. >> the cca program allows an opt out for the stand out program. opt in is how the state law [inaudible] to better understand why i was talking about this reserve, i am on slide 18. similar, to get shell comfortable with the model, what they are able to work out and what we're following upon is the process whereby customer revenues, they send to the cca and send it to a specific account. that would be controlling language from the bank that owns the account. shell would have the first priority. this is part of getting shell credit and other folks comfortable, when they have a bill that would get paid on time. that reserve -- that would be a minimum amount. that would be in the contract in order to avoid a default. those are the general broad overview i wanted to touch on for the term sheet. moving on to the outstanding issues, we're talking about, there is a few other things that are outstanding. one is that if you, i do not know if you recall. there is a rather esoteric part of the statute which requires a cca to post a bond capable of covering th

>> item 3, report on the status of cca activities. a, approving a resolution authorizing the continued implementation and definition of a community choice aggregation program. b, a california state legislation update. c, status update on proceedings at the california public utilities commission. supervisor campos: great, and mr. campbell is here to present for the public utilities commission. before that, i just want to ask the executive officer if you wanted to say anything before mr. campbell spoke. >> we have arranged the proceeding that mr. campbell will present a brief synopsis of the term sheet before you, and i will follow-up on that with -- with comment. >> good afternoon, commissioners. in your packet, you had received the presentation that i and my colleagues at the puc had given at the san francisco public utilities commission meeting on tuesday. i am going to provide a high level overview, and i'm happy to take questions throughout the presentation as you see fit. one thing to start out, just to highlight is, we have been

it does say that a general manager should continue to work on the cca program, but what i don't think is to submit the term sheet to the board of supervisors because there are too many unanswered questions. and i think that would be irresponsible of us to do so. in the form it is in now. >> do you have specific changes or comments? >> you don't like the second result. the reason that it is there is that should we go forward with this, the contract would have to come through both this commission and the board. so, do you give them a chance before the contract is finalized to have a discussion like you have had today, or do you wait until the contract is finalized before sending it to them? it is a policy discussion of how you want to handle it. >> well, my feeling is that the same questions are going to come up at the board, the same unanswered problems we have been talking about. so i don't think it should be submitted to the board at this time. >> do you feel confident through your continued negotiates if we took it out that you would be able to get clarity to bring back to us? >> it

>> one of the things we are excited about the program is 100% renewable for cca. i know the puc and department of environment have a working on a task force on the 100% renewal plans -- renewable plans. supervisor mirkarimi: i'm sorry, i did not hear the answer to that question. to that point of conversion? i have yet to hear mayor lee do the same thing. >> by conversion you mean -- >> how they plan to convert municipal reliance from our fossil fuel, nonclean energy into 100%, because this is something that they assert that this is the game plan for san francisco. so i'm actually trying to understand the p.u.c.'s role in the rollout of that plan. with or without c.c.a. >> and by municipal, you mean the broader city, not just municipal customers like the city hall and general -- >> i mean san francisco. >> san francisco in general. yeah, i have been focused on c.c.a. to date but i am certain we can come with a presentation about that. >> speak into the mic. >> i'm sorry. should i repeat the answer? >> it's all right. but you will come back with an answer. is this t

hoping to see is that if we spend eight cents getting some conservation energy and we put it into the cca at 15 or 18 cents, but there is a charge of a couple of pennies for shell dealing with what they have to do, that would be, from my perspective, the most compelling reason to do this at all. because we need a place to recover the cost of our various programs. but i would like to see that penciled out. >> in terms of how the substitution would work what we have been discussing we can't schedule the electricity so we couldn't put it into a contract saying a certain number of megawatt hours you are going to offset supply from shell. just do a straight substitution where the market price is the market price. shell has some supplies that it can offload, maybe at a loss or profit. then they would buy the power at the market price which would be the exact same price. it is something that we do not expect much of any cost associated with that, standard operating procedure. we would be guaranteed that we would be no richer or poorer for having done that. shell would be neither hurt financially

hoping to see is that if we spend eight cents getting some conservation energy and we put it into the cca at 15 or 18 cents, but there is a charge of a couple of pennies for shell dealing with what they have to do, that would be, from my

i worked at cca for many years and this project is long overdue. that site has been an eyesore for years. mr. baker and mr. bosley have worked with neighbors and leslee. the project is needed. we need a rental housing. the daggett triangle has been for many years an eyesore. i am glad this project is up for your approval. thank you. >> president olague: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am with walton development. we own the property across from daggett place. we participated in over 100 meetings over the last six or seven years. at every single one of those meetings, amir or dan murphy has been there. their outrage efforts have been remarkable, probably setting a world record of some sort. we believe the project is well co asset to san francisco in general. the neighborhood in particular. we're looking forward to being neighbors with the project and we encourage you to support the project. thank you. >> good afternoon. tim colon on behalf of the act of housing coalition. we have been looking at this since 2006. it has been before us h

this question is about economic development and jobs in san francisco because of a cca program and the possibility that provides going forward. that cannot be achieved without a plan for doing that. the plan for doing that cannot be achieved without a certain amount of research and work being done to understand the resources that currently exist and the resources that need to be developed, how they should be rolled out and play, how they should be packaged and put together, how they should be financed. we need to know what the plan is going to be. having that kind of plan can influence how you do the market procurement. the market procurement can have real influence over the plan. all that has been talked about by the sfpuc is the market procurements peiece. the local bill that is the only reason for having the program in the first place. they would be fine to divert the $390,000 left in the budget towards the marketing plan being proposed in the term sheet. that is not what the communities idea of clean power is about. the scope of work we have got to develop is about being able to ge