into lafco. we encourage our executive officers to do an orientation for new commissioners, but we can certainly assist in that and i'm very happy to do so. >> chairman: that's great. so madam clerk, i think let's make sure that we do put together an orientation protocol for all the newly appointed commissioners as well as an executive officer. let's make sure that an orientation with california lafco is very helpful and that we keep this presentation on the record as part of the documents that we will provide to all newly appointed commissioners as well as the alternate and executive officer or any staff that will be working on lafco and let's also make sure we include a conversation with the legal council of our san francisco lafco to make sure that we really understand our authority moving things forward and i think we need to set those protocols. colleagues, i want to make sure that if you have any questions for executive director miller that this is the time. seeing no comments. no one on th

it wouldn't directly affect san francisco lafco, but in the spirit of supporting other lafcos, we have been asked to provide and i am submitting a letter of support. and i apologize i did not put a clear letter of recommendation on this. it does require a second vote. the second question is an update on our renewable energy consultant. as you know, jenny woodson who was the lead as our renewable consultant, announced recently she was leaving and she has since departed. so over the course of the last month, vanner has assessed its staffing situation. in the beginning we thought that rose marie amphill has done a lot of the writing and reports for lafco. have had a chance to assess staffing resources and has informed me that they do not wish to extend their current contracts when it expires on july 20th won't be continuing. they left a great. [please stand by] -- for me to catch up with the work that they have done. i want to do -- from your report i want to make a motion to support -- to send -- to support ab-1581, is that the correct number? >> that's right, madam chair. >> chair chan:

it wouldn't directly affect san francisco lafco, but in the spirit of supporting other lafcos, we havebeen asked to provide and i am submitting a letter of support. and i apologize i did not put a clear letter of recommendation on this. it does require a second vote. the second question is an update on our renewable energy consultant. as you know, jenny woodson who was the lead as our renewable consultant, announced recently she was leaving and she has since departed. so over the course of the last month, vanner has assessed its staffing situation. in the beginning we thought that rose marie amphill has done a lot of the writing and reports for lafco. have had a chance to assess staffing resources and has informed me that they do not wish to extend their current contracts when it expires on july 20th won't be continuing. they left a great. [please stand by] -- for me to catch up with the work that they have done. i want to do -- from your report i want to make a motion to support -- to send -- to support ab-1581, is that the correct number? >> that's right, madam chair. >> chair chan:

as a followup to that report, we had another lafco research associate asked to analyze the june 2020 addressing power disconnections among low income utility customers. that was a result by senator ben owasso. it requires the cpuc to reduce gas and service disconnections by 2024. for ms. chan's research, she developed recommendations and i'm not going to go into all of her research, but the report has been provided to you and these are the main points her conclusion was that the june decision was insufficient to prevent debt accumulation during the shutoff moratorium and prevent keep making this. the reason she found it to be insufficient was that the plan or that the payment plan missed the mark in terms of eligibility. you have to be ruled in c.a.r.e. or f. e.r.a. and these programs help a lot of programs providing 30% discount on bills, but the eligibility requirements do not take into account the cost of living in san francisco. so that's going to miss a lot of folks who are in need of utility debt relief. also, if a customer misses two payments, they're kicked out of the program

as a followup to that report, we had another lafco research associate asked to analyze the june 2020 addressing power disconnections among low income utility customers. that was a result by senator ben owasso. it requires the cpuc to reduce gas and service disconnections by 2024. for ms. chan's research, she developed recommendations and i'm not going to go into all of her research, but the report has been provided to you and these are the main points her conclusion was that the june decision was insufficient to prevent debt accumulation during the shutoff moratorium and prevent keep making this. the reason she found it to be insufficient was that the plan or that the payment plan missed the mark in terms of eligibility. you have to be ruled in c.a.r.e. or f. e.r.a. and these programs help a lot of programs providing 30% discount on bills, but the eligibility requirements do not take into account the cost of living in san francisco. so that's going to miss a lot of folks who are in need of utility debt relief. also, if a customer misses two payments, they're kicked out of the program

as a followup to that report, we had another lafco research associate asked to analyze the june 2020 addressing power disconnections among low income utility customers. that was a result by senator ben owasso. it requires the cpuc to reduce gas and service disconnections by 2024. for ms. chan's research, she developed recommendations and i'm not going to go into all of her research, but the report has been provided to you and these are the main points her conclusion was that the june decision was insufficient to prevent debt accumulation during the shutoff moratorium and prevent keep making this. the reason she found it to be insufficient was that the plan or that the payment plan missed the mark in terms of eligibility. you have to be ruled in c.a.r.e. or f. e.r.a. and these programs help a lot of programs providing 30% discount on bills, but the eligibility requirements do not take into account the cost of living in san francisco. so that's going to miss a lot of folks who are in need of utility debt relief. also, if a customer misses two payments, they're kicked out of the program