back in 2007 the board insisted that a cca program would meet or beat pg&e's rate, meaning that cca power should cost 7.9 cents or less per kilowatt hour. the theory was that if we wanted to convince people to participate in a green energy program, we couldn't hit them with massive monthly bills or they'd likely opt out. that was good logic. but over the years the costs crept up and up and up, and last year this board authorized the puc to set rates at 12.8 cents per kilowatt hour. we ran the risk of large scale opt outs, but the logic was that the environmental benefits were so strong that san francisco would vote with their wallets and absorb the increases. set aside for the moment that there would be dangerous opt out aspects of this program, i feared that such an expensive cca would run the risk of sticking mono lingual and elderly san franciscan with soaring energy bills without fair knowledge. i made those concerns known and staff recommended reducing the rate to 10.9 cents per kilowatt hour. this is still significantly above the original goals of cca to meet or beat existing energy

they voted back in may to formally oppose the cca program. and if you read their resolution as i did, you'll notice that their rationale for posing the latest version of the community choice aggregation is exactly the same as mine. first and foremost, they want to see a program that actually creates jobs in san francisco by creating city-owned sustainable energy sources. this could include building wind farms, installing solar panels on municipal buildings, doing energy retrofits to existing residential or commercial buildings. supervisor, the voters are the ultimate policy makers of the city and county of san francisco and through their elected officials and legislative and executive branches of government and, of course, through the ballot measures, they express their will. nearly a dozen times san francisco voters have repeatedly rejected creating public power programs on the ballot. most recently in 2008 when proposition h was defeated by a margin of 60% of the vote, so, supervisor, you've given me a lot of credit for saying that my offic

lafco doesn't do cca. they've done special studies for us. [multiple voices] >> so, we've got a person who is the interim executive director who is also serving as general counsel; is that correct? >> yes. >> and then we have someone who is the senior community development specialist, is that correct? >> correct. >> we're looking to merge the executive officer and the senior community development specialist? >> in essence what we're really doing is expanding the scope of what the senior community development specialist position can do. because when it was created by the board, that position was only allowed to work on cca related projects. >> does this expansion have a cost to it? >> no, it will be a cost savings. >> a cost savings. >> right. would you like me to explain why? >> yes, please explain why this is [speaker not understood]. >> [speaker not understood] from the clerk's office. the costs will come in with the lower billable hours from the counsel that is currently serving as the executive officer. >> i see. have you cost out what th

there are examples around the country of cca integrating brand new energy. just a couple. the city of chicago recently aggregated, they signed a new contract led by the work we are doing here in california. they also integrated in state wind and they did a deal with their supplier to do a distributed solar supplier in chicago. there are 60 mega watts in marine brand new energy, cape cod and solar around 20 mega watts through the airport. we know that this works and i applaud you for looking at plan b and moving things forward, thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please? >> hi commissioners. i work with a group of local advocates working on this for a number of years. i main message is that lafco was created for the purpose of really making sure that clean power sf gets established and goes forward. there have been many times in the past where the sf puc is now -- not moving quickly or expeditiously enough and now lafco is moving quickly in terms of impact of getting work down for a build out study which lafco went and approved $100,000 contracts for part of th

again, going to the example of colorado, some lawmakers say cca and lobbyists did this deal behind closed doors, arguing that this was going to be beneficial to local economies. they were saying it would have killed jobs at a time when the state is still recovering from recession. >> and obviously, these private prisons are not without problems, are they? >> absolutely. just this year, a cca prison in idaho was held in contempt because it could not deal with its overcrowding and stabbing issues. that prison has been called a gladiator training center by some of the prisoners, and we also have heard of allegations of abuse at cca centers, contracted through homeland security, and there was a terrible case of inmates escaping from a privately run arizona facility who eventually murdered a couple after they escaped, so these private facilities are not without controversy. >> it kind of seems like one of those situations where they are dammed if they do and dammed if they do not. our correspondent reporting to was from l.a., thank you. >> you bet. >> well, they call themselves the freedom fig

, thinking about looking at ccas in their own communities. and we got more than a dozen jurisdictions to show up, several wishing they could come, but weren't able to send anyone. there is a lot more interest these days. i want you to see that, if you go to the next slide, that pg&e's estimated rate for 2014 is 9 cents a kilowatt hour. they just filed with the california puc for a rate increase. pg&e's green tariff option as estimated by pg&e and the press would be about 11-1/2 cents. if you add the penny to the base rate expected in january for pg&e, you would get a 12.5 cent green rate for its proposed tariff. we think if we launched today with the information that we have about shell and hetch hetchy power we could have a rate of less than -- less than 11 cents per share and probably less than 10 cents. i have a slide called water recs, but i'm not going to go through because i understand ed randolph is here from the california puc. he's an expert on the state's renewable portfolio standards and will do a much better job than i will explai

