secondly, nrdc believes quee can protect the environment and our local economy and think a lot of the focks is on per capita water use but ignores the water supply tools san francisco is moving forward with whether that is the groundwater banking project to help get through drought years or recycling waste water. in 20s 14 the bay area trumped 180 thousand water into the the treatment plants. that is a renewable resource and need to think of that as a resource not a waste protect. we can't just focus on conservation but it is clear we can do more than what is in the economic assessment. they did their assessment based on higher levels of demand than the city has shown is possible. we can do more and should do more. we have a morbl obligation to protect the rivers and fishing industry that is the heart of san francisco fishermans warf which is decimated by years and taking 90 percent out of the toileomy is not a river and can do better. i implor you to direct staff to meet with us and let us work on long term solutions because we can make this work and believe there are possibilities f

secondly, nrdc believes quee can protect the environment and our local economy and think a lot of the focks is on per capita water use but ignores the water supply tools san francisco is moving forward with whether that is the groundwater banking project to help get through drought years or recycling waste water. in 20s 14 the bay area trumped 180 thousand water into the the treatment plants. that is a renewable resource and need to think of that as a resource not a waste protect. we can't just focus on conservation but it is clear we can do more than what is in the economic assessment. they did their assessment based on higher levels of demand than the city has shown is possible. we can do more and should do more. we have a morbl obligation to protect the rivers and fishing industry that is the heart of san francisco fishermans warf which is decimated by years and taking 90 percent out of the toileomy is not a river and can do better. i implor you to direct staff to meet with us and let us work on long term solutions because we can make this work and believe there are possibilities f

40 percent at least and support the comments of the toileomy trust and san francisco bay keeper and nrdc and urge you to take the suggestion of dou g obogeee and mr. mac mans to direct staff to mean with concerned sit whereins that have before you submit your comments to the water board to iron out the inconsistency and contsversery raised today. everybody knows the bay needs more flesh water flow and agree on that and for many reasons for fish and wildlife and environment but one reason is also for health and safety of the resident in san francisco which you have a responsibility to protect. increasing fresh-water flow means increasing sediment to the eco system which protects the beaches and wet land and make them resilient to climate change. we have a king tide next week and know the impact and know it is 10 if not hundreds of millions of dollars to protect from sea level rise and caused by climate change so urge you to add to another good reason to support the boards water quality control plan to provide at least 40 percent of the flows, maintain 40 percent of the flows to san franci

nrdc, have over the years tern turned the courts -- have turned the courts far too much into a rubber stamp, rather than a vigorous check on the self-serving tendencies of agencies to interpret the law to expand their own power. title 2 of the bill, the separation of powers act, delivers this legislative reversal of chevron vs. hour. there's one thing, though, that still needs to be added to that portion of the bill. that is language to check the potential that, once they are restored, the full interpreterive powers that rightfully belong to them are --, our article 3 courts will not engage in judicial activism. to put a point on it, judges must not be allowed to use the separation of powers act as a license to interpret ambiguous statutes always to expand agency power. my amendment therefore succinctly but powerfully provides just that. it prohibits courts from reading ambiguities in constitutes to contain implicit delegations of legislative rulemaking authority to agencies or from reading those ambiguities expansively to extends agency power. although it failed in its task, the ches