Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    November 24, 2014 2:00pm-2:31pm PST

2:00 pm
that in context the transbay terminal that has the terminal provider will purchase between 4 and 8 megawatts a year san francisco puc power faftsdz have capital needs totally hundreds of millions of dollars like hetch hetchy and other parts of the system and locally a and most visibly in our san francisco puc ownerships owns more than 20 thousand street lights and those street lights are in a state of disrepair they have significant deferred maintenance and until recently the puc wasv. $250,000 to main 2 hundred plus strltsz the agency thas has increased that autumn it is quite inadequate and the
2:01 pm
lack of investment in our street light has table everyday impacts but the point of interest enterprise lacks the resources bogging because it is starved of arouses not a retail provider and this legislation will help it be to a reilly provider in you want to keep this amazing power seat the puc ms. have no more customers it will provide the puc with the first time right of yours for the public and private services it will not compel the puc to be the provide but give them the first right of the refusal it will have the authority to first conduct a study then in appropriate provide power if it makes economic and environmental sense this can be for the sports arena
2:02 pm
and the large housing projects, etc. go in addition the interesting being sold it private power to augment their green house gases portfolio if more hetch hetchy power is used locally for retail customers they'll have to provide or found alternatives for g h free energy and we'll see an increase in terms of providing this energy thank you statewide level and using the clean energy will help us to meet the climate goals in 2008, the board of supervisors adapted a policy that has a system one hundred percent g h c freebie 2030 it's important to understand the magnitude it is an average water year hopefully,
2:03 pm
we'll get back to that hetch hetchy produces one-hundred 44 mel megawatt what the hours we've heard concerns this prevent choice like the end users the developers will not be able to choose between the puc or pg&e and but that's important to keep in mind today they're there are is no choice for the private property owners they only have one choice pg&e they know that the puc provides a less expensive power than pentagon in most situations in addition we've heard censures about reliability but no facts to bear that out the puc has been a power provide for more than one hundred years for municipal purposes you don't hear about the lights combout in
2:04 pm
the airport or the applications or city hall or muni muni habitation many issues but the power going out is not one of them so this is an agency that provides power that is a water and sewer provide and understands how to operate a reliable utility system this will support many goals a as a city and an important step forward i'll be offering two amendments one is a clarifying amendment offered by the puc which i have copies of here and the second is addressing language to state that should a community choice ago gas station committee join here in san francisco hetch hetchy will support that program so again,
2:05 pm
we're notably to dictate to the puc under the charter how to use and distribute the charter prohibits us from micromanaging that and probable causes us they receive preferential treatment but to make clear we support the clean power sf program and so i have copies of those amendments here and so i also want to end by thanking the power in my office for his help and puc staff for working with us with that, supervisor kim if no noticeable questions or comments i'll invite barbara hail from the sf puc to come up and speak to us been on behalf of the
2:06 pm
agency. >> thank you, supervisors barbara hail assistant with the public utilities commission i'm going to e abolishment supervisor wiener the sf puc and the entrepreneurs is the provider of the electric services to the city and county of san francisco and their hunters point shipyard phase one and treasure island we're the little power provider we serve one hundred and 50 megawatts and outside of san francisco so inside of san francisco those customers are for example, our wastewater and city hall this building and ferry this and the police and fire the public utilities outside of san francisco we serve the facilities like much of our water facilities some in milling ray and the san francisco i want
2:07 pm
in san mateo county and alameda county and the towns in the surrounding area we provide the bundled service like pg&e and fund the efficiency like the improved lighting in the customer facilities and distribute enter projects like rooftop in chinatown the health and the moscone center we're building solar on this roof of this building we have rates less than or equal to the rates that pg&e charges the customers like the utility we rely on infrastructure that is aging and in need of capital improvements our steno year capital improvement plan we'll be
2:08 pm
spending $760 million on power to 2023 those improvements are funded by the revenues from the sale of electricity on an annual basis we bring in $115 million about 85 percent of those revenues come from revenue customers and 15 percent in wholesale customers supervisor wiener we have available power to sell to additional customers for every he 10 megawatts we can avoid about a penny kilowatt hour in general fund that's one felt benefits we bring low rates for our general fund department currently, we work with the preserve customers to determine if including them makes
2:09 pm
financial sense to us for example, recently sat down with the transbay center they're our new customer we sat down together with them we ran the numbers and found it maturing arbitrarily with the transbay joint powers authority to develop our relationship this effort minimum ice cream the feasibility that is described in the legislation in sections 99.2 and in section 99.3 the legislation identified the puc as the electrical provider for all tenants on city property that's a practice that is currently performed by us admittedly unevenly we find this addition to the administrative code helpful and directing the
2:10 pm
city departments on the electrical infrastructure should help us plan to serve the departments need with the affordability and reliability on the forefront we see this legislation as one of the tools in our toolbox to help with our improvement of the hetch hetchy system and provide the types of services we've provided for san franciscan and before any questions or comments i'm available. >> thank you very much ms. hail. >> okay. so at this point, i saw mr. johnson from supervisor breed office mr. true could i see if - >> sure. >> mr. johnson so as i mentioned supervisor breed is the co-sponsor.