something fairly interesting just talking to you, jason freed, is marine county, marine power, the cca program they sell to continue -- contra cost a county that we might have a joint pg & e with with marine county? >> marine has gone outside of it's county and now serves richmond because richmond decided to join the mea program. now this is napa trying to join. m ea are going through that process and making sure it doesn't harm their program and keeps their program moving in a functional way. they are trying to do another template program on how it can join their program. it could potentially decide to join apa in marine and be part of that program. there would need to be discussions that occur with them and in the city and county. >> we can do that with the public utilities commissioners and not being part of that process. >> there is a commissioner there and if it's power related, what's in the charter. i'm not a lawyer. >> i think that would be something worth exploring and maybe at the lafco meeting can be presented to us as a possibility and what the process was for the richmond

revenues have doubled to over $1 billion a year for the country's two largest private prison companies, cca or the corrections corporation of america and geo. the vast majority of the people held in, detection centers. >> keeping us safe from foreign terrorism. it makes no sense but it's making a lot of money for a lot of people. >> this looks like a florida retirement home. but behind the pink walls and palm trees is a detention center. this is th broward detention center. they were anxious to show it to us, it was one of their nicest facilities. >> broward is one of 250 detention facilities contracted by immigrations and being cch it's to facilitate the removal from the united states of people when they're ordered removed. >> immigration detention has a dark history. hundreds of cases of physical and sexual abuse have been documented. from 2003, to 2009, over 100 people died in ice custody. the obama administration announced they would reform the system. among ice officials, broward is held up as a model of that reform. >> what you'll see in broward as compared to certainly a county jail

cca has been and continues to be a strategy that could play a role and will play a role if the program is launched to help us get there. certainly not the only one. and the question is, you know, how we will ensure we have a program that meets all of those goals. so, that's where i think we're at. >> commissioner wald. >> i agree with what melanie said with the following friendly amendment. it's fine to say that we want to meet all of our goals, but i think based on what we heard tonight and what we've heard before, we cannot meet all of our goals equally. at least -- thank you, not right now. and i think the challenge -- and i have to say i'm glad it's the puc that really -- [laughter] >> -- that has the challenge and not us. >> a sfpuc commissioner, we happen to have a guest [speaker not understood]. >> it challenges how you balance all those goals. i think we have a big problem here in san francisco because we are so ambitious. >> right. >> because we do have such a huge vision. i love the notion of a green deal, a new green deal. for this program, we poured so much of our hopes and

a pocas mlade la zonaurban km coiderable dla Ínea fronteriza n tieuro y aquare difÍl d cree est ea ccaeoy ra e triri noeamerica. aÍuede cruzar prÁcticamen cualqur pso y a clquier hora. y esmos a una stancia de llas roximadamente lo que viene siendoogales sonora galesarizona. e ue s Áreas donenos esto q v aÍ. hay oas Áasqu.. >>> por esta Área no cruza muchos miantes, sin eargo se a p zan bellas vacÍas galos tas tipicasue rgan ellos, hay hueco p dejo de s rieles. >>lo q setiza mucho e la gente que uza, o aenta los bult par eladde esdos unos y los sac escondes en l vegetaÓn. y spuÉsasa u carro. >>> el muro continua mas adante pero sin duda s v po vila muy lnerle mona cra invitacion al cruce dras y pernas enogesrizona pro trer univision. >>>l sri aolla acosa los >>>n 8 cÁrcel d arizona yon e aserrÍ y la picÍaigue lais de hombreuee las arregla, parantrega erar ascso de masajes. yor el mento las ut Árido cenue ha cetido e deto emÁs de 30 ocasios. y jaime garcÍa, hablo con una d s vÍctimasrenta las Áges del esunto vlador. >>> este es el veo conueas auridades, espanuel pÚblico enfique al sosph

i would also add that marin energy authority, the cca in marin county was subject to the same claims before they launched their program several years ago, and they did not conduct c-e-q-a review in order to provide service to their customers. and they were not to. finally, i should mention in response to hunter stern's comments that the shell contract requires that whatever purchases are made under that contract will reduce greenhouse gas emissions relative to pg&e's portfolio. under any circumstance. >> all right, thank you. [gavel] >> i think we close public comment. and just to say a couple -- one quick thought, you know, that this is a big, big energy policy decision for the city and county of san francisco. i think maybe a big as the peakers. and there is so much that we want to see today bigger, bigger. during that time the environment commission and the department of environment as i said were the ones to really push and think outside the box and to exhaust all the list of questions, all the ideas to try to match vision and reality, shutting down, not building dirty fossil fue

. >> he is only supposed to work on cca related item. so, even asking him to find a contractor to look at a different kind of study is technically outside of his scope of work that the board created for him. if the lafco commission is interested in having him do this other work -- >> okay, i understand what the resolution says. but i'm confused and in some ways surprised because of information that i received directly from the person in the position about lafco and initially when i joined the board and how we've been able to communicate, it was my understanding, of course, that the position had never been filled. he's done work of those positions and this consolidation would basically help to continue things, make things more efficient in terms of the way they are. but at no point was i ever i think aware that he could not work on specific things because those were the things that were provide today me as his list of responsibilities and were actually encouraged -- i was encouraged to request these particular items that are not necessari