>> good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. this meeting will come to order. this is a regular meeting of the full budget. i'm supervisor -- to my left is supervisor tang and to my right is supervisor fewer. and supervisor sheehy. supervisor yee, we need to take a motion to excuse >> yes, i would like to include supervisor kim in that motion >> yes, i would like to include supervisor yee and kim for a motion to excuse. >> tang. >> i would like to make a motion to excuse yee and kim. >> second. >> seconded by second. supervisor fewer. without objection. thank you to our talented clerk, mr. victor young and to our friend adrian -- thank you for assisting us with today's broadcast. could

you call item is. >> yes, prior starting, i would like to state that supervisor fewer has been appointed to today's meeting and supervisor yee. in announcements, [inaudible] complete speaker cards and any documents to be included as apart of the file to be submitted to the clerk. item number 1, hearing on the proposed five-year information and technology plan for fiscal years 2017-2022. and requesting the committee on information technology to report. >> i'm a sponsor of this legislation, and today we will be hearing an overview on the proposed information and communication technology plan or the ict. this plan, you should note, this plan is the guiding document for the city investment and it provides an

assessment of the city investment recommendation for the next five years. so as you can imagine, this is important. this may be adopted by the board may 1st of 2017 which is why we're hearing this item outside of our usual budget process. i would like to bring up kelly who will present this item. thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors, naomi, kelly. i would like to present the communication's technology plan for fiscal years 2017 and 2018. oh, i'm sorry, fiscal years 2017-18 through fiscal year 20 -- we present an updated strategy on the future direction of the city's technology. in the last ict plan the city renewed over 121 projects and invested in key technologies across the

city. the ict plan helped the city plan for investments towards the replacement of the public safety -- and have recommendations during the budget cycle. it led to development of two technology initiatives that are running. first is the implementation of the city wide digital service strategy. i'm pleased to share that our new chief digital service officer kerry bishop is hired and actively working with departments to redesign their services to be more accessible and user friendly. up first, she'll work with the office of sifb immaterial grant affairs on their portal as a -- working with the office of short term rental on a faster and more efficient online application process. the second initiative to come from the ict plan was a focus on shared services. the

department of technology has instituted a shared service form which acts as an advisory body where department bodies can active -- this is an important step to develop our city wide it students that have been -- decisions being made, department by department, but together, we will be working collaboratively. i think i would like to go through some of our quick accomplishments. the ict plan over the last few -- last two years, we have been invested millions towards new technology. it changes how we deliver services, although there's many different projects to share, i want to highlight few accomplishments today. with the technical existence from the department of technology and staff involvement from every city department in this -- and i mean every city department, the controller's office let the financial system replacement project which will replace our

city wide procurement system and this is on budget and on track to be completed this year. we're excited about that especially my city roll purchaser. we help the police department establish a new smartphone app called east op which offers -- anyone stopped or detained for any reason. the police began using east op in response to the bill 9 -- the treasure tax collector has made the profit to register new businesses available online in the first seven months, 30,000 businesses registered and compare -- the department of public health and technology installed a new system at sucker bird hospital last yaek. this will provide more than 3 how voice over

ip sets with 71 offering video conferencing features and these are a few -- the it plan discusses much more in detail and to share more with you, i would like to introduce the new director, jaime who will walk you through the remaining sections of the plan. >> good afternoon, i'm director of coit. i'll go through the remaining section of the it plan with you all. and just to restate what the purpose of the ict plan is. it's a five year strategic document for the city's document and has two purposes of identifying areas of strategic importance -- and this is a financial document

that guides our decisions during the budget cycle as we review budget request. it's put into five different sections where we review the vision in the city and reduce the accomplishments, looking at different technology leaders, including department technology, data, mayor's office's innovation. coit, 311 and the new digital office and how they're contributing to the digital operations in the city and the next decisions is the goals of the city and strategies and recommendations for the next five years. >> looking at the vision for city technology, through our discussions with city leadership and our surveys and discussions of stakeholders, san francisco technology supports egt as an accessible service for every visitor and business and employer. this is an important vision statement

