you sit on lafco, right? [laughter] >> this position actually also serves at the pleasure of the lafco commissioners. >> right. >> because it's a limited scope. it's not a civil service position. it's extended by contract. so, even this is included, federal contract extension -- >> even in the contract it tells you -- in terms of the contract, this is how you will perform your duty, this is how you were evaluated. i don't know. commissioner breed? >> well, i don't know. [laughter] >> i know there's a contract, but isn't the person in the position of city employee? or is he a contract employee? >> he is a union member, but he is on contract by lafco. so, in essence, lafco could set those up. so, as a commission, if you want to determine your scope of work includes this and that you want to set those standards, that's what the [speaker not understood]. >> so, would there be a problem with postponing this item to the next full committee in order to provide sometime for clear communication as to what this really

lafco staff. my name is shawn marshall with the local agriculturation network -- aggregation network with promoting greater energy. i serve as vice-mayor as the city of valley. i'm signature -- sitting here with my lead hat on. i want to commend mayor lee, there is nothing in the california statute that requires the sf puc to be the response offer cca. i do think it would be the most logical choice, but given the political stalemate, i think it's smart for you to look at alternatives and there are many alternatives i think including marine, i think it's definitely work a conversation with them. there are cities in the formation process and this maybe even an opportunity to join statewide effort. i would welcome a conversation with you, miss miller in the future because i think there are some options that you ought to be considering. a couple quick comments. one is to let you know on wednesday, the county board of supervisors in san diego unanimously approved funding for cca study for the renewable

jason carried, lafco staff. i was watching it and dumbfounded by the comments made and some things being said auto out in the public and i was able to full transcript, sfgtv has a transcript version which is not perfectly accurate and there are a lot of spelling errors, i didn't try to correct that but there are comments in the packet where there are inaccuracies. i'm not going to get into each one of those individually. one of those that i did want to address is when the mayor was asked the question about how can we work together, you never seen him asked the questions directly. you never actually see -- it was not in my comment and probably should have been added to my comments. >> there's a discussion about how the mayor's was trying to fulfill the environmental efforts here in san francisco and i saw in the air district, i have been there since march of 2011 and parson was there, the mayor's seat has been vacant in the air district all this time, probably over a year. i have asked a number of times, like whe

you're aware lafco is a local agency commission. it's chaired by john avalos, vice-chaired by david campos, supervisor breed and supervisor mar also serve on this commission as well as members of the public from [speaker not understood] and lee pimentel. the board of supervisors gave us [speaker not understood] to help the puc figure out how to get this program up and running many years ago actually before the current members or lafco, that's how long lafco has been working on this particular project. so, i wanted to address a few of the things [speaker not understood] how things have changed. one of things to keep in mind that has changed in this program, when the board approved this program in september of last year, it was 5% bucket 1. we're now talking about 25% bucket 1 in the current mix. that has gone up a lot. as ms. malcolm mentioned during her comments, the rest of it is coming from bucket 2 and bucket 3. you want to talk about confusing people, try explaining the difference between a bucket 2 and bucket 3 rec. it becomes

lafco staff informed me that staff presented a not to compete rate at 11.5 cents. what do you see at the prospect at the program going forward that we would actually be able to meet pg & e's rate if we were not doing that but it's still a possibility for that happening? >> we started to do some analysis of whether we can get down to the pg & e rate with a hundred percent renewable product. we haven't completed that analysis and it would depend on many things and how the commission and supervisors would want the build out if we get at or below the rate of pg & e, we might not meet any margin. it also would depend on the type of what it looks like we execute because they still haven't given us any final number. that will happen after we get a rate after we would get a rate for our customers. >> and this maybe a question for miss hale, i have been told by the general manager that there are tremendous needs to resolve in the power generation side of the puc and especially what was highlighted with the rim fire that some of the facilities have deteriorated from the rim

