusable bags as part of the solution. the grant timeline will remain unchanged at this moment so it will remain through june of 2026. to date our planet recycling has been steady and consistent partner in our programing. they are the only certified full scale crv redemption center in san francisco approved by cal recycle and our incredible collaborator helping

us create more redemption solutions throughout the city. >> this next slide is a lot so i'll go through it quickly and just give you the highlights. basically in 2012 we saw the start of a big decline in the number of recycling centers in san francisco and that decline continued through 2022. we slowly began to see what customers saw as tax instead of a crv deposit so residents were not able to access redemption sites. they were closed and the state had created this funding pool for recycling center pilot programs. san francisco took that opportunity and worked with cal recycle and the our planet recycling recycling center to establish the bottle bank. and since then we are starting to see a continued upward trend

in terms of redemption by residents and the number of recycling sites operational. those five there at the end are four of them are the planet recycling operation including bottle bank. >> so with that in summary, the environment department is asking the commissioners to approve the resolution to increase the contract amount from 500,000 to 1 million and the goal the goal as previously stated is to continue to expand access to san francisco residents. thank you very much. now take any questions if there are any. >> so so quick questions so increase domo from 500,000 to 1 million. that's a pilot operator has the capacity to implement is program in such a scale up they do yeah they're currently operating with a budget of

about 400,000 annually on their own with the addition of some of these improvements like reverse vending machines and increased scale of operation they will be able to take in that budget. >> i see and in is there do five recycling centers we mean in san francisco and yuma do you know where do they usually locate in mostly in one location or one either the east side of the city of the west of crews are over different parts. >> yeah. great question. so the the main headquarters of our planet recycling is in the bay shore. there's another small recycling center besides our planet recycling that's represented in that five but they're not a full scale they're just a container and they're a southern california operation and that location is also in the bay shore at the food co. the remaining certified recycling centers are part of the bottle bank program and they are throughout the city. so the the four sites that are

part of the bottle bank are actually represented by the mobile recycling program that is the the bottle bank program that is throughout most districts in san francisco though operational limited amount of time and then the additional 500,000 sorry already secure the funding. >> yes yeah the funding is through the city county program allocation and it is annually over $200,000 at a commissioner. any questions? yes, commissioner. >> i'm trying to make sure that i understand what bang for buck with out this money if we did end approve this could the program continue into 2026 with its current funding the current program unfortunately has lost some of its operational work as a result of of other partners that are part of it for san

francisco conservation corps for one, we wouldn't be able to expand the program further so we wouldn't be able to test out new technologies like reverse vending machines and we wouldn't be able to add additional staff hours. so there's been a decrease as of this month as a result of the san francisco conservation corps exiting the program and can get into a lot of the detail. >> but that's that's part of the funding increases to be able to expand the program so the program could operate at its current level with the cuts this month until the end of 2026 or sorry until it ends in 2026. >> the contract the contract ends in 2026. there's no more funding in the contract. >> um okay. that's why i'm terrified. okay so then this funding would basically fund the program and then get us the additional implementation of you said reverse vending machines and

additional collection efforts. >> all right. i think i answered all the questions. thank you. thank you. thank you. is there any other questions or comments? uh, do i have a motion to approved a resolution file 2020 5-03 the seal i'll motion to approve. can i have a second on seconds ? >> thank you. we have a motion by vice president sullivan and a second by commissioner on 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 for item six. president one by vice president sullivan i commissioner on high commissioner bermejo i commissioner hunter high commissioner tompkins i commissioner yuan is excused correct a motion passes. >> thank you. next item is the next item is

item seven presentation on the 2025 update of san francisco's climate action plan. speakers are cindy comer for climate program and her and elizabeth stamp senior climate action coordinator. this item is for discussion as commissioners as cindy and elizabeth come up for over to come on. i just wanted to provide a little bit of context. as president juan noted, this is the second of our budget hearings before we submit our budget and we've been engaged in conversations with this commission regarding our strategic delivery plan. also noted today by several commissioners is that there clearly is a step being taken away from our federal and leading on climate with the current administration and we've seen that in the form of websites being taken down referencing climate freezes on grants that we have contracts with both in the city and this is happening throughout the nation with many other cities that we're talking and in collaboration with. and so with this kind of attack

on on climate issues which is our core function here as a department and as the commission, it's equally as important that we continue advancing this work advocating for the funding that's necessary to continue this work because in these kind of dark times everyone is looking to cities like san francisco to lead the way and the times we choose to step away when things get difficult that gives other cities the excuse to also step away to because if san francisco can't do it, they oftentimes they feel what chance do they have to move forward? and so as we have been beginning this process to update our climate action plan which sets forth our goals which cindy and elizabeth will talk about, it is very deeply tied to all of the funding conversations we've been having with this commission over the last several years and the decision point we're at of whether or not during this critical time when the federal steps away are we going to

continue moving forward or are we going to continue in reversing course and moving in an alternate direction? and so with that, i'll turn it over to cindy to kick us off just quickly for the record, commissioner, on how to be excused for a portion of the meeting. >> thank you. good evening, commissioners. again, i'm cindy commerford. i'm the climate program manager. i'm here with my colleague elizabeth stamp and we're going to give an update on the climate action plan just to give you some quick context. i think some of you were here in 2021 but not all of you. so our last climate action plan was released in 2021. it was supposed to be 2020 but because of the pandemic it was delayed and so our commitments to kind of our professional organizations and to the city is to update our climate action plan every five years. our last update was quite immersive. we kind of redid the entire framework for how we look at

climate actions establishing very concrete goals, strategies and actions and also grounding all of our work and equity. so this update is a little different that we're we're we're looking at the same framework and using the same structure but we're really trying to hone in and kind of polish our actions and how we approach the next five years. so here's the agenda. so in a nutshell i'm going to give a little bit of an overview and talk about what we've accomplished where we are . and then i'm going to pass it over to elizabeth to talk about the work that's been done on our 2025 cap and where we're going. so just to kind of set the stage and start off with some context. 2024 broke some new records and not the kind of records we want to see. so unfortunately 2024 was the warmest year in our modern times. and it also is a year that

signified we went over the 1.5 celsius threshold that was established by the paris agreement as kind of the trigger point that scientists have established that going over this threshold meant that we were going to start to see very severe climate impacts which we know we've been seeing for the last couple of years. and i think the fires in la really exemplify the magnitude of destruction we're seeing from climate change. >> and so here in san francisco we have made a lot of progress. you know, since 1990 we have reduced our emissions by 48%. this slide illustrates, you know, where our emissions are coming from predominantly from the transportation and building sector. and i think as taylor said, it's really important that san francisco remains a leader in the climate space. and the next five years are

going to be really critical in doing that. and so i want to talk a little bit about our accomplishments since the last climate action plan. we've done a lot of work after we released our climate action plan. the first thing we started to do is look at how we fund and finance that plan. we released a report in collaboration with uc berkeley around which we refer to as a clear report to look at how we can fund and finance the climate action plan. that is where we came up with that $22 billion price tag for the implementation of the plan. and i know that sounds like a lot but if we just look at the economic cost of the l.a. fires, they're estimating it to be $250 billion. and that's one climate disaster right there. we have also done a lot around tracking and accountability and developing websites and implementation tracking with other departments. and then also a lot around

public awareness marketing campaigns doing outreach and trying to be as inclusive as possible in our approach to our outreach. >> so as we move forward this slide shows the focus areas we need to prioritize in our climate action plan. so first to start off with transportation which is our largest source of emissions, we need to make sure that we are prioritizing saving our public transportation system. many of you might have seen that it's there. maybe there is going to be cuts to our public transportation system. and that foundation is really important to reducing climate emissions in san francisco. over the last year you've heard a lot of the great work from our clean transportation team. we need to continue to advancing our ev charging infrastructure in san francisco to allow for the easy adoption of evs. >> and then we also need to look at strategies such as

pricing that would help reduce the demand for driving and help with mode shift transport. >> and then we go to the building sector. you know some of our important things we need to look at in the building sector is public awareness making sure people know about the impacts of buildings and climate change are up coming back mid ruling around natural gas appliance replacement. also making sure that we're providing incentives and one thing that's not listed here is we will we are developing an upcoming policy called a building performance standard which you heard about for large buildings and so that will be important over the next year as we kind of go through other focus areas. housing's going to be incredibly important. we need to make sure rezonings san francisco to build the housing we need. this is a really important climate strategy also that downtown recovery is going to help reduce emissions in our energy sector. we need to move towards rate

reform. we need to make sure that we're making it affordable for people to electrify their homes. and we need to figure out how we actually decommission our gas system. we also added on our water supplies we have to make sure we're securing our long term water supply for san francisco and diversifying those sources . and then lastly, looking at healthy ecosystems, we want to make sure our city has the tree canopy that we need. we're investing in green spaces and biodiversity. and last but not least, we need to make sure we're doing all of this work in a circular manner and we're creating a circular vision for our city. and so next i'm going to turn over to elizabeth and she's going to talk about how we're going to do all this. >> thank you, cindy and good evening, commissioners. i'm elizabeth stamp. i started in the fall and dove right into the climate action plan update. so the approach that we're

using as cindy outlined, the last plan was very comprehensive. so with this one we're building on a strong foundation and trying to move quickly and streamline both the process and the plan so that it's easy for people to understand and hopefully support and hopefully fund. we are definitely staying bold and ambitious for all the reasons director chu laid out and cindy laid out as well. >> we're having flooding right now outside. and then the approach so it's a little hard to see but we're focusing we continue to have a net zero goal in 2014 and we're focusing on actions through 2030 sort of near-term clear concrete actions we're going to take soon. we're making those measurable working with other departments to try to make the actions as measurable and time bound as possible so that we can clearly report progress against goals.

we're working with all these departments to update again the goals, the strategies and the actions in the plan. this is the project timeline right now we're kind of at the tail end of updating you know, doing this initial proposed update of the goals strategies and actions. we're turning to the next couple of steps which are doing a racial and social equity review looking at the impacts and potential impacts potential benefits and how to mitigate any impacts, improve any benefits for people from underserved communities particularly. we're also starting our public outreach and i'll talk about that a little bit more and then we'll continue to revise refine present the plan, share it, finish it, publish it before the end of the calendar year. >> new sections in the plan include one on funding and

financing as well as one on governance, one on innovation and we'll be doing kind of an initial exploration of carbon removal. >> some sectors that have changed slightly we've moved land use from going with transportation and to going with housing and renamed to responsible production and consumption as circular economy . >> the rest stay the same. the emission targets also stay the same. >> and here you can see more of the nitty gritty of the updates we're doing. so there are seven sectors this is the first transfer or the first time talking about right now the largest contributor to our emissions. >> there are two two goals within this. one is mode shift which cindy mentioned earlier and one is vehicle electrification. >> this one has been in the

last plan the the mode shift was to low carbon modes and that has led to a little bit of confusion because it was a lot of modes it was shared you know carpooling it was evs. we've decided to just move from and this is again working with a lot of departments also still just proposed. >> but for now what we're proposing to do is to to have the mode shift goal be going from driving basically to walking biking and transit those sustainable modes not including vehicles. so for that reason then the percentage of trips that we're aiming for gets lower because again we're not including all these other vehicular trips. so it's 60% by 2030 and 80% by 2040. and then for the rest of the trips that are in vehicles where the goal is to electrify those those vehicles, the 25%

and 100% goals remain the same. and then we we're adding a goal for medium and heavy duty vehicles. so it's 25% by 2035 and 100% sorry that should say 2045. and these are five years later to reflect the fact that this technology is still developing . >> the next sector housing and land use. this comes directly from the city's housing element of the general plan and it lays out planning for 82,000 new homes by 2030 and 36,000 of those in well resourced areas. so that the new development is more equitably distributed in the building sector. the goal in the last plan was for all new buildings to be zero emission by 2021. that happened and we need to continue to maintain that as

