the san francisco p.u.c. is now taking a position that is contrary to science and is opposed by our recreational fishing and conservation members who believe that it will damage the eco systems of affected rivers, streams, and the san francisco bay and delta. the state water resources controls board's proposal for increases flows on the tuolomne and other rivers that flow into the san joaquin is already a compromise, let than what the scientific report does prepared for the proceeding, other agencies, major academic institutions, and conservation groups have stated is needed to restore healin restore healthy salmon runs. people in san francisco are world leaders of innovation in every sector, and we should be leaders for this sector, as well. we hope that the san francisco board of supervisors will reject the san francisco p.u.c.'s efforts to defeat the state water board proposals to maintain 40% of the river's flows. instead, follow the science and direct the san francisco p.u.c. to work with all stakeholder

have the support and help of our policy and government affairs group at the p.u.c. -- at the san francisco p.u.c., that is. the california p.u.c. held a closed-door deliberative meeting on monday. then, they came out and announced that a decision will not be made in this case before october 11, so i think the last time we reported to you, we told you they told us september 27. they've put it off until october 11, so we're keeping our ear to the ground and are prepared to model the impacts using our pro forma of whatever the decision is, and we'll be able to report back to you the impacts to our customers and what have you. happy to answer questions. >> i have a question. >> yeah. >> when you say there's 3800 supergreens or whatever that number is, does that include like a salesforce? does a business account include as one account? >> yeah. so that includes that account. most businesses, a building as large as that has more than one meter, but what we tend to do -- what we tend to do when we bill is those get bundled and are billed as a single account. so i think the 108,000 accounts and the 3,67

san francisco. i am a resident in san francisco supervisor peskin, thank you for working with us and the p.u.c. on this resolution. it is incredibly necessary. it will bring about the survival of this industry which is weathering on the vine. it is without question a disaster for us. we have faced to federally declared fisheries disasters for the previous two years and this year was severely curtailed. if you want to see this industry thrive we must support the state water board strong action in this regard. we will lose pier 45 if we do not act. thank you for your leadership. i appreciate it. >> hello. my name is. and i am president of the golden gate chapter of travel limited. i represents -- represent thousands of recreational anglers and conservationist friends in the bay area. we support the resolution. if supported, in supporting the state water board proposal, it is stepping up and acknowledging the importance of decades of scientific research that has been done. without enough flow, the water will get too warm and it will not have enough dissolved oxygen the floodplains will be insuffic

p.u.c. has found itself in the unfortunate position of not being in a position to advocate for the highest standards for bay protection. and, frankly, this has put san francisco behind much of the rest of the state in investing in water supply alternatives, though i believe the p.u.c. and the san francisco chronicle for that matter recognize the need to innovate in this regard. but as it stands, while we dither, other cities have recognized the need for stronger environmental protections. east bay mud has built their freeport project, giving them a new water supply if a disastrous drought hits. orange county is now the world leader in water recycling. contra costa built an offstream reservoir for water during droughts. now they are planning to expand that reservoir in a way that can help the environment and cities. santa monica's cleaning up the groundwater and storm water and is planning to be completely independent, eliminating their use of water from the bay-delta. san francisco, i think, should be leaders in this area, but, frankly, we have not been, and this resolution, pun intended, endeavors to turn the tide. the resolution before you reflects conversa

p.u.c. standards. >> director lai: is the lighting going to be standard, whatever we use in san francisco or are we designing specialized lighting for treasure island? >> we're using p.u.c.-approved mix -- fixtures for the streets. there are other areas that are a little more special with retail. in the park spaces, they're primarily more pedestrian-scaled as well. so those are unique. that's another layer of added character between them. >> i'm not sure how this works, but i would think that the lighting is a good opportunity to celebrate the unique environment of treasure island. if cost is not an issue, i would think we should explore the specialty lights around the promenade or something. i notice there are allocated space for swings. are there any play structures? >> there will be in future phases of eastside commons. >> director lai: and you mentioned sports fields. are there any other sport courts, tennis courts, basketball courts? >> it's a possibility in the sports area. that's a future phase, so we have not designed or laid them out. we'll want to coordinate with community members and see what peop

