i got a notice from p.u.c. and ignored it. then i got another letter to contact p.u.c. well, i followed up on that one. it was a nice letter, but it had some points i thought i should pay attention to. and believe me, here i am an environmentallist who was not looking at my water bill. the good news was, i met a p.u.c. water inspector who came to my home. his name was matthew jay brady. he was wonderful. he and i went through my whole house together from top to bottom, explained to me what was going on. it turned out there was one toilet that was not working right and was causing the problem and needed fixing and causing my bill to go up substantially. as i said, i had not paid much attention. the part did -- it was a part that was done, wore for one toilet. did not cost very much and my son fixed the toilet. so, thanks for all the information, and the terrific walk through my house with matthew. i'm just sharing that with you because there are probably a lot of others of us who don't pay attention but matthew did and you did, and my bill is much less. so, thanks very m

p.u.c., a max rate that all the agreements use as a standard max rate. we have never been close to that, but we, all city departments include that. >> who sets that standard max rate? >> the office of public finance is the one that helped us determine that rate, and i think it's based on, and maybe ben can answer that question. >> we'll defer to the controller. who sets that rate? >> just to be clear, this rate, memory serves correctly, actual borrowing rate on the actual commercial program paper we have in place for the city and the m.t.a. is much, much lower than that. hovering at or below 1% interest in recent years. >> considerably lower. >> creating a legal ceiling. >> i understand. >> i think it's a state, the state legislation that it's a 12% rate that's the maximum rate that local governments can charge, and the city basically used that for all the commercial programs. >> all right. thank you. next question is actually related to item five. what kind of outreach for people who have o

more what the california p.u.c. has had and legislative hearings, these things have come up. >> keep us posted. >> you bet. >> thank you. >> any other public comment on this item? next item. >> that would conclude my report. >> dave on the general manager's report. generally not specifically on cca. last week i attended the committee on information technology meeting here at city hall, and one of the items that was discussed and approved was i think about 22 million for the customer care and billing system extending that to retail electric customers not cca customers but the municipal direct and redevelopment area customers of which we have roughly 3,000, i believe. hopefully many more in the future. and i support having a new billing solution there clearly what we're doing now is extremely archaic and difficult and all of that. my concern is whether spending more than $20 million to get to a better solution is the best approach and my comment is prior to choosing orical or whatever it is to extend cc and b in that

p.u.c. thank you. and mr. clerk, could you call items 8-13 in conjunction with the p.u.c. presentation. >> clerk: item 8, ordinance, $340 million hetch hetchy revenue, cap-and-trade, and power revenue bonds, hetch hetchy capital improvement program. item 9, approximately $483 million of proceeds from revenue bonds state of california water resource control board revolving loan fund or grant fund, water revenue and water fees for the san francisco public utilities commission. water enterprise capital improvement. item number 10, approximately 1,000,000,217 million of proceeds from revenue funds, revolving loan fund, or grand fund, wastewater revenue and capacity funds, wastewater enterprise capital improvement program. 11, ordinance authorizing issuance and sale of tax exempt or taxable power revenue bond and other forms of indebtedness, not to exceed $154 million, item 12, ordinance authorized ordinance of tax exempt or taxable water revenue bonds and other forms of indebtedness by the san f

however, as p.u.c. will tell us today, they have significantly scaled back the blending amounts to less than .3 million gallons per day. to slow the process and to insure we are doing the right thing. since then we have conducted even more significant community outreach and as far as the office has heard, the level of concern from the community members has significantly decreased. i believe this is a good sign. understand that the fourth ground well is tested. and today we are here so that the assistant general manager of p.u.c. steve richie can report back on the data they have collected. are you coming up first? come on up. >> yes, if we could have the slide please. good morning. i am assistant general manager steve richie of the public utilities commission. good morning, supervisors. thank you for the introduction. and thank you also for this hearing where i was identified as stevie richie. my wife is the only person who calls me stevie. i don't know who you have been talking to. >> that was me and i

and to your credit and the p.u.c. even though we can always do better outreach -- >> absolutely. >> and certainly respect our constituents that in comparison to some of the tragedies and the complete negligence happening in other parts of the country whether it's flint, michigan, or whether it's a contamination of the water supply because of the fracking, some of the real, intense abuses that are happening, i appreciate the constant transparency that we have here in san francisco where we as a regulatory and watchdog body on the board of supervisors can constantly together with the public be monitoring the quality of our water supply and decisions that are made that impact that quality. i want to recognize and appreciate that because it's not the same in other places in the country. it is not something to take for granted. >> never. i wanted to close with that, but i am glad to make a motion to continue to the call of the chair to play that role. >> p.u.c. as an organization really does take this water supply and the