new developments are proposed as exemptions may be requested . we're still looking to keep new buildings here. our mission the large commercial buildings goal has been rolled into that third goal there for all buildings going zero emission by 2040 partly to reflect economic conditions there have not but there has not been a lot of new development and so that is moving out a little. >> energy supply remains the same 100% renewable electricity. this is completed for clean power srf if there is still some customers who are not on that and so we want to continue to make that electricity supply renewable as well. and then move to all renewable energy by 2040. and then water supply these are largely the same basically reduce water use, continue to have gravity fed a water system

which is zero emission and develop new water sources as we deal with drought when we're not dealing with flooding to diversify our suppliers and increase our resilience. and then the last two sectors circular economy. this one these are the goals from last time we're still discussing these these may be refined or added to but reducing solid waste generation 15% reducing disposal to landfill 50%. and then finally healthy ecosystem was the goal last time was to sequester residual emissions through nature based solutions. research has found that the amount of carbon that can be sequestered in san francisco through nature based solutions is relatively small. it's not going to make up as much of the proportion of emissions that we need to cut as we had hoped. so we are moving our focus away from sequestering emissions but still advancing the

conservation of biodiversity. so again these are still somewhat under construction but we're looking at having a goal around biodiversity, a goal around greening and access to it and a goal around trees which is 30,000 new street trees by 2030 as a key part of a healthy urban forest. >> we're starting engagement very soon. this is a tentative timeline. the events are somewhat tentative as well. there's been a pause on contracts which is pausing some of our planning but we're moving forward what we can and we invite you to participate in any and all of these that you would like. my understanding is that commissioners participate in some of the outreach. last time and we very much invite your feedback how this

plan can be stronger, how to build support and action. >> anything else and then particularly on the public events if any of you would be interested in participating in the kickoff and in language virtual meetings. >> again, you're very welcome. thank you. questions. questions? >> yes. thanks. thanks for that presentation and really important as we're heading into 2025. one question and one comment. so the the the electric vehicle goals 25% by 2030 100% by 2040 the i think that's that's not registrations right that's actual cars on the road that is vehicles registered in san francisco and actually it's both the private fleet so just cars people own and the public fleet right. >> but there could be we could

be by that point like every single new car that's coming onto the road is electric but there's still older cars that are that are not. >> so it's a it's more aggressive than just the registry. yes. that are happening. yeah. okay. and i think almost all these goals seem achievable with in my view one exception which is all building zero admission emissions by 2040. that's 15 years from now. i wonder if we really believe that. so i think that might be something to take a look at and i know it's easy to to have aggressive goals when they're far out but that's one that i'm a little skeptical about. yes, commissioner, thank you for coming. >> i'll second your point. you took my first comment. >> i think if we're thinking all buildings in san francisco i would love to see the math on how we're going to get there. i'm not sure it's possible. moving on from that though to the circular economy are really

keen to update some of the goals there as well. i'm curious if the department thinks it's feasible to go towards a true zero waste not just a reduction of 50% of 2015 numbers and what kind of time frame that would look like? i don't expect an answer right now but as we look at refreshing the climate action plan, i do think it's something to consider. >> hmm. thank you, commissioner. >> anyone else? >> i do have a couple of questions. so when you go over all the different sectors are they all seem to have very clear goals except the water supply that i'm not so sure is there like a certain percentage or any metrics that actually show that we achieved sonego because you say maximize the water use but what does that really means? >> um, i think that's that's true. we don't have metrics for those goals yet but we're continuing

to talk with the departments involved about it. >> okay. i'm just curious because all other sectors seems very clear and precise what we're trying to hit the goal but then for water supplies we don't have a clear indicator so it'll be great. >> i think there's some. sorry. i think there are some state goals that there. so like for the water use reduction there's a per capita water use per day metric that is and sort of lower down in the actions but yeah. >> thank you we can. yeah. and then the other question i have. i see there are two in language virtual meetings one for spanish and one for chinese where those cantonese and mandarin it could be complicated. i'm just wondering would that be only one opportunity for limit english speakers who are able to engage in this meeting? sometimes it does take longer time because they might not be familiar with the concept and all the stuff that time to digest. so i'm just wondering if that's possible to have more than one opportunities for each of the

speaking non-english speaking community to be engage. yeah. thank you. >> yes, that's right. there's one other thing i wanted to mention which is as we're adopting these goals i think it would be great if the commission could have in some kind of a regular cadence an update as to progress against the goals. >> i mean it could be once a year maybe a different cadence but i'd love to see how we're doing against these goals as as the years grow out. >> yeah but this is very helpful. definitely. yeah. >> i can't believe is five years already? yes. know i do want to revisit the housing and land use. having a plan feels as if we're not committed to actually putting these facilities in place. and so how did we move from a commitment of affordability and actually having built facilities to just a plan?

>> i think if i'm understanding the question i, i think what and this was you know, this is largely the planning department's work and the housing element. i think the thinking here was rather than to commit to building a certain number of houses which was for homes, which was how the the goal was stated in the last plan the city is not necessarily actually the one building the homes in most cases. so the city's power is to do the zoning. and so that's that's sort of what it is is rezoning land to make room for a lot more new homes. but the development does have to need a lot more actors than just the city. does that answer your question? >> so basically with what's within our control. >> right. or maybe another way is to create the environment where we can support the development and creation of those 80,000 homes. so using our powers as to

create the zoning changes or other changes in permitting or other things to facilitate those 82,000 homes being created because the city isn't building those 80,000 it's a private developer. and so what steps we take in terms of requirements around affordability land use all those things factor into how many homes eventually get built. >> thank you. >> thank you. any further discussion or questions? seeing none let's move on to public comment. >> are there any members of the public who wish to comment on this specific item? >> if you wish to comment. please come forward. you have three minutes to speak for yourself. my name is susan green. i'm with the san francisco

climate emergency coalition. thanks for this opportunity to speak. >> as you know, we can only limit the social and economic costs of climate damage if we invest strategically in measures to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible. the longer we postpone significant investments, the longer the more it will cost to simply adapt to continually worsening climate situation. >> as the clear reports findings underscore, the city's climate action plan has been what i think of as laughably underfunded for a number of years. >> the instructions for this year's city budget only make matters worse. this needs to change now. if the city is serious about meeting its climate goals, i very much support the environment department's and this commission's leadership by pushing to stabilize and increase funding for housing and vehicle electrification for greening the city for our zero waste goals and for investing

in measures that support transportation mode shift. the biggest emergency san francisco faces by far is the climate emergency and our goals the timeline for meeting those goals and our spending priorities all need to reflect that. thank you for your efforts to make that happen. >> hello. my name is julie lindow and i represent san francisco climate emergency coalition as well. as well as san francisco bay physicians for social responsibility. so today i am actually representing hundreds of health professionals in san francisco. many at ucsf and kaiser and i also worked at the foundation for deep ecology where i was an assistant reviewing grant proposals by climate organizations. and i can say from that experience that we are so incredibly fortunate to have

tyrone zhou and the team at sfe and an outstanding climate plan. and i want to second the comments that tyrone and cindy made about how important it is at this moment for san francisco to lead. we must lead and i want to thank all of you for everything all your support of funding the full funding funding full funding for the climate plan no matter what it takes. we need to fund the climate plan sfe bev zero waste and especially the climate equity hub. >> and i was very struck at the capital planning committee meeting recently that if you defer fixing potholes it exponentially costs a ton more. with the climate it's even worse right? as sue just pointed out, we're not talking about having to spend more money. we're talking about health and lives. and the doctors i work with know that more than better than

almost anybody else. so i think you for not only being local leaders but you will be national leaders if you can fund this plan. you will also be world leaders. so thank you. >> hello commissioners. my name is jennifer haggie. i'm a member of 350 san francisco and also the golden gate electric vehicle association. >> as a supporter of the cap goals, i appreciate all the work that's gone into updating the the plan. we need to continue the programs around building decarbonization transportation, electrification, fashion and responsible consumption and zero waste. also call or now called circular economy and healthy ecosystems. as a member of the golden gate electric vehicle association i have a particular interest in the implementation of the pilot

curbside charging program accessible charging. it's important to enable those without a garage for charging access who have a need to drive to be able to transition from gas to electric cars or vehicles. having this access near where people live is critical to their vehicle decision making. moving forward forward with all these programs requires funding and resources and to reach our 2040 goals. just having a plan is not enough. please ensure the cap is funded. thank you. >> are there any other members of the public who wish to speak on this item? madam president, we have no more speakers. >> thank you. public comment is now close. next item please. >> the next item is item eight presentations on refuse rates planning process for a new refuse rates period of october

2025 through september 2028. explanatory documents for this item are a recology rate application narrative for eight years 2026 to 2028 and recology rate applications summary of assumptions for rate years 2026 to 2028. there will be three presentations. the first will be the presentation by the comptroller with speaker julio profuse rates administrator. the second presentation will be from representatives of recology. the last presentation will be from the san francisco environment department with speaker alexa keelty residential zero waste senior coordinator. this item is for discussion. >> good evening commissioners. >> jay liao comptroller's office referees rates administrator evening dr. chu. >> before we jump into the more substantive presentations with recology environment i wanted to give this commission a little context around referees rate setting process why this is being heard today at this commission. so in 2021 the voters passed proposition f which made the

controllers the refuse rates administrator and took the regulation of referees rates from the department public works and put in the comptroller's office established four principles cost effective service that meets service standards with consideration for environmental goals, rate stability and fairness. transparent. accountable and publicly accessible process high professional ethical standards. also an f is that the refuse rate administrator must present proposed rate order to the environment commission. >> so we plan on being in front of this commission twice today is our first meeting to give some context to the commission. >> also a chance for the commission to hear what colleges proposal on the rates. what we'll do is we'll take your comments about recology proposal into consideration as we develop our own proposal which ends up in front of the board. we'll be back in april to fulfill this mandate to present our proposed rates to this

commission. a few other background pieces. we're currently only setting residential rates and then considerations in this rate setting include costs related to impound accounts so that impound account is funding from the refuse rates that go to certain city services which include programs within the environment department, public works and then our office as well. >> so the four main goals are those principles established cost effective service rates, ability rate fairness. but in addition to that some things that we set out in terms of goals for this rate setting process first was more robust ratepayer input. we found that kind of the rate parent input from commission hearings and from our report hearings we weren't getting a whole lot from that and so we've actually set out to do some focus groups and some community meetings to get some input into this our rate setting process. we have an improved rate order structure that would be rolling

out that looks more like a set of service level agreements so we can kind of spell out exactly what services will be provided from recology. we are going to be rolling out a new performance metrics monitoring program and then the other piece is there are you know, a lot of capital costs that ran dissipating in the future and looking to use rates to to mitigate some of those long term costs. >> so those are some of our goals when we set out to start this process. i'll try to be brief on this one. it's just some context for the timeline of the rate setting process. we look at this in three phases the first phase is the rate change request phase. so we introduced an application in september of last year recology had well anyone had up until january 3rd to propose changes to the rates recology submitted an application january 3rd so now we're in phase two two rate order

proposal development where we analyze recology proposal we do research and rate comparisons with other jurisdictions. we have a public record building process through a formal interrogatory through referees rate administrator hearings and then we have a public input process that includes written objections. we have a portal for that up to 18 mailers, focus groups, community meetings and then we also have these commission hearings and these all help us kind of develop our proposed rate order. phase three is basically our rate setting hearings. so we propose our rate order the rate board will consider our proposal and over the course of probably 2 to 4 hearings they will come to decisions around what's in the rates. >> this last slide is just to give you a summary of recology proposal and i'll let them go into the details around this

but as you can see for what they're proposing for this upcoming rate years and 18.18% increase in the first year 7.53% in rate your 2027 and 3.86% and rate your 2028 that first 18% increase represents for a single family home with the default service around 850 an increase $8.50 in our initial analysis and this may change but in reviewing and validating the application we're seeing about 8% of that rate year 2026 increase as structural and due to three factors. one prior year over projection of revenue. so in the last rate order recology assumed and we agreed on some level of recovery after the pandemic was modest 2% a year that wasn't realized. you know people are still

working from home and so the revenues didn't come in as expected. so a large chunk of this is make up. there was a payroll projection mistake from colleges and they ate some of that cost during the rate order. and so in this new one they're looking to make up that cost in the last we would say a structural is the voters passed a new business tax that increase that increased their tax burden by around 2.5 million a year. and so we consider that also structural. >> you know while 8% of the structural the 8% increase is high gives us some pause from a rate stability standpoint. so given the level of the proposed rate increase, we're looking at everything and our colleges rate application to see where we can find savings and bring rates down. so this includes model adjustments like growth and cost increase assumptions, account adjustments.

