ms. miller? >> yeah, there is a co ponent of the development of green -- component of the development of green jobs that was submitted and is part of task seven and eight. so it's in the body of the -- of the document. it's not a separate line item. it wasn't separately numbered. >> but what i'm saying is it didn't wow me. it didn't wow me at all. we have gone through p.u.c. we've gone through recurrent energy. we've gone through the solar city contracts. we have gone through -- i cannot tell you how many dozens and dozens of hours of debate through the budget committee and board of supervisors and being with the understanding that this would yield green jobs. and i still don't think the city has come to scratching the surface of yielding jobs for disadvantaged communities. it's frankly underwhemming. so in this case what i read beyond the eight key points of this percent speck us to, same thing. i don't see it, i don't feel it. so i want to make sure that if we invest in this, that we're getting

ms. miller, did you want to add anything to that? >> briefly, through the chair, the plan was that the sfpuc would approve the term sheet, and we would hear on friday any of the changes or comments that they had. since that did not occur, i want to briefly say that that may change my recommendation to you. a number of questions they had related -- i think mike did a good job of summarizing this. the related mainly to risk and what the risk was to the city, so there are some specific questions that the sfpuc is bringing back to them. hopefully, they will be able to meet in august. if that does not occur, we might want to consider meeting with them in a joint meeting in september. the only thing i have been at is if you want to fall -- hear the full presentation, mike is perfectly willing to give it to you. it could be that because the puc did not approve the term sheet, we may be continue each day until such time as they do approve it. given that, i would like to hear your comments or questions. supervisor campos: colleagues, if i may

ms. miller? >> i have no report, thank you. >> but, i'm sorry, i do want to introduce -- i'm going to have jason interview our new intern. i just wanted to get the opportunity to introduce our intern for the summer. last summer, she had different tasks to do. she is currently going to u.c. davis and is looking to do green type work in her future. i just wanted to welcome her do our internship program. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> colleagues, any questions? is there any public comment on this item? any money -- body wanting to speak? public comment is closed. madam, can you call item number six. it's within the jurisdiction of the commissioner. seeing none public bhick comment is closed. item seven? >> item number seven, future agenda items." >> colleagues any member of the public that would like to speak? seeing none, public comment was closed. >> just a quick question in terms oaf the join meeting with the -- of the joint meeting with the p.u.c., do you need specific dates for us. >> i

ms. miller? you think the medical loss ratio was coming to bring down health care costs or the cost of premiums? >> senator cardin, just speaking for oregon, since we have such high medical loss ratios, i don't think that medical loss ratio will make a difference, but i am not as familiar with other states and what is happening in terms of medical loss ratio. it certainly could have an impact in other states. >> and other states that are not -- minnesota has over 90% medical loss ratio. that's because oregon and minnesota are high value states, and part of sexually -- one thing i believe is going to bring down the bend in the cost curve is we are going to increase the value of health care and we are going to reward and incentivize the height all you care. my time is up, but i did want to point out that earlier senator hatch said that the purpose of the health care reform was not to reduce the rate of the growth of premiums but reduce premiums, and i don't think that's the case. i don't think anyb

ms. miller, please proceed. >> good morning. my name is theresa miller and i am the director of the oregon insurance. i will talk to about federal grants are improving our health insurance rate review process in oregon. we have worked very hard last four years to strengthen our state rate review law and open our process. because of these efforts, the rate review process as one of the most transparent and is supported by strong statute. the federal rate review grant has allowed us to hire the staff necessary to conduct more in- depth reviews of rate filings and provide the funds necessary to solicit meaningful public comments. i have included more detail in my written testimony about the key features of our process. those include posting all documents contained in issuing a plain language summary of our decision and e-mail in policyholders with a link to that decision. i want to focus my remarks to the improvements we have made with respect to federal grants dollars. we were allowed to solicit more detailed and meaningful public c

ms. miller hosted public testimony on the rate increase. i believe that was the first public testimony rate increase in 20 years. were you required to do that by locking? or did you think it would be an interesting experiment -- were you required to do that by law. >> we have had a public comment period prior. but this was the first year. >> was invaluable? it valuable? >> i did not know if consumers would find the experience helpful or valuable and i did not know how the company would react to it. i found it to be a very new data will experience. i heard from consumers that they so appreciated the opportunity to be heard and to testify and make their views known and have someone listen to them. we also had a lot of comments about -- the way we structure the hearing, we had the company presents the rate filing. i asked the company about 10 questions and then we had a consumer advocacy group present their thoughts on the filing and then we took comments from the public. we got comments from people as they were leaving that said things like i

ms. lena miller? >> good afternoon, supervisors. thank you for having me. i am the founder and co- executive director of the hunters point family. i was very excited to learn about this seat, because i started out my career with an interest in mental health. i thought i was going to be a psychiatrist and a kind of work with youth 1-on-one. but i came of age in the 1980's, which is sent -- when our community really started to change for the worse. we saw the epidemic of crack and also machine guns, and really a lot of pain in our community. as i graduated from college and a look into graduate school and what kind of debris i would pursue, i decided to get a master's in social work, because it would allow me to be a little more flexible with the kind of work that i would do in terms of healing. ultimately, i found the program that is known as the hunters point family. we started out as an after- school program. really, the thought about that was that a program that really nurtured young people and worked with them every single day was going to be a lot more p

ms. miller. >> thank you, mr. chairman. sorry, mr. higgins. [laughter] >> you know, mr. chairman, first of all, i want to thank you very much for holding this hearing. i think it is very, very important. and certainly after listening to the testimony today of all of the witnesses, it's very clear that we have situations here in america that we need to examine candidly as we all seek the very same thing which is a strong, safe, secure america and in the run-up of today's hearings we heard an awful lot of talk how we should not be pre-judging any single one group and i appreciate that and after hearing the compelling testimony i think many, many, particularly in the media, we're just as misguided by prejudging what this hearing was about, and i'm very hopeful that this hearing will actually strengthen our country. i think it's an opportunity to have an actual pivot historically for us and to help us all stand together as americans first above everything else. i would just make an observation. i know so many of my colleagues mentioned we should be having all these other hea

ms. miller. >> good morning. distinguished members of the committee, for the record, my name's teresa miller and i'm the administrator of the or began division and i'm honored to be here today and appreciate the opportunity to talk to you about how federal grants available through the affordable care act are improving our health insurance rate review process in oregon. oregon has worked very hazard over the last four years to strengthen our state rate review law and open our proelse is. because of these efforts, oregon's rate review process is one of the most transparent in the country. as we continue to improve our process, the federal rate review grants have allowed us to hire the staff necessary to conduct more in depth reviews of rate filings and have provided the funds necessary to solicit meaningful public comments. in my written testimony, i've included more detail about the key features of our rate review process, but just briefly those include posting all documents contained in a rating fu -- rate filing