i'm a construction manager with the san francisco public utilities commission infrastructure division, and i'm here today to present the p.u.c.'s portion of the presentation on contractor safety. i'll just quickly go over the agenda of the presentation. i'll go over the p.u.c.'s qualification program, and report on the sfpuc's safety program results from our recent water system improvement program, and then, i'll conclude by summarizing our path forward for our current and -- current and future construction contracts and collaboration with the other city departments. so as part of the sfpuc's prequalification process, contractors are required to complete a candidate control information form which requests information regarding a firm's organization, financial capacity, professional responsibility, as well as questions regarding a firm's history of safety practices and our current specs include a question of osha violations, and this is to gauge a firm's experience in a specific category of expertise and experience references. our prequalification program was originally developed in support of our water system improvement pro

will be held in sacramento as opposed to here in san francisco, across the street at their headquarters. so through our external affairs team, the p.u.c. hass engaged with our mayor as well as the board of supervisors and other communities impacted by these pending decisions. last week, mayor breed joined the mayor's of oakland and san jose in issuing a joint press release that urged the cpua to adopt the proposal in this case. the mayor's letter urged the cpuc to make a decision that does not shift cost to customers and could dramatically roll back the positive efforts of the local communities with respect to climate change. we also worked with state legislators to send a letter to the cpuc which has been signed by 17 assembly members. >> commissioner pollock >> any of our representatives, san francisco's representatives? >> yes. >> all of them? >> yes. >> and finally, cal c.c.a. put a full page article in the chronicle for publication. that happened on thursday that has been endorsed by more than 120 local elected officials. that was a letter that was asking the cpuc to adopt a balanced proposal that meets the requirements of state

san francisco committed to begin the service in 2015. that's a pretty steep incline over a short period of time. california p.u.c. staff and pg&e will need to prepare information to implement this decision. at this time, we expect that the decision will be implemented starting january 1st. what are we expecting to happen as a result of the decision? we anticipate that january 1st, 2019, the pcia rate will increase for clean power sf customers and pg&e generation rate, what they charge bundled customers will decrease relative to our current levels. based on the best available information we have today, we estimate that clean power sf customers could pay 40 to $50 million more per year to pg&e. if we take no action to absorb that change. that is 25% of our forecasted revenue from the clean power sf program. these figures that i'm giving to you are based on pg&e's most recent rate forecast, which is scheduled to be updated in early november. we're anticipating that the outlook will improve with the november updates. again, based on best available information of what that update will likely show, we estimate that the

san francisco and a vibrant community >> providing excellent customer service to each other so that we can succeed together. because we're a small division out here, and we're separated from the rest of the p.u.c., a lot of people wear a lot of different hats. everyone is really adept not just at their own job assigned to them, but really understanding how their job relates to the other functions, and then, how they can work together with other functions in the organization to solve those problems and meet our core mission. >> we procure, track, and store materials and supplies for the project here. our real goal is to provide the best materials, services and supplies to the 250 people that work here at hetch hetchy, and turn, that supports everyone here in the city. i have a very small, but very efficient and effective team. we really focus hard on doing things right, and then focus on doing the right thing, that benefits everyone. >> the accounting team has several different functions. what happens is because we're so remote out here, we have small groups of people that have to do what the equivalent are of many people in the city. out here, our accounting team handles everything. they love

other projects, and san francisco also agreed to fund the california department fish and wildlife department of fishery position for five to ten years. a side note, in the folks that p.u.c. was working with at that time, they were convinced that at least the staff we were working with, was convinced that a hatchery was what was needed. so they had a bias that direction, and i think that that clouded the conversations and the work that preceded. it would identify ten priority nonflow projects, with a minimum of two special run pool projects. special run pool projects where you take one of those big gravel pits that have been created by gravel mining and try to modify the habitat so it could be a useful part of the river again. other projects were to include gravel positions, flood plain restoration and riparian planting. and districts in san francisco were required to provide another $500,000, and one of the expects at that time because it was the end of the cal fed area is other funds coming from state and federal sources would be available, and a lot of that funding never materialized, which is part of the issue we were dealing with then. the settlement agreement also