so this includes the impound account as well program operational adjustments, any new program proposals and ultimately we just want to make sure that any costs incurred are to the benefit of the rate payer. so there any questions about the rate setting process? i'm going to hand it over to recology to go into the details about their proposal in a question. well commission i'll just ask a quick clarifying question for extreme clarity come 2028 we will not be able to change the rates if it's approved of this year. >> so we're locked in for the next three years basically, yes. this is a three error rate proposal so prop f allows us to propose 2 to 5 year rates. this is a three year rate cycle. so what happens is when we do a prop 218 notice it sets a maximum rate and so we can go below that but we can't go above that. thank you.

yep. now the question good evening commissioners and director joo my name is evan boyd region vice president for recology. i'm going to give you kind of a brief overview of our rate application and then my colleague will also help present portion of this rich lancer our region controller. >> so a brief overview of the application itself. >> we'll go to a few program enhancements a trash processing investment that's a priority for department of environment which we will talk about rate increase summary and break down what you saw a small portion of in presentation and then some

of the cost drivers that are behind our rate application. >> so just looking at the rate application overview at a very high level as you look at the residential rates, the residential rates have remained flat for the last two and a half years and and will remain flat through september 30 of this year as the refuge rate administrator mentioned this is a three year rate application so rates would become effective once approved on october first of 2025 and would run through september 30th of 2028. >> our rate application which you will see include input and priorities really from three different departments department of public works, department of environment and the refuge rate administrator

in some of their priorities as well. >> it includes the cost of our core services and some key assumptions and other cost drivers fuel labor increases inflation etc. and in class it includes the cost of several service and program enhancements which will go over here briefly a trash processing investment on a contingent schedule. so this is an investment which will allow us to sort through municipal solid waste after everything has been separated and do another sorting process which we'll talk about i will mention that is on a contingent schedule so it's not in these numbers here specifically and wouldn't take effect until 2027 if a couple of milestones are met through the development process our rate application creates a capital reserve fund.

>> we've got a number of capital investments that are required. >> some of those investments are designed to meet the climate action plan which you heard a little bit about and a move in conversion to zero emission vehicles and that would be over a substantial period of time and these are fairly large investments but at this application creates a fund to start to look at items such as that item such as facility upgrades to help meet the city's climate action plan and then there's a minimal increase in our rate application to headcount to account for some of the program enhancements that that will go over well, i'm sorry. >> so what is the projected balancing deficit? the projected balancing account deficit is essentially over a period of time in the rate

setting process. it is essentially a projection a projection variance to actual over time and there's a there is a surplus and or deficit at the end of each year that essentially carries and these these then probably may be better suited to answer this because he's the financial person but essentially there's a there's an account that takes into account the variance between what was projected in our rate projections versus what actually occurred over the course of each year. >> right. so maybe specifically i'm asking what's that deficit? >> are we talking about the debt? so as jay mentioned in his presentation there were projections in revenue that did not did not we're not realized. and so there was a deficit in

in the revenue that was realized versus what the projection was and and that variance is the deficit essentially one of many items but that's probably the simplest way i can explain it to you is to sorry present one do you know how much that deficit was like a dollar amount rich the current assessment at the end of 25 13.7 million at the end of 25. thank you just please continue some of the program enhancements that are in in the rate application is the addition of three abandoned material collection routes. >> so this is a legal dumping routes that are pick up abandonment serials on the street to help with street cleanliness. >> this was one of the request in working with the department of public works that they had they had asked for a series of

onboard camera systems that are a systems that help us identify overloaded bins and help us enforce the ability to either size with customers of proper bins so you don't have overloads and spillage onto the street that that system also includes contamination monitor so it will monitor and recycling bins what type of materials don't belong so that we can also notify customers of what's going into their bin and what should be there, what shouldn't be a citywide compost giveaway. this is a program that recology has done over the years, had done over the years, discontinued for a period of time around covid and and would like to was very popular program and would like to reinstitute also helps to meet

the sb 1383 requirements for the city and county of san francisco a number of expanded outreach programs that were priority of a department of environment cart and container stickers and outreach so better signage, better labeling to help residents know what goes where. and i think outreach can be very effective and organics d packager so currently we we process about 50% of the organic material that we bring in because of contaminants we get about a 50% yield from what we process. we think there are better systems out there to to do this work through this organics d packager we're able to increase that recovery or that yield by about another 11 to 12

percentage points. so from about a 50% yield to a 66 to 67% yield on our organics recovery a mattress recycling program that is a free service for for currently we run an independent program that's for charge in this rate order in this rate application this would be part of the state's program and would allow residents to bring their mattresses to us at no charge and then it would recycling and reuse program again and working with department environment and staff there coming up with a wood recycling they identified a reused lumber company that will take our dimensional lumber and and reuse and resell

that material. >> before we jump off this slide, one question about the organics packager what what what is it and how is it getting an additional you know 12% or so of conversion? >> yeah. so we there are a number of different types of organics processing equipment out there. this is we've we have in mind a certain vendor that we've seen that's been successful it's a it's an organics press essentially and for a lack of a better term it sort of mashes the materials but it liberates the the food waste from the plastic bags that that people put in their their food waste in and it turns the byproduct is essentially a preferred it called many things and this is my description of it as sort of an oatmeal or a yogurt consist in sea type organic material but it separates essentially

the it separates the plastic material from the food waste and the largest contaminants in organics is plastics. >> so that's essentially what it does. >> this all gets approved. when would that go into effect? so there's we have in the the rate order this take this d packager being in process by mid 2027 we think we can we've had some conversations with department of environment we believe we can move that timeline up a bit. it's really there's not a ton of construction that has to happen on site. we've got the space we've got the building. it's really the lead time for the equipment itself and any permits that that we need to acquire. but it would right now in the application itself the timing would be mid rate year 2027 amid a second rate year. thank you.

>> talked a little bit about the trash process thing proposal there's been a number of discussions about this is the number one i don't want to speak for the department of environment but this has been their number one priority at least for the last year and a half or so since since i've been around. >> so we put in our rate application a proposal to implement a trash processing line at our facility at 5l1 tunnel we've run a few pilot programs, pilot tests. we do have some data from some other operators down in the south bay on our material. we would repurpose the our amer

facility to our c and d operation that exists today. we have the we have the building, we have the space but we would essentially take that processing line out, put a new processing line in what that would allow us to do is to process about 500 tons a day and we think we could probably expand on that with more but optimum would be about 500 tons a day of processing essentially municipal solid waste. so what would be in your black cart? we would be able to go through that working with vendors and equipment manufacturers. you know, we've gotten some results too that would show that we would expect about a 49% recovery of of of the waste . >> so that is a significant investment. i will say that that is not in the rate applied in the rate increases that you see it's on

a contingent schedule. so a couple of the there are a couple of milestones that we would need to accomplish in the development process to be able to trigger that one it would be authority to construct from the air district would be number one and so be able to get the permits required to do that and then obviously approval from the rate board to move forward . >> we have looked at this option verse a couple of the other options that have explored and found that just in our analysis that this may be a cheaper solution to the other solutions than being explored. it certainly is a solution that would be dedicated to san francisco and would be in san francisco versus some other location to be a local tax asset. you can see there there's a part chart there on the right that talks about just the the

recovery of the municipal solid waste and the estimates and where where we're coming up or where we've determined that that 49% recovery would come from with that i'm going to ask rich lancer, our region controller to come up and present on the rate increase summary how do you move this thing up? go go. all right, we got those two. read them. okay. >> all right. good evening. our team, we submitted two rate applications. the first application is for the transfer station and material recovery operation and then the second is for the hauling company and the first application feeds into the hauling application because everything that the holding company picks up they take it to the transfer station or the material recovery facility. >> so when we look at look at

this slide, the bottom half of the slide shows the rate increases at the transfer station and the approximate tip fees for years that we are proposing and then the top half of this slide shows the three years that we're proposing and the first year is the main year that we're going to focus on and it's coming in at 18.818%. it's still, you know, lower. there's still the rate would be lower than what oakland and san jose are paying currently today if we were to implement the full 18.18% as to the next slide and here's a breakdown of all of the the different components that are making up to the 18.18% and 12.46% is what we're calling structural or one time ketchups the 7.58

is the under our over projected revenue from the previous year . >> so that's the numbers that jay was talking about. and then the next one is the increase in the city taxes which is a 2.02% increase and then another 1.84 for a payroll projection that was under projected in the previous year and then the remaining 5.72% is primarily made up of our normal payroll increases and other operating costs. >> and then there's a small amount in there for service enhancements that city staff has asked for to the next page and then we also have a couple of other drivers that both evan and they've been talking about you know like the business tax there was a 21% increase in rate your 25 from new legislation that increase

started just this past january and is you know not currently being supported by the rate so recology is paying is paying for it. we have an impound account funding increased that increased 20% or 4.7 million starting in your 26. we're also establishing a capital reserve fund of 1.75% of the revenue for alternative fuel vehicles and if you go if we go back a slide which you can see the 1.76 which is one of the primary drivers for rate year 27 the establishment of the fund and then obviously in 28 it just goes up slightly but the overall price increase which that means the last year only 3.86% i'm as evan said we also included a trash processing contingency application and those numbers

are not in here but on slide he calculated it out and it was an additional 1.49% and 2.88% in your 27 and rate your 28 and then the last the last item on this slide is the balance to the account that we spoke about earlier. the 13.7 million that is in there as a rate year 25 and i think with that there's the the conclusion of our presentation and we're available for questions and we've got our entire team here a commissioner any questions or comments about the rates? yes. >> so i wanted to focus on the trash processing contingency well operational in 2027. so what what needs to happen for the contingency to go away and for it to become actual and then do the rates automatically go up or is there another process that has to happen for that to yeah so it wouldn't

actually it's not actually operational in 2027 so that essentially starts the process. so the the overall investment is somewhere in the neighborhood of about $35 million what would be in rate year 2027 would be the start of the permit process and down payment for the machinery needed to put into the facility it would the facility would likely be operated know probably towards closer towards the end of this rate cycle. the concern there would be if you don't start in this rate cycle you're waiting another three years essentially to answer your question about what the contingency there really is is two one is we've got to