to say that technology -- it's to improve better service delivery. following up with the vision, there's three important goals, each with various sub strategies within them, and included in the ict plan document, there's several performance measures that we'll track each of these going forward to see how the city is going forward. goal number one is to support critical infrastructure which is the highest priority goal for the city. and this is where we've identified major projects like financial system replacement project and the future upcoming replacement to public replacement and public radio. within the goal one, we have four separate strategic initiatives which is the network communications and data -- and our disaster recovery efforts and each are

fundamental to supporting our goal of supporting and maintaining critical infrastructure city wide. under goal number two, we seek to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of city technology and operations. and underneath there, we have four separate initiatives ongoing as well including the strategic sourcing of procurement in the city led by contract administration and improved hiring technology as are increasing growth in the city. we need to have more and more professionals so that's led by the department of human resources and we have a data resource to improve data share and how we're using data operations and improving our customer services and creating central portals so when residents come to the city, that they can get the services they need and that is led through 311. our third goal is

increased transparency to city services and city technology. this is led by two different efforts and the first is the digital service's team led by kerry bishop who was recently hired and her purpose is to help reimagine how we interact with the city and look at the experience for resident and businesses -- and improve that process through digital means. the other major initiative is digital inclusion whereas we continue to create new technologies and have more of a digital society, making sure that all of the residents in san francisco do have access to the internet and know how to use these services whenever they need to. looking forward to the next two years, we have identified several different initiatives that guide and focus onto improve our technology. and the first is the city employee's experience. this is a direct result from our previous it team that led to the digital services strategy where we think how

we're delivering service and create more engagement with them. the city employee experience flips that and how city employees use technology and how we can better use technology to improve technologies on our end. we're looking at on boarding to see how we can train new employees and makes them adapt into city services quickly. the next stage initiative is reviewing the strategic procurement in the city and this is a seen as a pain point when bringing on new technologies so over the next two years, we will be looking at the current legislative framework, administrative code and other ways we can potentially help the procurement process. the next initiative is improving data sharing architecture. we want to have 54 different departments or technology services and we want to reexam

how we can improve data sharing and how we use operations in the city. coit passed two different policies around private security and disaster preparedness and response recovery. these are two fundamental issues we need to be concerned about and incorporate more risk management and over the next two years we'll look how we improve our data systems. moving onto the financial side of it plan. coit reviews all technology projects that are over $100,000 and through our process of public meetings and review of all the projects, the goal is to encourage facilitation. looking over the next five years, we recommend increasing the coit allocations, 10% for a total of 184 million over a five year

timeframe. coit allocation is put into two categories and it's -- this allocation has been used to fund a financial system replacement project, the public service safety and radio replacement project and will be used to fund the replacement property assessment and tax system. all these projects are defined as multi year and multi-million project that takes massive resources to change how we're using technology on an enterprise scale. over the next couple of years, we'll see this scale wrap up and looking at the public safety and public safety radio project continue to be implemented and beginning the project and the property tax assessment. the department of public health will be implementing the [inaudible] records project. although no general fund money will be used from the coit allocation to support this project. we'll maintain records and track this

as it goes because it does have significant changes to the way the department and health will be doing business. looking towards the future, there are several major it projects that we'll be investigating and scoping out for possible support. i will be reporting back on this on the next ict plan. the first major project we're considering is revoicing voice over protocol. our phone system needs continued support, we're investigating whether voice is an effective solution or offers cost savings to improve our operations, and we'll be looking at customer relationship management systems, specific to 311. many departments are using other crm systems to track how they're engaging with residents and businesses and this is a way so we could potentially work together and have better data saving. we'll scope out the voting system replacement project where the department of

elections current system will be end of term in 2018. and so we'll be investigating replacing that with another system that uses open source or open source software as apart of that. finally we'll be investigating the city's role in supporting broad ban going forward. supervisor farrell has several motions to improve universal access to the internet, so we'll be investigating how much support coit will be on that. moving onto the other allocation is the annual allocation where we review individual project request each fiscal year. over the five year timeframe, we're reviewing -- we've reviewed 152 projects and each budget cycle, we review each one to see prior [inaudible] funding and through the snap shot through the it program, the request for

