cca cannot possibly do what they need done. the word -- you can boil this whole argument down to one question, one word and that is "inevitability". we are running out of the oil. we are drowning in our own waste. we need to stop burning oil and the way you could do it is putting a couple hundred solar panels on each house in san francisco. this was indirectly mentioned in the guardian editorial but they don't say it and it's because they don't understand it. it's important to understand what being done in germany and other countries around the world because by doing this they're creating a massive cash flow to homeowners in these countries and it's an investment that the homeowners are glad to take the money out of equity and buy panels with. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. next speaker. seeing none public comment is closed. colleagues this is just a discussion item. mr. . fried. >> i wanted to thank danielle for the work that she did. there were two co-chairs one left the city family and got another job and she t

levering caa and and to the fee and tariff and having this set of customers under cca and guaranteed off takers the renewable power for years to come you can assure to the developers there is the market to sell into and thereby help them to get financing and get projects on the ground and supporting clean investments. for example by working with the pension and retirement funds to use some portion of the portfolios to go towards these programs and demonstrations on public property and that's been started already on clean power sf. we have almost 40 members in total and it's a fantastic group and we're lucky to have knowledgeable folks and universities in the area and active community members so a very big thank you to all those that worked on this for a year and a half and that's it. >> thank you very much for the presentation. why don't we open it up to comments or questions from the commission. commissioner olague. >> i was wondering how much time was given specifically to your conversations to the clean power sf? >> we -- basically we had a different topic each month. one month pu

are in working constructively with lafco in their advisory role to the board in implementation our ccarogram 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 make mention of by way of update is some of our activities at the california public utilities commission. we did go forward with the filing of our revised implementation agreement, implementation plan at the california public utilities commission. it is under review there and we expect it to be certified by their executive director before the -- by january. we have seen a proposed decision from the california public utilities commission that implements the

that has done it so far is verment and gainsville florida you need somebody here who is a critic of cca, not somebody in house and along with the shell game because it inevitably going to fail. if you don't have somebody speaking that understands the policy how it inevitably will fail, must fail. it's designed to fail. if you don't have somebody that understands that concept in the position then you're just going to be walking down the road to inevitably throwing money at a policy that will fail, so would urge when looking for somebody ask them questions about what policy they understand because most people in this town, and the media do not know that germany is approaching 100% renewable energy and there is already a nation that is 100% solar and the cca plan is just failure. designed to fail, so if you're not aware of that, if you never heard that before you should talk to somebody who knows and there's people who have written books on this how this policy must fail. it's just scientifically designed upside down and backwards. it can't possibly succeed but san francisco needs because

proposed decision from the california public utilities commission that implements the provisions of the cca code of conduct that were adopted in legislation, sponsored by senator leno, so we expect that proposed decision to become final in the next 30 to 60 day time period so we will have clarity on those rules of engagement are before we launch our program, and we are closely monitoring the green tariff pricing proposal that pg&e sprited to the california puc for approval. that is the program when it was initially proposed by pg&e would have pg&e offering to san franciscans an opportunity for 100% renewable product that is greening up their portfolio to using renewable energy credits, so they have placed a proposal before the california puc for -- their agreement. parties are engaged in asking questions, testimony has been filed. the cupuc had scheduled hearings in december for the proposal, but those hearings on hold in order to allow parties to talk further and potentially arrive at a settlement. there really isn't active settlement discussion under way right now. we expect that may happ

right now of in our budget with sf puc allocating sf puc resources because we do have sf puc money for cca, so there is some latitude to you from a budget standpoint about the position, so in terms of flexibility with option two. i don't think you need to say there is only one position available and we have two positions authorized and we're going to cut the one, and then maybe what you would be saying you want to authorize the other, but with cost effectiveness if you go out figure out in the interview that you could do the two with one you would do that if that makes sense to you. >> okay. commissioner avalos, did you want to add anything? i think -- >> i would have a preference that we don't -- we have a search process that doesn't go through the rigga mo rol that jason discussed right now with the ideal and we could have a flexible process for option two, but i just thought jason was shaking his head. i wasn't counting on the process so involved with the process and the mayor process -- the mayor be part of that process. that to me doesn't seem like a real easy process to go through. i

of conduct puts certain restrictions on both parties, the utility, in our case pg&e and on us as a cca. broadly speaking it prohibits either party from misleading customers. it requires that any expenditures that pg&e incurs to actively market against the program cannot be reimbursed by rate payers and shared by shareholders. it allows pg&e to answer questions and educate about their program and how it compares to our program. it requires both parties to work with the california public utilities commission public advisor's office to create a comparison document that would be made able by all parties on the two program offerings. so that gives you some of the key elements. >> and the code of conduct you said is in the process of being approved or is approved. >> so a proposed decision was drafted and sent out for comment by the cupuc staff. it then by state statute sits before the body for not less than 30 days before the commission may adopt, hold, or modify and then adopt the item. >> very good. do we expect that the way it is now to change dramatically? that some of the restrictions

. >> good afternoon, commissioners, in your packet was a revised timeline for our cca program. let me highlight the changes from the last time we met. today will be activity under item 11. on our communications contract. we also have the rate fairness board scheduled this friday to consider our rates and possible preparation of a recommendation to the commission. they also have invited the local power folks, consultants, to come and make a presentation on what they are finding. we are on january 22, scheduling a presentation on the financial deliverables that local power has prepared for us. and then finally, the anticipated consideration of the noble contract in december has been postponed until june. given the fact that we are now incorporating the customer notification plan and education period. we don't need to bring that to you until that later date. those the changes to the timeline. the next activity, with the turn the calendar year, pg & e rates will change. that means when we talk about the premium that is represented over the pg & e rate will change. i want you to be

or maybe this cca budget piece could be a bit of a drive or two. and how that shifted the dollars around. and i like the idea, of this strategic goals and updates and key policy initiative updates. i don't really know what that means, maybe we can get specific on what an update looks like. which goal has fallen short. or maybe a redefinition that you provide in advance, forgotten some definitions of goals. and maybe a quick review, are we making progress or not. maybe a simple indicator, up or down. but to get our feedback to understand what you need to keep those goals and initiatives moving forward. those would be what i hope for in somewhat structured mid-cycle review. >> if i may through the chair, a question to commissioner vietor, in the past you have given up additional initiatives or changed them. and this is to the degree that you have a new initiative that you want us to slice and dice the budget in that way. >> and maybe contextualize the review, and have the opportunity to add and delete, and an opportunity to say, is this still right.