2:11 pm
>> thank you, supervisor wiener i'll be brief here this is a very common sense legislation to reaffirm the board and city's commitment for the green house gases power and leveraging the amazing rows we have with the hetch hetchy system. >> thank you again supervisor wiener and supervisor kim we'll ask for your support too. >> thank you very much okay. at this point, we'll opening it up for public comment do we have public comment cards? okay. i'll call the cards i have arrest john from the sierra club and ken and dee dee workman from the chamber of commerce and the leg conservation voters and hang from the green party >> thank you, supervisor this is john with the sierra club we're in favor of this
2:12 pm
legislation and we thank you for putting 2 forward i think you mentioned really the reasons in our statement as to why we supported the reduction of green house gases and more funding for the public utilities commission department can't comment on the amendments because we haven't laboratory them they seem to be in line what we asked for a the ability of the clean power sf should it come to be to buy power from that so thank you again and we hope the supervisors approve it. >> thank you, sir. >> mr. cleveland. >> good afternoon, supervisors as you know i represent the building inspections and private
2:13 pm
property owners and developers we understand why you're putting forth this legislation but we have some serious heart burn with the mandate and specifically you know we talked about mature consent we worked with sf puc and the sf puc staff and are shthsd ousted language he said those agreements will be by mature consent so beyond the city bids out it's serviced why not allow pg&e and the puc to bid for the contract, if you will, to supply the power we don't understand why you feel it is necessary for the city to simply mandate you'll take power from the city if we find it to do so we have serious problems with it
2:14 pm
supervisor and we have problems with the fact if you're going to go into a building that is a one hundred square feet we we have a city tenant that's 10 thousand one square feet it allows the sfpuc to do a power spilling that to the building we that as mature consent and agreement we don't understand why the city feels it has to take over thirty this situation and mandate if you will, and mandate a private developer and private property owner must take hetch hetchy power we object. >> thank you, ms. workman. >> good afternoon dee dee workman from the chamber of commerce
2:15 pm
we appreciate the opportunity we were given to meet with the puc staff to discuss the tint legislation, however, we continued to have concerns had or over the legislation the charming charm is supporting the consumer choice but we obituary those only from a municipal sour or source we understand it gives the city the right to provide the legislation but we disagree the city may compel citizens on private and public property to buy city power we believe that utility customers whether a tenant on public or private property can president obama in and out and to dictate when no price and serve guarantee is wrong we urge the puc to work
2:16 pm
collaboratively on a mature agreement to allow the plan that serves the puc and private sector to move forward thank you. >> thank you, ms. workman sir. >> good afternoon, supervisors and supervisor kim i'm president of the san francisco lying league of conservatism voters thank you and sxheedz office for moving that forward we are excited about this with with all receptionist for the speakers while this seems like a choice of where private ownership could choice the power source none of that in true in the age of
2:17 pm
global warming not true when we discuss the public good and the environment this is a simple issue of expanding the roll of clean air but whether this is commercial or eventually residential and nothing it more critical in the global warning so we applaud many we hope it passes we're interested, of course, in the issues raised by the clean power 70 group we are big fans of power but this legislation needs to move forward and we're they've you're bringing it forward. >> thank you very much mr. wolf. >> thank you, supervisors bryce wolf hate ashbury would you be able i stand in support
2:18 pm
with the speakers that support this legislation. >> thank you for introducing it is needed at this point one of the amendments regarding the clean power sf we know it's not implemented hopefully soon next year that will be we feel i understand at the beginning of the hearing we can't micromanage or give direction but by stating extra power going to 70 sf is doing that so we'll hope when clean power sf comes on line it will be considered for preferential treatment we can't say that in the language we can with a caveat we can do what we want but the individual residents there should be some
2:19 pm
equality with them thank you. >> mr. brooks. >> good afternoon again supervisors eric brooks san francisco green local grassroots and representing the san francisco clean energy aligns with hanging and 350 sf first of all, to thank the authenticities for this legislation it the crucial that the san francisco rules committee sells this power at recites i respectfully strongly disagree with others who came forward claiming that is a mandate we've heard from the staff this is not a mandate this is just gives the sfpuc the stools to eye it's good judgment to make a deal for logical purposeers when it's
2:20 pm
good for them and if the sfpuc decides that pg&e is the better service provider so be it this self-mandate anything to get to clean power sf it is we've been working with you all and the city attorney trying to make sure we have the language for the clean power sf two sunday's ago the huge power with the international peaceable on global warming we have to make sure this board gives the strongest possible voices when it speaks to sfpuc we feel since the city attorney was clear that makes the sfpuc has the discretion we i think it's okay to put the word preferentially it is making clear the sfpuc