general fund support far exceeds any allocation available every year. and so we'll continue having to prioritize the annual cycle. finally recommendations, we have six recommendations to the board and the mayor to consider. first is to grow the it allocation by 10% annually and the second is continue to support coit prioritizing projects that align with plan goaled and the third is making sure that each project that is funded through major it project is proceeded through a planning scoping phase. to better understand the life cycle and cost returns. the 4th is coit sequence -- risk project and readiness and cost effectiveness and this is required since it projects are

in far- the 5th recommendation is that coit should continue to support technology projects that enhance existing services, and really improve the way that the city is providing operations, and finally the city should set aside a separate funding source for the continued refreshment it hardware which is a separate and important ask, the departments continue to ask every year. if you have any questions, i would love to answer questions from the it plan. we'll track performance of our progress toward the strategic goals going forward and sharing that information on the coit website which is at coit.org. >> i didn't catch your name. >> masias. >> are you the new director of the department of dtis? >> no. >> is that the vision infield? what's your role? i'm trying to figure out who is doing what?

>> jaime is the director of coit. >> got it. >> information technology. the director -- the new director of technology, we have received 155 applications. we are currently working with a recruiter to narrow it down and plan to interview in april, so hopefully by the time our budget process starts, we'll have a new director of department of technology and my city administrator and chief financial officer is the director at dp. >> you might want to answer the questions. coit has been around. it has been a challenged program since i have been on the board. i remember former supervisor chiu ragging on coit. i don't want to throw my fellow departments under the bus. he's had issues with technology. >> technology, i'm thinking out

of term. i thought it was coit. i was looking for a series of questions, but if i got my departments confused, i don't want to ask the questions so i'll refrain and i'll let supervisor tang. >> i think it's all relevant in the context of coit. but you know, my -- when i was talking to the previous director, he wanted to get our city's -- kind of the basics down. before you go and do flashy things and so i noticed that on the financial recommendation for item 4, it says that coit should think when funding certain it -- and you know, i guess looking at those criteria, i was wondering, i think it was really important, what the previous dt director

said, which is we need to get the basics down before we can do anything major. is that going to be one of the evaluation criteria rather than just the basic risk of cost effectiveness. >> mathia will address that issue for you. >> sure, i like to comment because the two major it projects we're doing right now, the finance replacement project and the public safety radio projects, those are large infrastructure projects and they were considered because they were about to fail or they need today have support. during that evaluation of risk, the city and coit decided these are major projects that needed to be prioritized and funded. that's how we're incorporating infrastructure into that process of really identifying what are the biggest risk because without the infrastructure, we can't do anything else. >> i'm glad to hear that. it wasn't highlighted in the

presentation, but if i'm hearing that's the priority, that's good to hear. >> thank you. colleagues, to my right, any other questions or anything? no. okay. all right, thank you for your presentation. it's good to see you and to meet you. let's see. let's take this matter to public comment. ladies and gentlemen, if you're interested in speaking on this item, please come up at this podium. you'll have two minutes to speak. seeing none. public comment is closed. thank you. is there a motion on this item? do you want to continue or file the hearing? we can file? >> controller's office, you can file this item today and then it will come back as a different item, it would come back as an action item in a

couple of weeks. speaker: i look forward to the detail when's it comes forward. i'll make a motion to file this hearing. >> thank you. >> we can take that motion without objection. >> we need a second with a five-member committee. >> we need a second on this speaker: second. >> all right. without objection. that was sandy fewer who seconded by the way. could you call item 2, please. >> item number 2, hearing on the proposed ten year expenditure plan for fiscal year 2018-2027 and requesting the control's office to report. >> thank you for joining us today and colleagues, we're going to be hearing an overview of the senior capital year for 2018-2027. this plan is a guiding document for the city's infrastructure investment and this assess the city's capital

need and identifying the investment level required for us to meet those needs and it provides funding -- provides a strategy and a financing plan for the city for the next ten years so we can deliver on these infrastructure improvements. this is many critical needs for the city, and while the investments identified in the plan might not be immediate or sexy, sorry, brian, but they are differently important. i think we all agree to that. it lays out the future of our city and also it lays out the identity of our city. we're talking about critical investments like central -- major developments that are shaping the look and feel of our city. these are a few of the things that will truly shape the city for the next several years so i want to emphasize how important it is for us to be discussing this item today. and with that, i would like to bring up naomi