. >>> jason freed, lafco staff. what i just heard read i think would be a big detriment to this program. i think that while there are some questions that still need to be answered, this is the wrong way to go about it. you are going to be derailing this program. it has a very sensitive start time. if we can get this thing started in the spring, all these things that we're talking about can occur. if we continue to wait, the things that shell is saying they can potentially do, those contracts they have available for us to get in-state labor, hydro, ghg free, start to go away because they're going to start selling those contracts to other vendors that they have, other people that want to buy that energy. and, so, we need to keep this thing moving forward. i understand, commissioner arce, that you have some kaiserious concerns. those are concerns that have nothing to do with the not to exceed rate. they have other program designs and we can continue to have this discussion. you doughthv need a resolution to have that c

to our future and the lafco is really key to this whole process and if you like to ask me about that, i can explain it. >> i think that we know. >> thank you. >> public comments? >> seeing none, thank you. next item >> out reach presentation on zero waste training for city employees, the speaker today is julie bryant, city government zero waste, senior coordinate and her this is informational and presentation and discussion. >> before we begin, commissioner king had a comment. so once again, it is time to talk about all of the wonderful things that we are doing in the department of environment for the city and county of san francisco. and knowing that there are so many people that actually watch this on television, i can't believe how many people walked up to me in my own building to say that they watched last commission meeting. i was like you must have nothing better to do. and knowing that this is edutainment, you are not just talking to us but you are talking to the audience and so keep that in mind and thank you for your time in being here after 5:00. >> thank you. >> i am the c

hire, the creators they did it probono and that, the local power to do the implementation plan in lafco, they introduced that plan. and that brought this sfupc back to the table and kind of shuned them and came back and got to work and worked on a plan with us and then in 2011, after we had for many years, said, that for the commission and it is staff to work on the most important aspect of this program and it is the most important aspect to this commission is that the local build out and the jobs and making sure that we did the study work necessary to prepare for hundreds of mega watts of local and renewable efficiency that we put forward in this program, and going to hire the consultant to do that work and what and undid that and serious, to get us to the point where we are now and where we actually have a build out and plan and development and that is the local agency and formation and commission, stepped up to hire the contractor itself and once again, it was local power, and that once again, forced sfpuc back to the table and so please have your staff work very closely with the laf

closely with the lafco because that is the ground that we found the most fertile when the program is on hold as it is right now, thanks. >> thank you. >> for the public comment? >> seeing none, we will get the next item. and we need to figure the logistics for the retreat. >> operation's committee chair report, the highlights of the august 14, 2013 meeting and review the agenda for the november meeting. >> i table that. and i am continue that into the next meeting. >> i don't have my notes. >> motion to continue by commissioner king? >> second that. >> second from commissioner josefowitz. can i hear all of those in favor of continuing the item to our next meeting, please say aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> item is continued. >> policy committee report. >> commissioner wald? >> on august 12th... >> i am sorry. could i get what is the move to make? i did not take public comment on that item. >> i know that we have watch dogs in the audience and i don't want to make that mistake. >> deputy city? >> you can recind the vote. >> could i get a motion to recind. >> all those in aye. >> item 12, publ

wanted to thank the staff of the puc and also i want to thank the staff of the board of supervisors and lafco for all of your hard work and of course to the advocates who are here and labor who are here as well. i think it's very important that we're grateful for all the participation that you've provide and had the input you provided. but i said before that this program has to be a clean energy goals articulated listed, i've been studying the program to understand the pros and the cons and i want to reiterate that i do my own homework and i make up my own mind and i think 20 year ins the legislature ought to indicate to you how i made up my mind and i will put my environmental record on the legislature before and after, thirdly, i think it's important for us to understand that there are still concerns that i have after looking at this very carefully. number one, i do not feel that the labor issues have been fully addressed, that's number one for me, number 2, the table currently on the table as some people argued are fundamentally different from what was proposed and that is also true. third

get those rates, and what we are calling you on to do is work with the board of supervisors on the lafco to the extent that they will work with you, the sfpuc on getting the build out plan finished. and so that we don't have to make our, and we don't have to delay the program and we are saying to you, is instead of saying that it is not ready, help us make it ready and work with them to make it ready and so that we don't have to wait and start the program immediately and so that is what we would like to see at your next meeting is something that takes a strong stand for this commission and this department to take a strong lead in moving this forward in the next year. >> thank you. >> comments on this item? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. item 19, please? >> excuse me >> commissioner king. >> my apologies, i have something work-related that i need to have going on about 7:00 for. so i need to be excused. >> not a problem, commissioner king. >> we are still five? i can't count. four? >> five, okay. thank you. >> yes? >> commissioner josefowitz? >> no. >> item 19 please? >> >> pub

i also recall a lafco meeting. six months ago when you, supervisor, made sure to point out that a major differentiating benefit of our cca program was that it did not include recs. look, i understand that sometimes circumstances change and that the programs need to be flexible and respond to changing circumstances. but when the final product is so vastly different from the original intent, decision-makers like the public utilities commission need to exercise their oversight role. that's exactly what the commission did in this case and i'm glad they did. another part of the program that the board approved is the state law requirement that any community choice aggregation program be opt out, which supervisor breed mentioned in her question. i believe that any public power program would need to be opt in, allowing residents to make an informed choice about their power bills. i'm