start the permit process with the bay area hq m d and we have to obtain a permit what they call an etsy or an authority to construct to start to build the building that would be trigger number one and trigger number two in the contingency was placed the process in place to process oh that's right sorry. >> yeah so the second component of this is is the ability to take the organics that are recovered from the msw and this is not just organics you saw the pie chart but having a viable location for processing what you recover through this system. >> okay. and so those those two two criteria have to get met to then trigger the funds to be released. i think the refuge rate

administrator is probably better suited to answer the approval process than that. but for recology we've got to hit two milestones the authority to construct and then having a viable outlet for the material this recovery. >> okay is this is pretty exciting if i get the numbers right to take 50% of what's going into the into the black bins and actually have it diverted from landfills, that's that's pretty exciting. so recology is it am i correct in understanding that recology is sort of moving forward hoping, trying to get the permits from the air district and trying to find a place for the stuff to go if it if this all works and so you're working on making those happen and if if if all that actually does happen then the rate increases would kick in and and later on a year or two later we would actually see this working that would be the channel that we are the path that we are going down at this point through the

rate application process. the short answer is yes. i will say and i think alexa is following this presentation there are other there are other options being explored for a similar scenario. so this was the plan that we put forth. >> so short answer to that is is yes, that's the we would work on the development, the permitting and obtaining those two milestones or being able to achieve those two milestones to then be able to trigger the contingency and then i'm going to defer to the refuse rate administrator on on the sort of implementation of the of the funds and when and how that takes effect. >> thank you so a follow up question. so when you mentioned $35 million up for implementation or is it for this raise period or are we talking about that's the investment in the capital, that's the capital investment

into the end of the facility during this rate period the timing would be so at least i think we've got it's it's all in this rate period. >> yeah so i see and can you elaborate a little bit about i think one of the project enhancement is really the to expand outreach, right? can you elaborate a little bit what that means on the expanded outreach? i i'm actually going to defer to sfe on the expanded outreach portion of of the rate application. we do a lot of outreach in tandem with the department of environment essentially more mailers, more outreach but i'm going to defer to department of environment on the expanded outreach that that would be done as part of the program. so any other questions the calls your representative all right. >> thank you. and just just want to add one

one thing about the timeline for the mixed waste processing in the rate application we have it going into effect in rate year 27 so we start processing in 27 and be fully operational in 28. okay. >> good evening commissioners alexa kelty residential zero waste senior coordinator at the environment department. my presentation is a bit repetitive with morris i'm sorry evan's presentation but hopefully there will be an opportunity for you all to ask any additional questions but i'll kind of quickly flow through that. >> so the last time i was here we talked about the priorities that we wanted recology to include and what i'm talking about today is what actually made it into the rate application and kind of our perspective on it.

so as you all know we have a 50% landfill reduction goal by 2030. time is ticking. i reconfigure the slide. >> so basically the three things i want to communicate here is landfill is actually going back up post-covid because we got a little reprieve with covid the blue line is actually our recovery rate. some people call it diversionary and that is actually going down. so we're at about a 35% recovery rate that is quite low. part of that has to do with specialty crushing closing and so we lost a lot of construction demolition recycling but this is this is a low rate. we really need to get that up and in order to get to our 2030 goals we have to recover 200,000 tons of material. >> the only way we're going to get there is through technological investment. so right now it's on the table is trash processing so we can do additional outreach which we will continue to do. it's very important.

so our separation is our goal. we get cleaner material but this is what's going to get us to our goal if we want to get there we our climate action plan goal states we want to get to zero emissions by 2040. >> this is just looking at landfill only. this is essentially organic coming out of our landfill and we're still at 100 and 85,000 metric tons of co2 coming out of our landfill from organics. so if we want to get that number down and technological investment, it's going to cost money. >> there's no way around it. >> we recently did our waste characterization study looking at what was in our landfill and this is basically what we found and apology is that the numbers aren't as aggregated as i'd like to have them but we looked at different the rohloff compactors, landfill containers and the carts but essentially i'll give you the summary between 51 and 70% of what's in our landfill could be

recovered. there's a tremendous amount of organics and recycle is still going to our landfill. so how do we get that out? there's just essentially two ways outreach so separation in getting people to sort correctly and technology at the back end. >> so here i'm going to blow through this quickly. >> i don't want to be too redundant but evan talked about our wood reuse program very happy this made it into the rate application essentially they're going to have a full time teamster, a recology person focus on wood. this is going to help support our circular economy goals in our climate action plan. the good news about this is it's taking 190 tons of dimensional lumber out of our landfill and bringing it to the reuse people our partner which we help with the rent at that location on the port and they can sell it locally. so this is the most circular program that we could develop on wood for you mattress

recycling. >> thank you. this as evan mentioned marcy mattress recycling council when you purchase a mattress you pay a recycling fee. san francisco as been one of the only counties that doesn't have a free drop off and we're hoping with this is going to decrease the amount of illegal dumping tremendous amount of mattresses on the street as you see. we'll see if it works. we're expecting right now recology manages about 5000 mattresses here. >> we expect with the free drop off we're going to probably get 10,000 mattresses a year. >> bulky item pickup we talked about last time i was here we did a reuse analysis recology has agreed to incorporate reuse into bulky item. they're telling us there's no refuse rate impact. they can basically reuse a basic utilize the trucks that they have and the existing partnership that they have with st vincent de paul already to maximize reuse. so i'm really excited to holds

recology accountable and have them do that and back on outreach we can talk a little bit more of that so almost $1 million and outreach was put into the rate application. basically what we discussed is alternate between all residential so that would be all single family multifamily household hazardous waste information, a focus on lithium ion batteries which are a risk or a risky material in our waste stream at the moment and and then alternating to commercial we haven't really spent a lot of ratepayer money on commercial but it all goes into the same streams and payers are impacted so we're looking at it alternating between single family and commercial every other year in the referees rate. is there any other questions on outreach while we're on that topic? >> yeah, just wondering was that and has been will be i think the end of day is the key

is how do we change people's behavior and it takes a lot of outreach efforts and community engagement in order to make that go happen and we have a very diverse community so i think make really sense for our cisco. we need to invest even more how to reach out to diverse community. >> absolutely. and just to clarify that our empower and account requests that i believe you're going to hear more about later this afternoon has a lot on outreach that separate from recology but given that recology you know, has direct access to their bins, this i think that's really important that they do some of their direct outreach to their customers so they have better access. so we will do that as well as an environment. okay. so real quick we support piloting six new cameras on six routes. it's a new type of camera monitoring for contamination. we're hoping to see some improvement there, the retooling of the timer. so basically reiterating what

evan talked about but essentially they have a construction demolition. that's what the amorphous sorting facility d and given that the volume has gone down considerably as you noticed, construction's gone down. they want to retool that facility for trash passing. so it's a great opportunity. we have the building, we have the space it's enclosed. >> so this is a huge opportunity and we are supportive of a recology the last time you heard me talk about greenways that facility and so san jose and there's a lot of complexity outsourcing that piece of the puzzle it would make a lot of sense to keep it low goal especially given our unions here in san francisco. we want to support them and the department of environment is in support of recology building out the facility. we do have some outstanding questions. we are hiring an engineering firm to do some analysis on the construction of the facility as

well as the permitting so we can better understand that and the end product. so one of the areas i'm most concerned about is the compost product that is derived out of this. >> what are the markets and where is it going and how clean is it and how can we monitor it. >> so we'll be working with most likely for on that an engineering firm. >> yeah. so essentially they're proposing passing 500 tons per day. >> that's 33% of our landfill bound material so it's still not going to get us to our 2030 goals but it's going to get us almost halfway there. and now i want to switch gears sorry this is a fast switch. we're going to talk about the pre-processing equipment for the organics. so our organic stream has a lot of contaminant action at the moment and we need to do something about it dramatically. and in the last rate process we did purchase through the rate process that recology purchased a trommel screen.

this is the piece of equipment that's currently there 501 tunnel it's not working great. it's basically pulling off tremendous amount of organics along with the plastic so we're losing good material. >> we need that new d packager that marie's talked about actually in rate year one we can't wait till rate year two that's two too long of a a a waiting period and we're going to lose good material. so we're encouraging the install that in right year one and that concludes my presentation. happy to take questions before presentation and while commissioner questions commissioner hunter just a few quick clarifying questions for my own math here. so when we talk about on slide it looks like slide nine on the wood recovery program that projected 190 is current and not something we get attribute

to this rate increase necessarily. >> well so give a little background. we did a pilot study prior to the rate this rate process to examine what is possible if we put some labor to pulling out the dimensional lumber and that's the number that they estimated so now that were recology is looking at putting a full time employee at at 501 tunnel to pull the lumber that's their projections for the year 190 based on that pilot and then if you were given unlimited money what would have made the cut and what didn't make the cut? you covered everything that did make the cut this go around what was left on the floor? >> yeah, what was left? >> that's a great question. i'd have to think back in my memory. >> we looked at creating a steeper incentive cost structure.

we looked at changing the cost structure if you remember that for a rate pair or sorry for generators so a business would have to recycle more in order to get the same discount and we were hoping that was going to drive behavior change that got thrown off the table, ballots got thrown off the table. i have to look back honestly i'm drawing a blank at the moment. >> i think the big things in terms of what was really going to move tons the trash processing and the contamination removal that's in there and so that that's we're happy and i'll make some general comments really positive that's okay. i'm a huge fan of your work. >> i hope you know this. i think generally if this was put to a vote today i would probably vote now this would be the first thing that i have ever voted no on because i think the department does great work. i'm very nervous about 2030. i'm not sure if we go out to

2028 and then we're only processing 500 tons a day. >> we're not going to hit that goal. when i look at the math it is adding up for me right now and i realize we have a fast two more years after this rate setting period totally close that gap. but we missed our last goal that the city set this commission passed a resolution we urge the mayor to adopt it and then we do good a great work but we missed our goal. it's very possible for us to fail. i realize you are an incredibly capable human and the department is on top of it. we need to be more aggressive and i think you have our back and you have at least my backing and holding our other stakeholders to higher standards and being more aggressive in what we ask for. thank you. thank you. commissioner hunter. i definitely concur and you have my back. i think the full commission's back to any other common

questions. >> okay. can i ask the questions that we later to the projected deficit of revenue with this rate that we propose what's the likelihood that we will end up we have another projected revenue deficit three years later, right? we should not have the same problem we we projected rate year 25 to be flat because our first quarter of this year has been flat so far and then we only projected modest increases for 26, 27 and 28 and we limited the rate increases to the rate not to the residential but only to the commercial and the apartment and what and multifamily rates so our projections are not on growing the revenue base with the residential revenue base. so last year last time we did

2% across the board this time it's 1 to 1.5%. >> i just want to prevent a structural deficit and have a huge raise hiked for the next rate period. >> right. we're hoping not to repeat that but we everybody was hopeful that we'd have a big recovery from covid and it just hasn't happened yet. okay. this is not a voting item is more for discussion. is there any other discussions or comments? all right. >> let's open it up for public comment. are there any members of the public who wish to comment on the specific item very quickly again, julie lindo representing san francisco climate emergency coalition and san francisco bay physicians for social responsibility including hundreds of health professionals in the bay area. i just want to say we support the rate increase for recology and very much support sophie's zero waste program. >> thank you.