kelly who will bring up ryan strong. all right, thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors, naomi city administrator. it's my pleasure to present the fiscal year plan 2018 through fiscal year 2027. as you mentioned supervisor cohen, i know you are excited and all the other -- libraries, cultural institutions and other places all over san francisco that's owned by the public. this recommends a record level of $35 billion in investments over the next decade and these funds will improve san francisco -- seismic repairs and strengthening utility systems and safer streets for pedestrian and bicycles and drivers and more affordable housing. this plan is fiscally

constrained. strategic -- it's a strategic blueprint for a more sustainable san francisco. it includes plans to address the multi generational need to fortify the c-wall which protects three miles of our vibrant water front. it's assets in those who rely on it for home, recreation or travel and they're vulnerable to the meet threat of an earthquake damage and -- the plan keeps us on track for smoother pavement by bringing the city's pavement index score to 70 by 2025. its highest level in nearly 30 years, major projects range -- we're working on the replacement of the animal control shelter and the replacement ambulance deployment facility, repurposing space at laguna hospital, improving the sewer and emergency water systems and

and retro and fire police stations. the citizens of san francisco are showing their support for the plan and city's capital plan -- over the past 8 years, voters approved $3.5 billion in go bonds for approvable housing, hospitals, parks, police, firefighters and transportation and streets. this investment is more than any other time in the city's history. the work -- the work to draft the plan was done in a fiscally and transparent manner without increasing the tax rates or posing an undue burden to the fund. it met strict standards and leverage public investments for project delivery and funding. as i mentioned earlier, it's investing in the c-wall. we're imposing a $3 million obligation bond to fortify that wall. we also looked at -- we are addressing key challenges by striking the right balance between caring for existing

aging infrastructure and investing in new projects that accommodate a rapidly growing population. we're dealing with the rising construction cost in the market and we're continuing our efforts to increase the city's resiliency against earthquakes and sea level rise. it is my pleasure to call up ryan strong who is taking on a new role of both the chief resilience officer, but capital planning. he's working with capital planning and he will be presenting the rest of the plan. >> thank you. welcome back, mr. strong. >> thank you very much. good afternoon members of the board of supervisors, chair cohen. i really appreciate -- this is the 9th capital -- 9th tenth year capital plan i have had the pleasure of presenting to this board and i have a copy of the original one here and the new one is twice as big. so

we've actually increased and it's a $35 billion capital plan. the first was $15 billion. it's twice as much of where we started. part of that is we've done a much better job capturing different needs and leverage resources. the capital plan, and the capital planning committee is the only place really where the city comes together and talks about infrastructure in a hole list tech manner. that role is really important just in the amount of collaboration and coordinations we have seen with departments and other agencies as well. the city administrative says it's a -- it's one of the best practices we've had other jurisdictions looking to follow our lead. by considering the capital plan, we state what we fund and do

not fund. and that's important to keep in mind. we also have created a transparent process where we have public meeting on all these different items. the capital planning committee in of itself is one of the few committees that has legislative and executive branch reputation on it and it provides executive information on the state facilities and recommendations to you to make the decisions around house the capital plan and how these projects move forward. so very briefly, the accomplishments and we have more identified in the presentation. you know, we -- over the past, you know, naomi mentioned $3.5 million. we

invested $10 billion so that includes revenue bonds and the work at the puc and other projects moving forward. the lion share of this is to address resiliency and in addition, we know we've also managed to increase the amount of funds, the general fund has been putting into capital. i think supervisor tang was asking the it plan and taking care of what we own. when we think about pay as you go program, we take care of how renewals and we have manage today grow that significantly over the past -- since i started doing this a little more than ten years ago and it's one of the key policies in the capital plan that we managed to, for the most part, honor and move forward. i would say that we also -- at the city and the capital plan contributed, i think so the city bond rating and the

controller can attest to our bond rating are as high as it has ever been. we know the a rating -- they ask a lot of questions of our capital plan and the assets we're funding and those we aren't able to fund and we're proud of that rating and proud of moving the city toward more - to having really strong fiscal health. >> quick question. what is the city's bond rating? since it's the highest? >> i'll refer to the controller. >> supervisors, there's three ratings and they use different scales, but we're a double a plus. it's across the board. we have a table available on our website to give more information. triple a is the highest, but mr. strong is correct. our current rating is as high as it has been in the history. >> real quick, controller, what are the factors that