. >>> jason freed, lafco staff. what i just heard read i think would be a big detriment to this program. i think that while there are some questions that still need to be answered, this is the wrong way to go about it. you are going to be derailing this program. it has a very sensitive start time. if we can get this thing started in the spring, all these things that we're talking about can occur. if we continue to wait, the things that shell is ng

the sierra club has been critical before you and critical before lafco in the past when having this rate discussion, however, we feel that the rate set before you are fair and the pricing structure that the staff is talking about is reasonable and within the realm of meeting pg&e's rates in a competitive way, especially when you factor in the rate increases that pg&e is planning. the power is clean, every environmental group, every major environmental group backs the state of california's definition of what clean energy is and this is what is being provided in the short term, what shell would provide, so you know, that is certified by the state of california. i want to address a little bit what was misrepresented from the commission on environment, it is public record that president arsy's motion failed, that he was speaking for the minority of the commission on environment, the majority of the commission on environment had another take. i think the main thing is what commissioner vietor said several times is that we cannot create the final plan, the details of where the jobs are going t

the concerns and the ideas we've heard from our public officials which includes our own commission, lafco, members of this commission, and our rate fairness board. as well as the board of supervisors. today the program is designed to provide 100% renewable product to all clean power sf customers, renewable by the california public utilities commission standards. and we are planning to initiate work on our local buildout at launch. we're doing planning and work on that right now which i can explain a little more in a few minutes. as i mentioned, we have a contract with shell energy of north america for 20 to 30 megawatts of power. and something that i've been working on very hard in the last month or so is an investigation of whether we can be buying power in-house with expertise we already have. san francisco puc already scheduled and delivers about 240 megawatts of power to municipal and other customers every year, adding -- adding 10 or 20 megawatts would not be a big change in what they're doing. it's a matter of conducting some risk assessment and figuring out the best way to do that

communication to the local agency formation commission that you support the idea that works and would like the lafco to work very closely and cooperatively with the advocates to make sure that workshop is successful. thank you. >> thank you. ~ workshop next speaker. >> could i just observe that i'm extraordinarily moved and impressed by eric burks' comments. i remember sitting in the ground floor of the old sfe offices. >>> yes. >> in the dark. [laughter] >> on really uncomfortable chairs. >>> i remember. >> and hearing eric excoriate the puc? don't you love that word? i never get to use it. >> i was like wow. >> i mean, he was really as hard on them as i have been on federal agencies in my career, and that is saying something. and to have him come here and say that the program that we're talking about -- that they're talking about is, in fact, better for the things that we care about than it used to be is really impactful for me. i have to say that. thank you. >> thank you. >>> thanks. >> it's hard to say when things -- it's harder to say when things are going well than it is to say when they're re

so, when the board created that position, they said, you can only work on lafco. so, technically the current person who fills that position is operating outside of his scope because he has been doing special studies that the lafco commission has requested of him, which was on split banking, on [speaker not understood] voting -- >> can i clarify special that were outside of scope. he is not doing the work directly. he is finding people to do the work, that we're paying to do the work of these studies. >> yes and no. these are not necessarily studies that are contracted out. but you are directing -- >> i was told that they were all studies that were contracted out, that he basically helps with the process and finds the appropriate entity do the studies and he just basically oversees the process. >> sure, sure. however he chooses to carry those out. still technically, if you look at the resolution which is referenced here that created that position, he's not supposed to do that. >> okay. >> he is only supposed to work on cca related item. so, even asking him to find

>> jason freed, lafco staff. i happen to know someone who just came back into town and would be good interning with us and if that person is available i can have something by next meeting and if that person is not available, i can have a report by next meeting. it would take time to get together. i would recommend the departments, the over see staff and the commission or environmentings -- every commission seems to have it's own process. some of done, like the puc commission like where the mayor nominates, they can say yes or no to it and there are other commission on the environment where the mayor a points, the board has the time to vote and the mayor can a point someone before the board knows who this person is and what as occurred with the appointment. it might be a broad study to have the commissions and some commissions are done by split appointments and the mayor does some and in some cases we can put together a spreadsheet to talk about all that. >> how long does that take? >> if i have the availability o