>> are there any additional members of the public who wish to comment on this item? madam president, we have no more speakers. >> all right. public comments now close next item please. the next item is item nine review and vote on whether to increase safe drug disposal ordinance fees. the sponsor for this item is polio head toxics reduction and healthy communities program manager speaker is christopher lester special waste disposal analyst the explanatory document for this item is safe drug disposal ordinance propose fee revision schedule. >> this item is for discussion and possible action. >> thanks alice. good evening commissioners i'm paleo have program manager for the toxics reduction healthy communities team and i'm joined here by my colleague chris lester and just to give a quick recap last month joe leo and i

and all the program managers went over our budgets with you all and the toxics budget. one of our funding sources comes from fees and it comes from this ordinance the safe drug disposal stewardship ordinance. so the ordinance is a it's a takeback program for pharmaceuticals and the pharmaceutical industry pays for that takeback program. >> we have a role in implementing the program. we provide implementation support and we also provide oversight and so we are to recover our costs and that's paid for through the pharmaceutical industry through their stewardship organizations. and chris is going to talk about that a little bit more. >> but that's where those fees come from in our budget we've discovered that over the past few years we've actually been under recovering and so we need to set the fee higher so that

we can do what we are supposed to do which is recover our costs fully from the from the program as the ordinance states. so chris is going to give you a little bit of background on the ordinance because i think it's been a while since we've been here and he's going to explain the new proposed fee schedule and then there is an action before you we're recommending that you vote yes and that you adopt the fee schedule that staff has put together that chris essentially and i have put together so i'm going to hand it over to him and he's going to give you a little bit more background and then we can take any questions. >> hopefully everybody can hear me try and get my microphone ready. >> all righty. thank you so much for that introduction. >> paoli and good evening commissioners. >> i'm going to jump in. so you first you might be asking yourself why safe medicine disposal in the first

place? >> there's three main reasons why we want to provide residents safe access to safe and environmentally sound disposal options for their unwanted medicines the first of which is an environmental need. medicines can pollute drinking water and the environment when they're flushed down the toilet or drain or are placed in the household trash. >> the section second is to prevent prescription drug misuse. simply put, there's a really well-established connection between the home medicine cabinet when we leave medicines in the home especially certain medicines longer than were needed they become available to misuse and subsequent addiction . so again, we want to provide people a way to get those medicines out of their home as soon as possible. and then lastly sort of in a similar public health focus is to prevent accidental poisonings. there's incidents where children seniors, pets get into unwanted medicines in the home can have hospitalization and other adverse consequences. so again, this is why it's

vital for us to provide people safe, convenient and free disposal options for their unwanted medicines. >> so to help address these concerns, the safe drug disposal stewardship ordinance was signed into law in march 2015. it's based off an extended producer responsibility or epr approach where pharmaceutical manufacturers called producers in the ordinance that sell their products into san francisco or are responsible for funding and operating the collection program. so it's really a unique thing that we have here as far as amongst the many programs that sfd operates and under an epr approach producers can either provide the program themselves individually or they can designate a products stewardship operator to provide the program on their behalf. and that's how it's taking place in san francisco as we have two approved program operators is currently.

>> so the ordinance requirements can broadly be bucketed into three categories the first of which is the collection and disposal system requirements which establish the type and the amount of medicine collection services that approved programs are required to provide. the second promotion system requirements to ensure that the program is broadly promoted to residents, prescribers and others in the medical and veterinary communities and reporting requirements to ensure the program's mean ordinance requirements and also identify potential improvements . >> and as a result of this program, medicine disposal is now a much more convenient it was first launched in late 2016 and in the years since has greatly expanded residents access to convenient safe medicine disposal services. this includes the 60 kiosks drop off locations like the ones pictured on the screen where residents rather can drop off their medicines year round.

so these are at pharmacies and police station locations and 60 locations currently. >> in addition there are 87 medicine mailbox envelope distribution locations and these are locations where residents can visit and pick up a free prepaid mail back envelope to return their medicines for safe disposal through the mail. you can see those little plastic envelopes set in the display there. so these are typically at locations like maybe a veterinary clinic or something medical or veterinary related that isn't able to host a kiosk because of the federal dea requirements. >> and in a recent development in ma, one of the two approved program operators that are operating in san francisco right now started offering special one day medicine collection events. so it's sort of idea of you have a very tent and locate at

a park or other location and people bring by their medicines. and so in march started doing this in late 2024 ultimately provided nine collection events and we expect them to provide up to 22 collection events in calendar year 2025. >> and what you're seeing here on the screen is the weight of medicine collected by calendar year since the program launched. and as you can see as the medicine collection options have scaled up, the amount of meds collected by weight have also increased. we of course did have a small dip during the pandemic but you can see now that we're rebounding quite significantly from that. and in 2023 the most recent year where we had collections data available we collected 38,000 pounds of medicine. so quite a substantial amount of unwanted meds being kept out of the water and out of the trash.

>> so speaking to sfp role under the ordinance pelly talked about how we ourselves don't operate the program. so our two main roles are to review written product stewardship plans which is a document that describes how the perspective program operator will provide their program and operate it to meet the ordinance requirements and also our city goals for the program . as part of this role we conduct a really detailed review of the documents reviewed against the requirements in the ordinance and our other objectives and then ultimately make a determination on whether we want to approve it rejected or we also do approvals with conditions as well. >> and then after plan approval as the fees roll is to provide ongoing program oversight and implementations support to ensure that the approved plan is being operated as described in the approved stewardship plan document. >> and as you mentioned, the pharmaceutical industry is responsible for covering sfe

costs and asset fees responsibility is to set fees to recover but not exceed our costs. and for this program those are 100% staff labor. the ordinance establishes two types of fees to do this. the first is a plan review fee. and the second is the annual operating fee and the fee schedule must be approved by the commission for it to go into effect. >> so the plan review fee is hourly and is charged to the program operator whose plan is under review. this covers all sfe activities relating to review in approving or rejecting a proposed stewardship plan. so that could include public comments to provide the public an opportunity for input posting the plan actually doing the review everything from plan submission all the way through final approval. in addition this also covers asset fees time spent reviewing significant modifications to an

approved stewardship plan. and so if there's a change that needs to happen sort of midstream or mid-cycle, our hours would be covered under that fee as well. >> the annual operating fee is charged on an annual basis and historically has been split among equally among all approved program operators. >> and so this fee supports all of our non plan review activities. many things but a few highlights include our implementing option calls with approved program operators reviewing annual reports and results from the biannual survey of residents that program operators are required to conduct providing support and technical assistance to pharmacies, kiosk hosts, mail back sites and other entities that are participating in the program and preparing biennial reports to the board of supervisors to report to them how the program is doing.

and i realize i skipped a slide there sorry. okay. so what we have on the screen currently is the current and previous fee schedules which we developed with the comptroller through the city's established process. these fees are reflected in the fees approved budget each year . as you can see we've periodically adjusted the fees every 4 to 5 years as costs have essentially outpaced our cost recovery. the current fee schedules there on the bottom it's been in effect since july 2020 and it authorizes a $95,000 annual operating fee and a $110 per hour plan review fee. >> this table shows actual and projected cost recovery from fiscal year 1922 fiscal year 2627. the column on the far right shows recovery as a percentage of cost. and so our goal there is to be

at or close to 100% without actually exceeding that number. that's how we know that we're effectively recovering our costs but not over recovering. >> so as you can see we were significantly under recovering in 1920 fiscal year 1920 with recovery just at 37%. and so that's what prompted us to initiate the last plan fee update which went into effect july 1st, 2020. moving down the column you can see that that improved our cost recovery for some time but we're now seeing a drop in that cost recovery especially when we look at the projected years . and that short as i said, that shortfall is projected to increase significantly in the two next fiscal years without an update to the fees. >> so to summarize, a fee increase is needed because we have not increased the fees since july 2020 and our costs

in terms of staff labor have increased significantly since then under the current fee schedule we've been under recovery in the last four fiscal years without an increase. cost recovery will continue to drop and is expected to fall to 67% by fiscal year 2627. >> and here's the proposed fee schedule that we are recommending for commission approval today. it covers fiscal year 2526 and 2627. it would increase the annual operating fee for $95,000 to $143,000 for fiscal year 2526. >> and then includes a smaller, more modest increase for fiscal year 2627 $247,000. this increase is based off of the negotiated unions contract rates essentially cola increases that are part of the the rate the hourly plan review

fee will not change. overall these proposed fees were calculated based off expected staffing and designed to achieve a 99% recovery rate in both of those years. and so with that staff are requesting commission approval of this proposed fee schedule which is included in your meeting packets. i do have one last comment to make and it's to acknowledge a public comment that we received stating that the annual operating fee should not be split among the approved program operators. as you may recall i talked about how the annual operating fee is split equally amongst all the approved program operators as of july 1st of the year. there's currently two so the each pay half. >> this comment however suggested that it should be split in a manner that ties it to performance of the collection program. i want to say as if you do not

agree with this approach. the fees are intended to recover asset fees administrate of and enforcement costs. they are not intended to incentivize or penalize a certain performance outcome. we have other tools available for this these measures including in administrative fines and penalties. and so wanted to address that because that comment is in your packets. and with that i am happy to take any questions. thanks so much for your attention. >> thank you for presentation. any questions or comments? >> i'm just curious with the new proposal to cover the under recovering costs in previous year? >> well no it would not recover essentially back recover that those discrepancies that we had in previous years. this is really about sort of getting to a level of cost recovery for this year and then future years beyond. >> and so the idea in doing the

next two fiscal years is that's how far out our union rate contract extends. and so when we get towards the end of that union rate contract we have a much better idea of what our costs will look like. we would come back to the commission in one and a half two years with that information in hand to make a more informed projection. >> see thank you. seeing no comment questions let's open up for public comment. >> oh i'm sorry. now i hear a motion to approve the proposed fee revision schedule. to thank you commissioner. but any one second. second. thank you. so we have a motion by commissioner mayo and a second by commissioner thompson tompkins. and let's open up for public comment. >> we received emailed public comment on this item. are there any other members of the public who wish to comment on this specific item? madam president, we have no

speakers. >> thank you. public comment is now closed. let's do our cultural president one eye. >> vice president sullivan. high commissioner honors excuse me, commissioner mayo. i. commissioner hunter, i. commissioner tompkins. i. commissioner you in as excused. >> thank you. the motion passes. thank you. next item. >> thank you very much, commissioners. the next item is item ten review and vote on whether to approve the environment department's budget for fiscal year 20 2526 and 20 2627. the sponsors for this item are tyrone du director and leo chief deputy director. >> the speaker is joseph salem finance program manager. explanatory documents include the environment department draft budget for fiscal year 20 2526 and 20 2627 and the requisite rate administrator hearing presentation. this item is for discussion and possible action. great. thank you so much. i'm going to go ahead and jump in and get us started. so again the agenda is to walk

you through again quickly the budget process. i know there's members of the public here so we just want to make sure that everyone's got a clear understanding of how we're moving forward. we'll provide you some budget summary information. we'll focus in on general fund once again and we'll also talk about the solid waste and pound account proposal. and then finally close out with next steps regarding the solid waste impound account proposal. there's also an additional attachment in your board packet that is the presentation that i gave at the rafi's rate administrator hearing last week and that has some additional detail but i'm happy to talk about that as much or as little as you want. you'll see that there's a fairly condensed summary in this presentation. >> so for the budget process just reminding everyone that under the ordinance number

294-19 we have to follow the city's required budget timetable. in january we had our first public meeting here to focus on proposed budget priorities. >> and then today we're here to fulfill the second meeting requirement. this will let our team submit the official budget proposal for the department to the mayor and comptroller's office by february 21st. the mayor submits their budget proposal to the board of supervisors by june 1st. technically june 2nd this year because june 1st is on a sunday and then the board of supervisors must adopt the budget by the end of july. >> so in january just to recap we heard presentations program by program and so you see them

listed there and there's a lot of detail and for anyone who missed it they can look online and view the recording and the materials. >> so this slide is just an update on the budget instructions situation. we said we would keep you updated about how we're proceeding. >> you know we had approached the mayor's budget office just expressing our concerns about the challenges that those instructions pose for us the budget instructions required that we reduce general fund spending by 15%. so that's a $200,000 ongoing reduction for san francisco environment that was requested . there was general instruction to eliminate vacancies and to have no new afters. and that's always focused on general fund. but the city is also always trying to maintain as much consistency as it can have.

