campbell or the p.u.c. staff. i think the frustration is with the p.u.c. as a commission not acting when we expected them to act. but obviously, we are grateful to staff for the work that they do but that's not within their control. in terms of moving forward, miss miller, when will we know if there is a possibility for a joint meeting or is there a possibility of the special meeting at the p.u.c. where this action could be taken? >> i would suggest -- i made that request on tuesday. i would suggest that we send a letter to the chair insisting on a joint meeting. i can give them, you know, late august, depending on your calendars through september for that as well as the -- the -- insisting on the special meeting for them to have questions answered. would i also have in that letter staff of lafco would be contacting them to meet to discuss questions and issues. so i think that's one thing. when i will know, you know, i actually think that it also will be helpful if i have you contact the chair of the s.f. p.u.c., in addition to me contacting ed again. super

this is a resolution from the s.f. p.u.c., and local power under contract with them for development of what i will call the renewable portion of the local in-city renewable portion of the c.c.a. program. one of the potential tasks under that contract is they've been attempting to negotiate for that scope for some months now, and it has been a back-and-forth process but one that has not yet resulted in a task being contracted for. so i'm bringing this item to you. there are certain of the task in the scope of work that we can contract for. what this is is the work that will be done to prepare the r.f.p. for the in-city renewable portion based on the c.c.a. program. we start the program and we have the ability to layer in our own resources as or our own energy efficiency programs and our own c.c.a. renewable projects. we need an r.f.p. to do that. we need a consultant to be able to plan that type of work. i will say one thing about the budget, which is the budget that is being looked at by the s.f. p.u.c. is $390,000. my autho

but perhaps if this is a broader issue, it should be taken up at the giant p.u.c. lafco meeting. >> when is the joint meeting, sfleeze >> we don't have a date. it is something we started talking with mike about today. but i am serious about going to meet on our own -- hopefully with mike, with each commissioner, to talk about what their concerns are. as to the joint meeting, i did have a conversation with the -- with ed harrington about trying to set up their special meeting in august, which is something the commission did direct them to do. and i do think we also ought to set up a joint meeting. i mean, so that if action isn't taken in august, we can be prepared to do so in september when we have the joint meeting. >> i think you're being potentially naive about the fact that coming into a intensified election season after labor day, considering the three municipal races that are up, that this only distracts from the conversation both from the mayor's office and board of supervisors and commissioners that i think opportunity has now been missed by their not being a

yes, the p.u.c. did put out its own scope believed what it is the local buildout. but when we tested it, it was a failure. it went nowhere. and so the scope that's been developed now and i suppose there could be more conversation in the next couple of weeks is calculated to work. when we took that as a community group and said this is the plan to build if your neighborhood to deliver tangible results after we begin with this kind of first flavor of this program, that gets people excited. so if you don't have this buildout, if you don't have the plan if you don't start doing the work and don't get it done, the plan is not calculated to succeed because if you don't have a local buildout there's no plan. this is what we're most excited about and we've been here on these two parallel tracks. we want to do this type of work, to have the local 3wil8dout. i'm sure you'll have these conversations with your local vendor. other than having these conversations with barbara heal, well, the first one he blessed them with his hand. that's how this scope is formed. it's feedback.

but perhaps if this is a broader issue, it should be taken up at the giant p.u.c. lafco meeting. >> when is the joint meeting, sfleeze >> we don't have a date. it is something we started talking with mike about today. but i am serious about going to meet on our own -- hopefully with mike, with each commissioner, to talk about what their concerns are. as to the joint meeting, i did have a conversation with the -- with ed harrington about trying to set up their special meeting in august, which is something the commission did direct them to do. and i do think we also ought to set up a joint meeting. i mean, so that if action isn't taken in august, we can be prepared to do

so i'm actually trying to understand the p.u.c.'s role in the rollout of that plan. with or without c.c.a. >> and by municipal, you mean the broader city, not just municipal customers like the city hall and general -- >> i mean san francisco. >> san francisco in general. yeah, i have been focused on c.c.a. to date but i am certain we can come with a presentation about that. >> speak into the mic. >> i'm sorry. should i repeat the answer? >> it's all right. but you will come back with an answer. is this the first you heard of this? i'm just curious. miss miller, through the chair to miss miller, i always feel like we go three steps forward and four steps back when we get to these junctures of dealing with contracts. so just elaborate a little bit more. i thought there was a bit of a convergence or confluence of minds on this contract with the p.u.c.. why are things glitching? >> i think through the chair, nancy miller, your interim executive officer, this is my speculation, but i do believe that you have some new commissioners that don't have the history of some of th

and with the understanding that it's been agreed that the p.u.c. will do this work. i would ask for a motion to accept staff's recommendation to aprove, give the executive officer approval or authority to enter into a contract up to an amount of 100,000 but that's not necessarily the amount that will be spent. so is there a motion? motion by commissioner avalos. is there a second. >> second by commissioner mikarimi. [voting] >> mr. chair, we have three ayes and one no. >> the motion passes. madam clerk can you call item number five? >> item number five, executive officer's report. >> 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 com

. >> the head of the state p.u.c. took a trip to sweden with pg&e executives. was this for business or pleasure? these trips have been going on for years. >> they have. and trips are paid for by the governments involved or an industry related nonprofit. and the p.u.c. chairman likes going. he's done this trip many times since he was appointed to the commission. and this interview we're about to hear was done 11 months before the explosion in san bruno. p.u.c. chairman mike peavy told me the trips he's taken are important. >> climate change is a world. it's not just a california problem. you're going do your best if you learn the best practices. >> peavy has taken 16 trips, and total costs? over $160,000. >> i cam back here and was enthusiastic about things we saw there. i couldn't do that by looking at video autos the former commissioner says the trips, particularly this sweden trip is a boondoggel. >> i think in that trip we spent a couple hours and an awful a lot of hours drinking and eating. >> brown told me it didn

the p.u.c., mayor's office of housing. if you have any questions about the project. so i think that the funding story on this park is excellent. we have funds for the acquisition. all the various life cycles of a park. we have funds for the acquisition through the eastern neighborhood impact fees, for th

the p.u.c., mayor's office of housing. if you have any questions about the project. so i think that the funding story on this park is excellent. we have funds for the acquisition. all the various life cycles of a park. we have funds for the acquisition through the eastern neighborhood impact fees, for the development through the prop 84 state grant that you allowed us to apply for several months ago on this project. we also have funds for maintenance from the eastern neighborhood impact fees. there's not too many times i think a project comes before us that has this kind of funding behind it. so all of those funding sources are from non-r.p.d. sources. i also like to highlight because we have these funding sources and the park is in such a high needs neighborhood it would score at the top of the list with our new draft acquisition policy that the parks and open space advisory committee and the department staff has been working very hard and will be bringing back before you in september. it's precisely this kind of project

the p.u.c. to try and make -- find funding to -- add as many improvements as we can to the first portion of the project. the p.u.c. may be very interested in funding some of the daylighting of the creek and the ball field renovation, guess there's an opportunity to provide water storage for further irrigation, store water to irrigate the ball fields. that's something they are interested in partnering with us on. the m.t.a. would like to partner with us for some of the improvements. thank you. commissioner buell: thank you. commissioner harrison? commissioner harrison: just a question. i noticed that there's some concern about tree removal. >> he yes. commissioner harrison: how have you addressed that? >> great. i have a couple of slides. this is an image of existing tennis court and some of the undermining of the adjacent structural walls around the tennis courts. more close up image of the park. here's the current entrance to the park. let me see if i can get to one of the ones. so the relocatio