what we have here is a table of the p.u.c. operating budget. broken down into our enterprises, wastewater enterprise, hetch hetchy water and power, and cleanpowersf, such a big driver over the next two years. what you can see is our existing budget is about a billion dollars, $53 million, going up for fiscal year, 1,000,000,299 million and for 2020, 1,000,000,499 million, increase of 348 million over the two-year period. lion's share by cleanpowersf and the other big drivers are debt service on water bonds, on wastewater bonds, and then revenue funded capital on water and wastewater infrastructure assets. >> bring to your attention the presentation was -- >> long? >> yes, long, but supposed to be ten minutes and you are already like seven minutes over. i need you to wrap it up to get to the questions. >> sorry about that. operating budgets

brian from the p.u.c. to commit on the resolution that allows the p.u.c. to acquire land from lake merced golf club as part of a regional groundwater storage recovery project. the p.u.c. pays the grantor $66,000 for the land which was the appraised value as of 2014. maybe you can talk to us for the appraised value of 2014 as opposed to a more current one. thank you. >> good morning. brian rally. and we have been in negotiations with lake merced golf club for quite some time. there was a lot of extenuating circumstances, so it was kind of a mutually agreed thing they accepted the appraised value that we had presented in 2014. >> all right. is there anything else that you would like to share with us? >> basically f i could, explain the regional groundwater project which is going to place 16 welled a various locations down the peninsula for use during dry weather years. in a normal rain years t wells would be allowed to naturally recharge, and the p.u.c. will supply hetch hetchy watter to the wholesale customer on the peninsula. during the dry years, the p.u.

we do better with p.u.c. than p.g.e. we coordinate the paving -- it's coordinated and planned five years in advance. so we are very much looking ahead and trying to plan as far as possible and so we get a sense of what p.g.e., m.t.a. and p.u.c. has in the pipeline. we're not perfect. we inevitably miss some, but we do pretty good. and we look at equity, in terms of what we're doing city-wide. >> supervisor cohen: on the slide breaking down the funding sources over the last few years and this is in your previous presentation, what percenting a of that funding is from local sources, again, we talked about senate bill 1. out of the fund that's available, how much is it coming from the local, general fund? >> it represents probably based on the current year, it would represent -- i will ballpark 60%. i can give you the exact breakdown. that includes $8.6 million of senate bill one revenues. we're getting $23 million in the budget year. that drops it below 50%. i can provide you the specific numbers. >> supervisor cohen: than

coming soon to a p.u.c. near us. anyway, good work to karen and all the staff involved in the ssip. thanks. >> thank you. >> i have a question. >> i'm just reflecting on the fact that there is no increase with the bio solids, which i find curious. it's such a big project. will we see an increase in the future? is this, we're not going to approach it right now because we have these other increases and the other areas? >> >> eddie: we have some hard bid for head works. we are now going to be starting to put out some of the early packages for biosolids as we get into the late summer and fall and winter. i think then we will start to see how our bids are coming in. we took our latest firm estimate. the team still is in the process of design so those estimates will be redivided. we have three parties looking at it. our c.m., our contractor, and also an independent. so we just brought on a program c.m. that will assist us with some of those things. did you have anything? >> i would sigh that we are concerned given the president's tariffs in how that will impact steel prices. we're sort of

biggest challenges as we implement projects, programs we are facing is the retirement risk at the p.u.c. particularly in our water and wastewater side. i just want to point out this graph which represents the eligibility of folks eligible for retirement in the next five years and if you look at the red bar, the red bar represents the number, the folks who will max out. meaning it is probably the best time for them to retire because they won't receive any better benefits. it's safe to say the 16% on wastewater probably will retire in 15 years and the rest are eligible for retirement. that's probably one of our biggest risks we are facing so we are looking at ways we can attract the next generation of workers as a high priority to our agency. which leads me into our workforce and our aging workforce with close to half of our workforce will be close to retirement. so that's something we identified in our 2020 strategic plan. the goal is to attract, retain and develop an effective workforce reflective and supportive of our communities. to achieve this goal we have actively implemented progr