>> there was the mention of a potential hiring freeze and that has been enacted. there's a process that we've been given to be able to request positions, be able to move forward and so at the end of each month we can submit a prioritized list to the mayor's budget office which will be then reviewing it with the the the mayor's office staff person who's responsible for climate infrastructure and resiliency. so that's alisa jean-baptiste who we've been communicating with. >> the next bullet point is to assess cbo grant allocations and prioritize cost effective cbo's. since that time new contracts in grants have also been frozen and we've been asked to follow a similar process of submitting at the end of each month any

requests for exceptions. so again we did that as well for january and we aired on the side of caution to make sure that anything that we thought they may be interested in reviewing would be included including some things that would arguably not be considered new because they were just revisions or they were a continuation of an existing program. but we want to just do our due diligence and make sure that we've moved those forward and hopefully can get full approvals. finally there's the order for no air travel and overnight travel and i guess i should have updated that and read as well. but even in that last meeting that had already been put into place. >> so this is a reminder and recap about why general fund is significant for our department . >> it lets us have flexibility and agility as a department to move quickly. we've demonstrated that we're able to use general fund to bring in additional dollars by leveraging that money we're able to fund innovation and do new pilot projects.

we can use our funds for match funding when there's grant applications and it lets us manage our overhead rates to some extent. >> additionally there's always questions of legal risk with the use of fee dollars. so with impound account money such as significant part of our budget for general fund support is really valuable for allowing us to diversify our staff members ability to devote some of their time to other general activities. finally stable general fund supports effective planning and reduces the amount of time that we spend securing resources and i know all of you can sympathize with that because we've talked about this quite a bit in these hearings since january we've built in compliance with the budget instructions so we do have a plan in place to shift multiple positions away from general fund support to other funding

sources. >> and you know, i mean there's real bounds on how much we can do that. but i think that you know, we're able to manage staff's work plans and ensure that we're reflecting appropriate use of all of our resources. >> for number two, i provided the budget presentation to the refuge rate administrator on january 30th detailing san francisco environment's requested $3 million of increased solid waste impound account support for enhanced programing for number three. we modeled out the fee increase for the safe drug disposal ordinance in the budget and staffing model to achieve full recovery. so thanks to all of you for approving that and the toxics team for all of their diligent work. and the number four we reflected increased federal grant revenues while planning for potential risks associated with our federal administration change.

>> so we have an updated slide here showing our funding sources. this pie chart is familiar to many of you. >> currently our percentage budget for sources is 47% from grants. it's proposed to be 31% from the solid waste impound account the fee percentage is 9%. interdepartmental services which we tend to call work orders is 11% and then general fund in this pie has now gone down to 2%. >> so this slide is here to really just emphasize you know, both how excited we have been to have secured about $39 million of funding from the federal. and it's in red because we are just closing and just making sure that everyone's aware that there is risk to really all of

the funding. >> there's some risk so we had initially intended to do an analysis about kind of what we were most concerned about but there's so much uncertainty that i decided we should just move forward with flagging the total amount that is at risk. we're definitely managing to try to ensure that we are striking the balance between moving programing forward and showing that we have a need an urgent need to have these funds and to use them and that we believe these contracts are valid. >> but at the same time when there's new contracts or new hiring involved with funds that are frozen or not really available where we're also being smart about how we're handling those situations. >> so here is the summary of the grants and prizes that are included in the budget and the

upcoming acceptance expense and actually most of those expense acceptance expense have moved forward and it's just one that we had been anticipating we would need to move forward. so again those are some of the key ones that are potentially most at risk just because they're the most recent. so there hasn't been as much activity and they line up with a lot of the areas that trump administration has voiced a lot of concern about. >> so at this point i'm going to hand over to joe to walk us through some of the financial numbers and get into those details before we go back to me to kind of pull it together at the end. thanks, sir. >> thanks. good evening, commissioners. my name is joe salem. i'm the budget manager for the san francisco environment department. i want to preface my next words just by reiterating the fact that this is still a draft

budget until it's submitted on the 21st of february and as such there there is, you know, a chance that some of these numbers might change a little bit between now and then depending on various circumstances as we complete this process and submit our budget to the mayor's office. so as most of you know, the san francisco environment department has both an annual appropriation ordinance or a budget and an annual operating budget. the about request is what we deliver to the mayor's office on februar 21st and it represents the new funding being requested by the department. the operating budget is more comprehensive. >> it's a more comprehensive representation of the department's spending plan and takes into consideration the department's entire current projections for revenues and expenditures in a given fiscal year. >> so while the annual budget proposal that will submit to

the mayor's office on the 21st of february will be approximately 37.7 million for fiscal 2026 we anticipate actually utilizing approximately $52 million in the same fiscal year. for this reason that we usually focus on our operating budgets in these presentations we feel it's the best way to provide the most comprehensive view of our budget process and spending plan for for fiscal year. so every department is required to submit a two year budget but because of the nature of our funding and our heavy reliance on grants, it's it's incredibly difficult to forecast a budget for the second fiscal year of our submission. currently fiscal 2027 as we see

here in the slide is showing a deficit of approximately a little over 1.7 million and the main driver of that deficit is the fact that multiple grants that are active in fiscal 2026 will end before fiscal 2020 seven. >> and you know, while we have every confidence that we'll secure new grants or other funding sources or revenue should be revenue sources to cover that gap by the time we submit our fiscal 2026, 27, 27, 28 budget a year from now. >> you know those grants haven't even been identified yet, much less, you know, been you know, applied for and awarded. so you know, we simply don't have enough information to to give an accurate picture of our budget two years out as we go through this process. >> so when we look at fiscal 2020 six against the current

fiscal year, we can see that there's an increase of almost $12 million or 28% for fiscal 2026 and this is mainly due to two factors new grants that the department is expecting to utilize in the fiscal year and an anticipated increase in the refuse impound funding. and again this is most dramatically illustrated on this slide by the 45% increase in grant revenue and the 51% increase in non personnel services expenditures which is mostly a function of new grant spending. >> the last thing i would like to point out is that we are currently balanced for for 2026 and i'd like to thank leo chee and maxine schultz as well as the program managers and other staff for helping us achieve this. i think we're in good shape. obviously there's a lot of questions around grants but we are currently balanced and

moving forward with that. so if there's no other questions i will turn it back over to leo. thank you. thanks jim. all right. so back on general fund. >> so just kind of emphasizing the ongoing conversations that we're in with the mayor's office. i think first off i should correct that i severely garbled at least to jean baptiste title. she's the chief of infrastructure climate and mobility and tie and are thrilled to be working with her so she will be part of these conversations going forward. >> so these ongoing conversations include we had asked to not have to meet target or if there were ways to

make some corrections and those included that we had highlighted that the overhead funding in the second year had fallen out when it was assumed to be part of our budget because it's connected to each fte that's funded. >> and you know in our conversations with the budget office they provided reassurance that they thought that the overhead funding should continue and that it wasn't removed from a policy reason or something like that. and they also indicated support for the 5.15 after ees that are part of the climate action plan work. >> so you know those are good signs and we hope that we can continue to make progress after we submit our budget. but we are still supposed to meet the target cuts in our proposal. >> i'm noting that you know, we're really observing that the new cuts that are being asked of us layered upon reductions that were made in last year's budget process made balancing extremely difficult especially

when we're thinking about the second year. and you know, as joe talked about in terms of balancing the second year, there is uncertainty around grants but the general fund piece is a smaller part of it. but a very significant piece because it's not easy to replace that funding with anything else. and then finally i'm just noting that we do receive funding from the city via the department of public works and so there's some money that the mayor's office has asked dpw to cut where it basically puts funding for our department at risk as well. so we're continuing to have conversations with the mayor's office about that swap funding and we're making sure to keep the refuse rate administrator and anyone else in the comptroller's office who needs to be aware of it up to date. so this is the general fund over time which we have looked at before and you know i felt

like it was necessary to just put it back in here just as disclosure. it's you know, a balancing act to not be up here just doing advocacy but the the changes over time have been pretty significant and so this is showing currently what will go into the system and the budget that we're asking you to approve. and we're hoping that, you know, we'll see that line instead of dropping be at least kind of flat i thought 1.5 million level if if at all possible. >> and i think some of you have indicated that you wanted to see some more specific detail. and so this is a chart that those of you who were here last year are familiar with because i believe we used it in both hearings and so i've updated it to show what the final budget was for the current year. so for fiscal year 2425 as well as what is proposed for 2526.

and so the yeah, so you can really see kind of the programs that had already been proposed for elimination and then just how we're continuing to trim what's available. the fte numbers are often like system generated based on equivalencies but they're fairly close. >> so you can see we go from a pretty reasonable commitment in terms of comparing with like 5.15 fte to not really having that support. if we do make the cut and it's accepted and it does become worse on the year after. >> so we've spent a fair amount of time on the solid waste impound account proposal we've talked about the overall rate proposal but this is the

portion where i just wanted to again highlight the calendar for where there's opportunities for the commission to weigh in and for the public to weigh in about the rafi's rate process. so we are early. it's february and they're here at our commission and they will also be having a number of reviews rate administrator hearings as well as rate board hearings where they'll be making decisions. so we'll be continuing to work closely with the refuse rated administrator as they share with us any concerns they have about our proposed budget and and then we want to work with them to make sure that the rafael's rate administrator is comfortable with what we're proposing, understands how it fits with our zero waste and overall environmental goals and so that you know so that jay is able to support our budget and feel like he's able to justify a strong recommendation to his

board that he has to be accountable to. >> so here is the kind of rolled up information about what is happening in our proposal for the rate funding that would come to san francisco environment. so the solid waste impound account is the portion of the budget that is allocated for san francisco environment, department of public works and the refuse rate administrator's office themselves. and so i'm just showing you on the right side san francisco environment's portion so there's an allocation to us that's just based on the cpi assumption that is 2.84% that was used and then we had requested $3 million beyond that. so that would be about a $16 million request for rate year 2526. >> if you look at some of the

year over year numbers you'll see some differences because we did have a fair amount of one time money in our budget in the current year fiscal year 2425. so when you compare like there's there will be year over year comparisons where if you have the one time money in it won't look like a $3 million increase that looks more like a $1.5 million increase. >> so this is the even more kind of condensed version of some of the key items that are in the proposal for the refuse rate process and i will be continuing to work with our program staff to make sure that we're all on the same page and able to really give a clear story about how these investments are going to result in additional benefits for the climate and for achieving our zero waste goals. so these are some of the highlights that i wanted to

emphasize. >> so for the zero waste team we're looking at advancing the deconstruction program and that really builds upon the construction and demolition work. and this is about diverting building materials to reuse. we're proposing an enforcement assistant coordinator who would increase local and state compliance for mandatory source separation and edible food donation. >> and there's also a proposal for a repair and reuse coordinator that will reduce waste generation and disposal as part of the toxics program team. we're focusing in on the green business program which is one of their very strong programs and we see an opportunity to have a real impact on waste reduction as well as workers health and resource consumption. we can recruit more businesses and then really focus in on amplifying the zero waste messaging that we do department wide. we're also proposing increasing staff for addressing proper