2:21 pm
gets to decide as booument so we want to put that word - >> thank you very much is there is there any additional public comment on item 3? seeing none, public comment is closed supervisor kim >> thank you happy to make the motion to move this forward with with a positive recommendation as a committee report i actually want to add my name as a sponsor reading the ordinance this is the right step moving forward being in the negotiation with the puc last year, we did an open puc to see who would be the provider the puc submitted the best bid we were able to negotiate something
2:22 pm
that will be highly beneficial to the city at large and i represent treasure island where currently puc provides the power to the private residents it's one of the few neighbors i think it's great for the city for us to provide this not only does that gives us more leverage in terms of financing our infrastructure but it's important for our residents and employers to have that type of available to them speaking on clean choice agency vacation this is a program we strongly support and we would like to see move forward it is something that voters said going they wanted this as an option east of they have to pay for it, it's the right thing to do i want to
2:23 pm
thank the authors and happy to support more of those partnerships and add my name as a co-sponsor. >> so the amendments i've described we we'll take that without objection. we'll take that without objection. the amendments are adapted so i want to first of all, thank everyone on all sides and supervisor breed and supervisor kim so far co-authoring the legislation i think people think this legislation is going to change everything overnight what this will do give the puc the stool that it needs for many, many years to increase the number of retail customers to generate nor crucial revenue to meet it's infrastructure needs it's in everyone's interest for the puc to meet the
2:24 pm
infrastructure needs whether the system or going down to the street light system that benefits all san franciscans i want to address i have great respect for the beaumont and chamber of commerce i've sad with beaumont and you urged them to meet with the puc and to see their exception the puc has obedience clear it's not in the puc's interest to take on small promotions they're interested in the larger projects it's make sense for the agency and it's committed it's going to work collaborating with the customers it's not a dictate to recall kind of situation we know that the puc works collaboratively we don't have a history of customer choice 2, 3, 4 san francisco when it comes to electricity to
2:25 pm
suggest it is in any way new for people not to be able to automatically have a choice in electrical providers that's not new we have a history of monopoly their advantages and disadvantages to utilize monopolies it is what it is it is not something that is new to say that the puc will be the power provider and one particular power provider if we want to have a greater san francisco historic preservation commission with the business community about choice and electrical providers in san francisco that's a conversation we can have but we can't have it conversation with respect to the puc where you have to or have empire choice, in fact, clean
2:26 pm
power sf will provide customer choice they can stick with puc or president obama out for pg&e there's opposition to the clean power program despite support from the mayor's office and the puc again, if we want to talk about customer choice that's a whittier one to have when it comes to our electrical provider we're trying to make sure that the san francisco public utilities has the retail customer base it needs to be viable so the power enterprise is viable and the infrastructure is viable so i also know i want to respect there that i understand when you're talking about switching or potentially going with the power provider that people are
2:27 pm
not used to going with there's questions and concerns and we all want the light to go on when you turn the lights on but the puc is not like this is an unknown quantity that is an agency the point of interest enterprise that's been providing electricity inform customers for more than one hundred years and when you look at like i said at the beginning the sfo or the fire stations or police stations or the port of san francisco the power works just as well with the transbay external there's no way that supervisor kim will attest the pga has selected this if it's not one thousand confident that power is reliable i said the apprehension and the nervousness he get that but i think it will be borne out that
2:28 pm
is not how things are going to unfold we know that from a hundred years of experience so again, thank you to everyone that came out today and supervisor kim has made a motion to forward item 3 as amended to the full board with with a positive recommendation and as a committee report we'll take that without objection. thank you madam clerk call item 4. >> item 4 is a hearing requesting the municipal agency to report on the high speed rail feet. >> i'm going to get some hot water. >> we're going to take a 2 minute recess - what just for a minute we're in a very, very brief recess.
2:29 pm
2:30 pm
>> committee and madam clerk you've called item 4 correct so item four is is an oversight hearing to receive an update from the mta will the high speed rail fleet and the agencies plans to maximize the capacity and the capacity of that acknowledging fleet until we receive our next generation of light rail vehicles recently the board of supervisors approved a contract with siemens a one $.2 billion for light rail vehicles this is exciting for the muni riders it will improve our system and the capacity of the system and eventually we'll see