[speaker not understood] i serve on the puc citizen advisory committee. i did want to speak in support of an extension. i'm not sure if this is the right amount of time, if it should be more or less. i'm happy to work with supervisor farrell and others to look at things that we could tweak about the composition or the reporting, so that it is more effective. i have heard a number of concerns over time about whether it's being too -- no effective enough -- no enough -- we certainly have a general obligation bond oversight committee and we have bond oversight at the city college. so we have a more tradition of bond oversight than in the past. if this is not extended my understanding is that there would be effectively no oversight of the literally billions of dollars of [pwo-pbts/]s bonds that the puc has. so i would just offer those comments. on the legislation itself, sorry i did read it online 9-10, there there is no reference to section 1. there are section 2 and 3. unless you have any questions, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> through the chair to

if the puc owned that building and we could make that the icon i can sustainable building puc representsuldn't be a dramatic idea? >> so, one of the major decisions we made was we wanted to make a statement with this building. we wanted this building to be a lead platinum building which is very few buildings in san francisco that achieved this mark. >> leadership and energy environmental design, it takes a look at the way we think about the places where we live and work. i like to think of it as designed for human and environmental health. lead addresses five categories that enhances environment. indoor air quality, energy, water, materials and resources, and sustainable sites are the five categories for the lead. you can go for several gold or platinum certifications. >> the city wanted to be silver lead status. . maybe gold was a stretch. and people said, if we're going to be a sustainable organization that the pucs this has got to be the top of the line. it's got to be a lead platinum building. what does that mean to us? we run water, power, and sewer. so, those are some of the bigges

now on the othered and, we point out on page 7 of our report that if the puc were to lease instead of purchase comparable property, new properties, to get a centralized location, then it is shown in table 4 on page 8 of our report the net present value of such lease is over 30 years is an estimated $23.1 million, which is $4.9 million or 27% more than the net present value of the estimated purchase price/relocation and occupancy costs, as well as the financion costs over a 30-year period that. would be an estimated $18.1 million. so our our conclusion because it includes new costs for the pucks, as compared to continuing to lease at the existing locations, therefore, we say it's a policy matter, even though we acknowledge that if the supervisors agree with the department to centralize in one location, it appears that the city would be getting a good deal. >> thank you, mr. rose. sean? >> mr. rose, and maybe this is puc too, and maybe you might not know harvey, the current lease analysis that you did, if we kept it for 30 years, what are the current terms of lease? do we have those lea

who is presenting on that from the puc? we will provide the general update of the cleanpower sf program. >> barbara hale will give an update. >> thank you mr. herring -- mr. kelly, sorry. thank you, i am barbara hale, assistant general manager for power. by way of updates item four i just wanted to remind you in your packets is a detailed timeline for implementation of our cca program. we also are in working constructively with lafco in their advisory role to the board in implementation our cca program we are operating under a memorandum of understanding with lafco that describes the roles and responsibilities of our respective staff and we expect that as we get to actual program launch we will come back to you with a new mou that describes our ongoing relationship at the time. the mou we're operating under this point is expired but i think we're both comfortable to serve those roles until the program takes better shape and we can then revisit roles and responds with that information in hand. then the other item i wanted to

the recreation department has been largely absent for decades. so, i think is a puc is the owner, the rightful group, they should be responsible to apply the 2 million dollars. >> supervisor kim: the public comment is closed. i like to entertain a motion to convene to close session. i would l >> we have that motion that we can do that without opposition. madam clerk, do we have any other announcement? seeing none. the meeting is adjourned. thank you. >> good afternoon. this is our disaster council meeting of october 26. thank you all

the cap discount. finding 4.1, sf puc's current outreach methods over low income areas in the program's jurisdiction ands conduct various cap outreach efforts but the department could do more to targetiÀ outreach predominantly low income areas of san francisco. so recommendation 28 says that puc should explore cost effective outreach methods for cap tailored to reach customers residing in low income neighborhoods, including coordinating outreach efforts with local community based organizations. and what we did, we examined the percentage of people living at or below 100% gç=t>iç the federl property level by san francisco zip code area. so as of march 2012, 54.2% of cap accounts resided in only three of sf zip codes. that was ingleside, excelsior, 54.2%, visitacion valley, sunnydale 15.7% of that 54.2% and sunset is 12.2%. what we found was there were neighborhoods with high levels of poverty that had relatively low cap enrollment. for instance bayview and hunter's point had similar levels of property as ingleside but only one-third as many cap participants inspect inner mission and bernal heights has t

the recreation department has been largely absent for decades. so, i think is a puc is the owner, the rightful group, they should be responsible to apply the 2 million dollars. >> supervisor kim: the public comment is closed. i like to entertain a motion to convene to close session. i would l >> we have that motion that we can do that without opposition. madam clerk, do we have any other announcement? seeing none. the meeting is adjourned. thank you. . >> are you guys ready? okay. >> roll call. commissioner. >> present. >> commissioner. >> here. >> commissioner. >> here. >> commissioner. >> here. >> item two approval of minutes for october 23, 2012 meeting with a minor correction on the first page commissioner brandon was present. >> so moved. >> all in favor. >> aye. >> number three, public comment on executive session. sue hester. >> sue hester. i didn't identify myself on there, but i have attended all of the public workshops for input on pier 30, 32, and i would ask this commission and the staff to direct everyone who is a negotiating party to when they attend th

the cap discount. finding 4.1, sf puc's current outreach methods over low income areas in the program's jurisdiction ands conduct various cap outreach efforts but the department could do more to targetiÀ outreach predominantly low income areas of san francisco. so recommendation 28 says that puc should explore cost effective outreach methods for cap tailored to reach customers residing in low income neighborhoods, including coordinating outreach efforts with local community based organizations. and what we did, we examined the percentage of people living at or below 100% gç=t>iç the federl property level by

finally, the chair of the puc citizens advisorye! he appropriate websites but there is no similar biography forú#4÷ rate fairness board and he suggested as part of your3i discussion, i don't know that you need to write it into the legislation, but that you communicate a desire to the8dv$ puc and%úñ?ñ? to these bodies to provide biographies that can be placed on the appropriate place atí =h the puc website to increase transparency. otherwise i support the extension andóxxl >> chairv 9j÷ayou. >> chair kim: is there any other public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is[5]<].Ñ closed. supervisor ferrell. >> supervisor farrell: thank you. colleagues, i want to thank you for the continuance from the 9&utgh last time around. we -- i think it was a good idea to do that, and i/ó;aoie know there have been again i will reiterate where i was and after speaking with our city attorney as well, even though it seems to be -- there are some issues, i'd rather -- and flaws i would rather see the revenue oversight committee continue and