disposal of household hazardous waste as part of the climate team we're looking at supporting a public awareness campaign to educate san francisco residents about the city's 2025 cap. so cindy presented on that earlier and you know, we're we're definitely cognizant of the uses of the impound account and we're only proposing that it would be a small proportion of that that would be funded by the impound account. but we do think that's a really suitable use for these dollars . and again residents would get information and share their feedback about curbing emissions by striving for zero waste habits, reducing toxics consumption and supporting a circular economy. >> and the second point is also really related to circular economy and really looking at how we can drive policy

implementation, stakeholder engagement and research about resource efficiency and low waste business practices. so i think with circular economy we're looking both at the upstream parts of the supply chain what's involved in the production and people's consumption choices about what they purchase as well as when you look at deconstruction stuff further down the line in that kind of process of material use. >> the fourth bucket here is key community education and engagement items in the proposal. so we do have a plan to hire staff to increase multilingual programing and a streamlined grant management and we're really working to ensure all communities benefit from sfe waste reduction strategies, public health services and climate action directives. and so some of that is to also help us comply with the city's language access ordinance and also be responsive to the

comptroller's office and other central officers requirements about having really strong grant monitoring and accountability. and then finally number two, bullet under the community education engagement piece we really want to fund outreach initiatives to support san francisco environments green business program, healthy nail salons and food reduction campaigns. >> previous campaigns have resulted in more than 28,000 visits to our website and 3000 items of collateral distributed . >> as many of you have said tonight, education is really crucial to bringing about behavior change and these campaigns are essential to our zero waste goals. >> and you know, we've talked about sort of the fact that, you know, marketing is a term that sometimes people you know, don't like but we are doing strong marketing and we're doing strong work around community based education and i think these things can go hand in hand to really kind of

synergize. >> so i'm going to give us our next steps before we submit the budget on the 21st. so number one is to of course maintain alignment with the refuse rate process through ongoing communications with the refuse rate administrator. >> we want to be making sure that everything technical is correct, that we have all our details aligned as well as making sure that we're effectively sharing our priorities and that we're aligned with their calendar. >> for number two, we're going to keep refining our staffing and budget details to ensure our balanced budget for both years and we'll make sure to include our most updated revenue and expenditure projections. we're continuing to finalize inter-departmental service agreements which are the work orders. again, there's some complexity this year because the enterprises that we work with a lot of them are in year two of

a two year fixed budget so i'm continuing to communicate with them just about expectations and how to best move forward when they may not actually be fully developed in our fiscal year 2627 budget the way that we must we'll be working on finalizing any technical improvements to the budget structure as well and we've been working closely with the comptroller as budget and analysis division as well as accounting operations and systems division. >> so not the most dramatic sexy work but i think can really improve our ability to quickly see what's in our budget, what belongs to which team and it can be also valuable for the public as well just to see that transparency last is we do have quite a few required narratives and forms that the mayor's office and comptroller's office need from us so we'll be trying to get all the numbers in as soon as possible so that we can then devote the right amount of time

to making our case for why everything in our budget is needed and they should consider enhancing it further. >> so we're nearing the end here so this is the commission action that's listed as part of this agenda item which is that we recommend you approve the environment department's proposed budget for fiscal years 20 2526 and 20 2627. but before you take action there is time for questions and feedback from all of you as as you wish the commissioners any questions any feedback i think it's a very detailed report and clearly indicate the importance of the general fund and also how to continue our work and we want to be a leading city for nations especially on many

different new proposal all programs that you put on here i think like commissioner hunter said, we're very anxious about whether we hit the goal for the climate action plan and with this economic climate is really challenging. but thank you for all the great work without any further comments do i hear motion to approve the budget as presented in our motion to approve? >> thank you vice president any second. >> oh wait i'll second public so a public comment? yeah a public comment after the vote. yeah so we have a motion by vice president sullivan and a second by commissioner hunter and let's open up all public comment. >> thank you so much. we received emailed public comment on this item are there any additional members of the public who wish to comment on this item? please come forward and introduce yourselves. you have three minutes.

>> good evening commissioners. my name is zachary friel. i work as the environmental justice organizer with some care in the south a market community action network and i also serve on as some cancer representative on the advisory committee for the arts of environment's climate equity hub. we submitted a letter from our oregon this item but i wanted to reiterate some of the points here. >> my comment as you've already seen in compliance with the mayor's budget instructions sophie's current budget proposal drastically reduces general fund supported expenditure is this will result in operational and staffing capacity for the climate equity hub being zeroed out in the upcoming fiscal year. sam kane views these proposed cuts to the climate equity hub as a significant risk threatening the inclusion of environmental justice communities in the city's building decarbonization efforts. >> the climate equity hub serves as a unique space for sfe to collaborate with industry partners, health professionals, contractors and community based organizations like song can in pursuing a

just and equitable transition to net zero emissions. it was set up with the intention of helping low income homeowners and other residents and communities electrify and weatherize their homes at minimal to no cost. the pioneering work of the climate equity hub has resulted in the successful installation of nine heat pump water heaters across the city with 38 heat pump water heaters and six heat pump installations scheduled to commence as early as this month. >> you'll hear from one of our community members who has a participant in this program having received a free water heater replacement in november of last year with backman rules banning the sale of gas powered water heaters and furnaces taking effect in 2027 and 2029 is more crucial than ever that san franciscans have spaces like the climate equity hub to prepare them for these transitions. as president trump threatens to eliminate federal funding dedicated towards clean energy and climate resilience, it's more important than ever that

the city of san francisco steps up to invest in programs like the climate equity hub that address the worsening climate emergency. we ask that you advocate for full funding for the climate equity hub program. >> thank you so much. >> hello commissioners. my name is teresa lawless and i live in the soma filipinas district. my family is one of several that have benefited from the climate equity hub electrification program and i urge this commission to please not cut. i saw $0 $0 losing, you know, a year more than a year's hard work and progress, you know, would harm the low income communities that rely on a program like this and and compromise and also at the same time we've learned so much so that means compromising health and safety. >> san francisco has long been

a leader in protecting both people and the environment. this program helps underserved tenants and landlords gradual transition from gas to clean electric water heater appliances and furnaces. when gas appliances begin phasing out in 2027 aiming to meet the 2030 or 31 clean air goals. more importantly, the team i love the team safety environment they've worked so hard closely with residents they've done outreach ground zero grassroots level listening, educating us and creating real solutions. this is what public service should be. cutting funding now would set the program back leaving vulnerable communities without support. why? why always the the low income

families people of color p w ds you know why do we have to suffer, right? it would it would also make it harder for san francisco to achieve its environmental goals. >> i know you understand the real impact of this decision. then you know that this program must remain funded. now more than ever you know this uncertainty with this new administration right now we won't be able to afford, you know, food and necessities. right. let alone paying our utilities. what more? the cost of replacing appliances to meet the goals of clean air please. i ask that you keep this program funded. thank you. >> maraming salamat po and god bless everyone. >> hello again julie lindo is

san francisco climate emergency coalition and san francisco bay physicians for social responsibility. >> and first i just want to second the excellent comments of the last two speakers and build upon them. we need full funding of our san francisco environment department so they can lead our climate plan. and it's particularly important as we've already mentioned because our environmental justice communities are being sorry so attacked right now. i want to thank everyone for the comments earlier about the need for cultural and language appropriate. i'm sorry donald, really just got to me. >> the need for cultural and language appropriate outreach materials to our communities and i want to build upon what the last speakers just said by adding that funding of sfd is so critical because if we don't fund them they can't go after all the grants that they pointed out that they've been

getting right. and so the small amount of funding that's put of general funding that's given to sfe is incredibly important. it's high value, it's a huge return on the investment and one really important investment is the climate equity hub and i want to add that the climate equity hub it is is a model for the entire nation. it's a collaboration between all i believe all of our environmental justice communities and cbos in san francisco with the city and it has enabled san francisco bay physicians for social responsibility to apply for grants to fund those eight cbos we recently got a grant to help fund outreach materials and we applied for another grant that would be a three year grant to fund the eight cbos who are part of that collaboration. so i encourage all of you once again thank you for being not just local leaders but national leaders and for protecting our our vulnerable communities and supporting our fabulous s.f. department. >> thank you.

>> well, it's humbling to have to follow those two. all i can do is agree. i'm you know, i'm horrified by that pie chart with the funding sources and general fund. >> i mean my glasses need dusting and couldn't see it at all but i was sure it was there was about 2%. >> you need to push. >> you really need to push for more or at least to keep that without. without that you know everybody's talking about the the difficulty we are facing right now in this current new administration which i hope will last perhaps two years or maybe even four. you got to stand strong to hold us through that because as has been pointed out many times san francisco is going to be sort of a beacon in the dark. >> and with that responsibility

i just want to leave you with that request. >> please stand strong for us because you know whatever is going on locally, we know it's a global climate emergency. >> we know we've got to do our part. so are there any additional members of the public would wish to comment on this item? >> madam president, we have no more speakers and public comment is now closed. please call the roll for item ten. president one i. vice president sullivan. i. commissioner honors excused. commissioner bermejo i. commissioner hunter. commissioner thompkins. commissioner yunus excuse. >> motion passes. thank you. next item please. the next item is item 11 review and vote on whether to approve letter regarding ongoing general fund support for environment department staff and programs. the sponsor for this item is sarah juan. commission president. the explanatory document is a

budget letter. this item is for discussion and possible action. >> thank you. commissioner has this been the practice of this commission to send a letter to the mayor each year about the department's budget submission? >> we've been sending this letter to ensure we memorize our important conversations and most importantly our concerns about funding the climate action plan and ensuring the department has the necessary resources. i felt like i don't need to make any more further comments . we've heard so many excellent presentations to really showcase that we need this fully funded in order to continue our goal. so with a new administration locally like the challenging administration federally where we are in the dark ages, i think it's important we continue this tradition. >> so like other commissioners before me i offered this very simple letter for your review and approval and are open for any questions or comments and any changes on the letter that i hear any comments or any changes on the letter.

i have no changes on the letter . >> a clarification on that two line. would we also be able to forward this to the board of supervisors or any relevant committees for policy committee? >> it's a director too. yeah, that's the discretion of the commission who they like to direct letter to. right. so we could also send it to the full board or supervisor. thank you. >> yes. yeah. no, no comments to the letter. >> i just want to say we all acknowledge that there's a budget crisis at the city and when you have budget problems you have to focus on priorities and and we have a climate emergency in san francisco. and so it doesn't mean you cut everything. it means you prioritize what's really important and there's absolutely nothing more important than fixing the climate problem in san francisco and and doing it here

has ramifications around the country and around the world because we are a leader. i'm really glad to see the climate community coming out today and i wish i wish there were more people like you and we need more people like you. so no comments to the letter. i think we've got to really emphasize in san francisco. prioritized doesn't mean cutting everything. >> it means focusing on priorities. thank you vice president. hearing no other discussion or changes except that we'll also send this letter to the boards of visor. >> do i hear a motion to approve the letter your commission of a may own second i'll second. all right. we have a motion by commissioner bermejo and second by vice president sullivan. >> let's open up for public comment. are there any members of the public who wish to comment on this item? i just think it's important to be brief.