my attention was drawn to the p.u.c. bond where i understand there are now criminal investigations underway for bid rigging. and i'm not sure to what extent we would be aware if there was bid rigging going on. >> certainly on that note, that we conducted, one of the authorities is also to enlist any analysis or audits of the commission. it is within your authority as cgoboc to also ask the controllers office for commission any types of audits or investigations or more audits in the purview of the committee. so the extent that you do ask controllers office to conduct such types of engagements, that's something that we have considered in the past. >> but nothing came from your review. >> no. >> as a warning sign. >> one of the things that you also recommend is increased audits asked for by the goboc committee. any particular audit areas that you think should be priorities for us? >> so, within the authority that is given to the committee, i think what you have asked the controllers office to conduct, which are the expendit

we have been charging it as long as i've been at the p.u.c., almost 10 years now. it's a non-standard fee, if you you look across the our peer agencies no one else charges a fee just to sign up to become a customer, so we are proposing to eliminate this fee, it just doesn't make sense. another thing we are suggesting to reduce is the return check charge or bounced check fee, currently $105, that seems excessive. so we looked at the costs that we have associated with this charge and we are reducing the fee down to $50, which is the fee that's charged to us by the treasurer/tax collector office. we are eliminating fees from bounced check, and passing on the cost associated with the treasurer's office, we will continue to work with the treasurer's office to see if we could further get this fee down but this is an intermediate step in terms of providing cost relief for our customers. the last area is our fees associated with our water and power shut-off process. we have costs, you may be aware of this, we did share some of these details when we spoke to you about affor

>> not specifically for that one, no. >> if anything, i think the p.u.c. was highlighted for our proactive practices and our health and safety. >> ok. and for the other two, the power enterprise and wastewater? >> power cells for two irrigation districts and long-term energy agreements are on a cycle, and renewed on potentially annual basis and those conversations have not happened yet due to an extension of the agreement. >> as i recall, they said we should renegotiate our contracts, easier said than done. >> part if i may say, is that with that particular audit, it was -- it was -- there was a gray area, the recommendations were, they were really recommendations for our agencies to consider as part of renegotiation, but not so much of a directive to establish like the, they had very specific methods and i guess calculations and methodology that they wanted us to consider. but they realize that was not entirely possible, it is a situation where negotiation would take place between two parties. >> right. the reason i ask those questions, we had said as obj

alone with the central soma package of nominations that will come before this commission, each p.u.c. nominated to commence mint conservation district. this district, along with the other districts initiated under the central soma plan will be before you for your review and comment at your hearing next week. the commission unanimously approved initiation and there were a few members of the public property owners that spoke both in support and had additional questions regarding the responsibilities and benefits of locate of designation, and so we continue our outreach efforts through the central soma hearing process to keep those property owners informed. and then finally, i wanted to just make you aware although you probably have heard that the arts commission and the historic preservation commission filed a briefing for a request for rehearing for a certificate of appropriateness to remove the early days sculpture from the pioneer monument. we understand that that rehearing request will be on june 13, and that concludes my presentation unless you have any questions. thank you. >> pre

. >> well, both the state p.u.c. north bay fires to find out what caused them. most of the lawsuits claim that the utility failed to maintain and repair the power lines and that pg&e crews had done a poor job of clearing vegetation from lines. vic lee, abc 7 news. >>> now the accuweather forecast with spencer chris zploon we are winding down another cool breezy pleasant day across the bay area. it was warm in spots. let's look at live doppler 7. you can see fog touches the coastline but sunny over the bay and inland. at 24-hour temperature changes shows a cool down in the bay area locations 2 to 4 degrees cooler than yesterday. san francisco one degree warmer. 59 in the city np 63 in oakland. 81 in santa rosa. 79 at danville. 74 at san jose. and the forecast for fog shows that it's going to be quite dense during the overnight hours at the start of the day tomorrow. start of the morning commute. there will be widespread dense fog long the coastline across the bay, inland, visibility is going to be reduced. i'll show what you the rest of the day looks like in a fe

imagined with the irrigation and drainage based scope and the project is funded in partnership with the p.u.c. large landscape grant program, rec and park water conservation program, and also general funds secured by supervisor peskin. to address the closure t project will require the closure of the majority of the park for up to the year with the exception that the northwest corner of the park that is the children's play area and restroom will remain open for the duration of the project. we are exploring all ways possible to expedite the construction under the city contract code. and the yearlong closure that we have been messaging to the community is based on experience we have had at other sites that are frequently unforeseen conditions when we start digging and so it may be that we can do this quite a bit more quickly. but we are really trying to set expectations for the neighborhood because i don't want to go telling people that we other going to close it for five months and then have it closed for a year. and so we're trying to be realistic with the community. today the department has e