what was the reason for the postponement for pcia? >> so, we haven't -- we were keeping an eye out for the proposed decision and none has been issued. we haven't heard -- i haven't heard an explanation. pg&e sent a letter to the commission saying since we haven't heard anything, we won't be proposing new rates for the first of the year. and so we are assuming everything is delayed. the california p.u.c. will have their last commission meeting on this year of december 14. any action would require a proposed decision to be published for comment, has to stay in the public domain for 30 days and can't be acted on in that period. so we know we're at least 30 days away from any action. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioners, any other questionss? any public comment on this item? next item, please. >> next item is a quarterly audit and performance review. nancy hall. >> good afternoon, president and commissioners. my name is nancy hall, dpty chief -- interim deputy chief chief financial officer. i'm here to the review report for fiscal

they've also proposed pcia changes as well. it is a sort of roller coaster of rate changes and effects that flow through to our programme and the competitive view of our programme. at the end of the day, customers pay bills, not rates. so, what is going to matter is the bottom line on that bill. and we're very conscience of that. as we procure more energy to grow our programme, we're paying very close attention to the cost profile and running the proforma to make sure that all costs are covered by the rates we are charging. so that we are meeting ours revenue requirement from this customer base with no subsidies from our other electric rate payers. >> so, is there any other other downside, besides this potential future guessing game at this point, i guess. or like from an optics perspective that -- is there a downsides in setting these rates, reducing these rates? >> we don't see a down psi. you know, we are staying competitive, which i think is important for continuing to market the supergreen component of this programme. the

that will have an impact on our pcia and we expect a decision in early 2018. with that, i'm happy to take any questions you may have. >> supervisor fewer: any questions from commissioner? >> just as a clarification, you said that you would begin serving new customers july 1, 2018? >> yes. >> that is our plan. >> not 2019? >> we're expecting to do two more enrollments, one july 2018 and one july 2019 and by then, everyone will be enrolled in cleanpowersf in san san francisco. >> i love this. >> are there any members of the public to comment on item three? >> thank you. jeff hoaltsman. i would speak to say if you happen to know any members of the board of supervisors getting the approval of the authority to the sf puc, i know that the monetary value might be higher than usual, but it's in line with other cca programs that don't have to get the authority from boards like this and it's the only way that the pra fram could move at business pace and make -- from program could move at business pace and make progress. >> thank you very much. >> eric brooks, our city a

and then, you know, the regulatory activities are largely consumed by our pcia efforts. cpuc held work shops on january 16 and 17. on that exit fee reform, we're now preparing testimony, getting ready for hearings on that case. we've been in strong collaboration with cal c.c.a., the rest of the community choice aggregators that are operating in the state and planning to operate. so we're putting together a nice team, a good approach, i think. the staff of the cpuc, i mentioned last time, a draft resolution on resource adequacy in december and i just wanted to report that we've been active on that. the stated objective of that resolution is to avoid cost shifts from departing customers to remaining customers. remaining utility customers by aligning the expansion of c.c.a.s and the startup dates of those expansions and new programmes with the p.u.c.'s planning cycle for setting resource a adequacy obligations. we filed comment and reply comments both as the city on our own and in collaboration with cal c.c.a. so everything has been submitted to the cpuc for their considera