>> hi, it's me again teresa lawless. i particularly want to talk about the climate equity hub electrification program. so $0 allocated. so i know when you're talking about priorities aren't we priorities also the community that actually low income community that do not have the money to actually replace these these gas water heaters into electric. and then we also have landlords who can't afford it. >> when i heard about this you know, i heard it from some ken and sophie we were educated right. >> you know, in our faces what the actual impacts is for health and safety about gas in our homes and cleaner air in our in our city in s.f.. please help us.

can you please include climate equity hubs allocation? please be funded in this letter. i would really appreciate it. have to we have to remember we're also citizens here or residents here in san francisco . we're just low income. we don't have the money. and this program would actually help, you know, low income tenants and landlords. >> i would really appreciate that. >> god bless everybody. are there any additional commenters? madam president, we have no more speakers. thank you all the comments. public comment is now closed. please call the roll for item 11 president one i. >> vice president sullivan high commissioner honors excused commissioner bermejo. i. commissioner hunter. commissioner tompkins. commissioner you and as excused. >> thank you. the motion passes and we hear all the concern. >> thank you.

next item please. the next item is item 12 directors report with speaker tyrone joo director. and this includes the five year sfp strategic delivery plan report. >> commissioners first if i can just take a moment just to thank the number of public speakers that have come out today. really appreciate and echo vice president comments around just how important your advocacy is. and i also did want to respond to one of the questions and that in the letter that the commission is sending they are asking for full funding of our five year strategic delivery plan which includes funding the incentive program for the climate equity hub. and so i want to make that point very clear that the commission through their action is advocating through the process that resources be allocated for this important program and we share that concern as well. >> i won't go into detail but

the annual or the report on the five year strategic delivery plan was included in your packet. we said we would summarize all of the activities and that is there for your review and for the public review as well. a couple of just quick note i know it's been a very long meeting so i'm going to abbreviate a bunch of things. just today i just wanted to confirm that mayor lori has approved me serving as his appointee on the bay area air quality management district. again. and so that i will be sworn in tomorrow at the air district meeting and so thankful for being having the opportunity to represent near lurie after representing marilee and mayor breed over the past now almost nine years. now on that on that air district i did want to call out again last at the last commission meeting we talked about the accepted expen process that we were initiating through this department to accept all of those federal dollars that are currently on

hold from the federal. and i want to call out and appreciate charles and alice and joe basically from the public affairs and policy team on their work kind of organizing with our board of supervisors, the clerk of the board, the comptroller's office, the mayor's office all of the activities to get a massive accept and expend process through in record time for our city. we got the accept and expand approval from the board of supervisors in one week which is a process that normally takes about a month and a half to two months. and so hats off to the team for leading that effort not just on our behalf for the department but on behalf of the entire city. and so while that money is on hold due to the executive orders laid out by president trump and by departmental actions, it does put us in a better position to advocate for those resources going forward and so we're coordinating with our city attorney's office on all the appropriate next steps we need to take to ensure those dollars come in to our city and

to our communities. and we're coordinating with other cities across the nation as well. lastly, i did want to just mention that we have initiated conversations also on another federal funding opportunity around the iris direct pay mechanism. and so this is a tax credit that is available now to non governmental organizations and cities that has never been available before. just opened up last year. we are organizing conversation options thanks to pro bono services that we secure from deloitte several months ago. and so we're again we're initiating conversations across our city departments to look for those tax credit opportunities to advance our vehicle electrification within the city and clean energy projects and take advantage of this funding while it's still available. and so one of the think again alice and cindy and the entire

team for their work on that and we're continuing to push that forward while that window is available to the city. and finally i'll just mention that on january 22nd i was one of the few departments that was able to attend the san francisco chamber of commerce city hall advisory day to speak to all of our business leaders in the city. and the message that i relayed to them echoed by this commission was in short we have to be able to walk and chew bubblegum at the same time. we have to address all of the challenges that i know our mayor and our board are focused on on our streets in our city and we also need to be able to keep an eye towards the future we want to create in san francisco in the future we want to create is one that attracts people to come and invest and live here that supports our marginalized communities and underserved populations. and that's what our climate action plan is all about. and so i deliver that message to business leaders saying the conversation i want to have

with each one of them is not debating where we need to go. i think that future needs to be in a common agreement that we have to end our dependance on fossil fuels. we have to improve the health of our communities by ending that dependance and we can then debate and how we transition there and how quickly we get there through our climate action plan and do our work. and i think that message was received pretty well by the business community. so one to give that update and i'll conclude my director's report there. >> thank you, director. any questions or comments? >> quick follow up question. so if the federal funding is on hold, would that result in any short term impact? >> we are doing that analysis now as leo mentioned, it's it's kind of tough to exactly know what the impacts are going to be because it seems like each and every day there's a new executive order, there's a new action coming out and so being able to project exactly what

the impact is is difficult. >> we are halting future kind of grants that we've been awarded. obviously the $20 million grant we got for building performance standards, the $50 million grant we got for ev charging for do the charging and fueling infrastructure grant the million dollars that we had been awarded to fund our curbside ev charging program those new programs are definitely on hold because there's no way to move those processes forward without the support of the federal in executing those contracts. where we're we're looking at right now is through to your point president one all of the existing programs that we were counting on through this budget that you just approved. and what that looks like just from a deficit standpoint. so we're doing that analysis right now. we weren't ready to kind of get this ready in time for this committee meeting because like i said, it's changing each and every day. and so the rest assured this will be part of our conversation with the mayor's

office as we advance submitting our budget on the 21st. >> thank you. any other questions and comments? >> if not, we're open 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. public comments and i'll close next item please. next item is item 13 new business feature agenda items. speakers charles sheehan chief policy and public affairs officer. >> this item is for discussion . >> good evening. good evening commissioners. thank you. >> the next commission meeting is slated for march 24th. >> there is some chance we may cancel that so stay tuned on that and then the commission meeting after that is slated for april 28th. >> we've heard that there will be a refuse rate presentation though they will be further along in the process and so they will come back and give you the latest update where it stands.

and you know, the first to commission meetings are the first two commission meetings of the year. always very, very crowded and that's all i have. so we will be working to populate future agendas and so if you have any suggestions, please always let us know. are there any questions since then? let's move on to a public comment. >> are there any members of the public who wish to comment on this item? madam president, we have no . >> thank you. public comment is now closed. next agenda item please. >> next item is item 14 adjournment. the meeting is adjourned. the time is 7:51 p.m.. thank you for joining us

and s.f. gov tv >> i don't think you need to be an expert to look around and see the increasing frequency of fires throughout california. they are continuing at an ever-increasing rate every summer, and as we all know, the drought continues and huge shortages of water right now. i don't think you have to be an expert to see the impact. when people create greenhouse gases, we are doing so by

different activities like burning fossil fuels and letting off carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and we also do this with food waste. when we waste solid food and leave it in the landfill, it puts methane gas into the atmosphere and that accelerates the rate at which we are warming our planet and makes all the effects of climate change worse. the good news is there are a lot of things that you can be doing, particularly composting and the added benefit is when the compost is actually applied to the soil, it has the ability to reverse climate change by pulling carbon out of the atmosphere and into the soil and the t radios. and there is huge amount of science that is breaking right now around that. >> in the early 90s, san francisco hired some engineers

to analyze the material san francisco was sending to landfill. they did a waste characterization study, and that showed that most of the material san francisco was sending to landfill could be composted. it was things like food scraps, coffee grounds and egg shells and sticks and leaves from gardening. together re-ecology in san francisco started this curbside composting program and we were the first city in the country to collect food scraps separately from other trash and turn them into compost. it turns out it was one of the best things we ever did. it kept 2.5 million tons of material out of the landfill, produced a beautiful nutrient rich compost that has gone on to hundreds of farms, orchards and vineyards. so in that way you can manage your food scraps and produce far less methane. that is part of the solution. that gives people hope that we're doing something to slow down climate change.

>> i have been into organic farming my whole life. when we started planting trees, it was natural to have compost from re-ecology. compost is how i work and the soil biology or the microbes feed the plant and our job as regenerative farmers is to feed the microbes with compost and they will feed the plant. it is very much like in business where you say take care of your employees and your employees will take carolinas of your customers. the same thing. take care of the soil microbes and soil life and that will feed and take care of the plants. >> they love compost because it is a nutrient rich soil amendment. it is food for the soil. that is photosynthesis. pulling carbon from the atmosphere. pushing it back into the soil where it belongs. and the roots exude carbon into the soil. you are helping turn a farm into a carbon sink. it is an international model.

delegations from 135 countries have come to study this program. and it actually helped inspire a new law in california, senate bill 1383. which requires cities in california to reduce the amount of compostable materials they send to landfills by 75% by 2025. and san francisco helped inspire this and this is a nation-leading policy. >> because we have such an immature relationship with nature and the natural cycles and the carbon cycles, government does have to step in and protect the commons, which is soil, ocean, foryes, sir, and so forth. -- forest, and so fors. we know that our largest corporations are a significant percentage of carbon emission, and that the corporate community has significant role to play in reducing carbon emissions. unfortunately, we have no idea and no requirement that they disclose anything about the

carbon footprint, the core operation and sp360 stands for the basic notion that large corporations should be transparent about the carbon footprint. it makes all the sense in the world and very common sense but is controversial. any time you are proposing a policy that is going to make real change and that will change behavior because we know that when corporations have to disclose and be transparent and have that kind of accountability, there is going to be opposition. >> we have to provide technical assistance to comply with the state legislation sb1383 which requires them to have a food donation program. we keep the edible food local. and we are not composting it because we don't want to compost edible food. we want that food to get eaten within san francisco and feed folks in need.

it is very unique in san francisco we have such a broad and expansive education program for the city. but also that we have partners in government and nonprofit that are dedicated to this work. at san francisco unified school district, we have a sustainability office and educators throughout the science department that are building it into the curriculum. making it easy for teachers to teach about this. we work together to build a pipeline for students so that when they are really young in pre-k, they are just learning about the awe and wonder and beauty of nature and they are connecting to animals and things they would naturally find love and affinity towards. as they get older, concepts that keep them engaged like society and people and economics. >> california is experiencing many years of drought. dry periods. that is really hard on farms and is really challenging. compost helps farms get through

these difficult times. how is that? compost is a natural sponge that attracts and retains water. and so when we put compost around the roots of plants, it holds any moisture there from rainfall or irrigation. it helps farms make that corner and that helps them grow for food. you can grow 30% more food in times of drought in you farm naturally with compost. farms and cities in california are very hip now to this fact that creating compost, providing compost to farms helps communities survive and get through those dry periods. >> here is the thing. soil health, climate health, human health, one conversation. if we grow our food differently, we can capture all that excess carbon in the atmosphere and store it in unlimited quantities in the soil, that will create nutrient dense foods that will take care of most of our civilized diseases.

so it's one conversation. people have to understand that they are nature. they can't separate. we started prowling the high plains in the 1870s and by the 1930s, 60 year, we turned it into a dust bowl. that is what ignorance looks like when you don't pay attention to nature. nature bats last. so people have to wake up. wake up. compost. >> it is really easy to get frustrated because we have this belief that you have to be completely sustainable 24/7 in all aspects of your life. it is not about being perfect. it is about making a change here, a change there in your life. maybe saying, you know what? i don't have to drive to that particular place today. today i am going to take the bus or i'm going to walk. it is about having us is stainable in mind. that is -- it is about having sustainability in mind. that is how we move the dial. you don't have to be perfect all the time.

>> san francisco has been and will continue to be one of the greener cities because there are communities who care about protecting a special ecosystem and habitat. thinking about the history of the ohlone and the native and indigenous people who are stewards of this land from that history to now with the ambitious climate action plan we just passed and the goals we have, i think we have a dedicated group of people who see the importance of this place. and who put effort into building an infrastructure that actually makes it possible. >> we have a long history starting with the gold rush and the anti-war activism and that is also part of the environmental movement in the 60s and 70s. and of course, earth day in 1970 which is huge. and i feel very privileged to work for the city because we are on such a forefront of environmental issues, and we get calls from all over the world really to get information.

how do cities create waste programs like they do in san francisco. we are looking into the few which you are and we want innovation. we want solutions.

sheriff and live we are ready to begin. >> t