contributed to having a high bond rating? >> a whole host of factors have contributed to things -- improvements have been the adoption in some of the multi-year plan. the fact that we go through a process to assess longer term needs has been a major positive strength. it's a reserved policy adopted by the mayor and the board since the last recession were significant improvement for us in terms of rating agencies. and the forecasting process we go through -- look out over five years as apart of the five-year forecast and to do that habitually. it's relatively new. and then the thing that's less about our management decisions in the building and more about where we are is the diversity and the strength of the san francisco economy, which can't be underestimated in this math.

>> thank you. >> moving onto slide four instead of funding overview. it's a $35 billion capital plan. $5.2 billion -- those include the departments you would find in a city, so around public safety, city and the county i should say. some of our health department programs, recreation and park and those facilities. it's around $19 billion when you talk about -- when you add in our enterprise departments, those you know, are the mta, port, puc, sfo, you know, puc and sfo are making large investments in their infrastructure and the port is moving in that direction and some of the general fund dollars that we have are going to be helping to fund the projects out of the port. we have $11 billion in external agencies and these are agencies we do not have direct control

over or authority over, but we coordinate and collaborate with on a regular basis. that includes city college and the school district, the redevelopment agency or now the office of community infrastructure and investment, housing authority, you know, the county transportation authority, those types of agencies. the next slide shows the funding sources. if you're looking at the general fund department program, you can see the go bonds and the general fund, the general fund is in the blue, it may be hard for some to see, but those two programs make up, you know, 2/3 of our overall spending. for the general fund department is not as high although we have critical federal grants that are coming in especially around our bridges and we have other debts around participation which you'll get to later in the presentation. if you look

at our enterprise department, you'll see the federal and state picks up considerably. they work out at the mta and at the airport. so i mentioned it's a constrained capital plan. we have a number of policies that we agree to when we put this document together to help with the structure and what we're able to fund. the pay as you go program which you consider instead of our cash program is -- it's a policy or the policies around that where we agree that we'll be growing it at 7% a year. in previous times, we were growing it at 10%. we started at 50 million and it's up to 128 million in the current year budget. next budget, this is taking -- again, this is becoming a bigger percentage of the discretionary budget and it's

why we started having discussions to slow that down -- the growth of that down a little bit. and i have to say the flexibility is hampered by the set asides that has occurred. if we look to the fourth bullet, we have a park and rec set aside. they have committed that to capital which we're happy to see, but it does reduce flexibility. the more recent street tree set aside has reduced some of our capital only by 5 million in total. but again, those few things combined, you know, make it -- can make it challenging when things shift in our program. >> on your sheet, you have a note that says escalated by 5 percent for the remainder of the plan. can you explain that to me? >> yes, when we're looking at construction cost over -- if we look back over the past 50 years or so, on average,

escalation for construction cost from year to year has been 5%. so it's like your consumer price, it's cpi for construction cost. we're not as high as health cost have been going up, but we are higher than your normal cpi. so when we're -- when we're looking at these programs, we're escalating them forward and when you look at the numbers, even the $35 billion number, we're working in that escalation. does that answer your question? >> yes, thank you. >> and i should also say that while the pay as you go program, we're using it to take care of what we own. they're critical enhancements that creep up every year and an example is telegraph hill when we had a rock slide. this is trueing up our plan with our budget. we know we have to spend a certain amount of money on enhancements so what we have done, we put that into our pay as you go program as well. the

lining share -- it's paid out of our gop bond or certificates of efforts participation program. the capital plan started this concept and we've been putting it in practice of having a capital planning fund. the idea that we have money that we're setting aside to do pre-development and understand projects before they go to voter and before they come to this body so we're speaking a lot more with confidence about what we can achieve and that has made a difference to move these bonds forward. >> when do we start the pre-construction project development? >> that started back in 2006-2007. we had a year -- this is under former mayor newsome, but we had a 30 year

surplus on the budget and we did funding for the hospital rebuild. that $24 million we spent on that hospital ended up enabling us to be one of the few hospitals in the state, if not the only hospital in state that delivered that budget on time. that was $887.4 million project. so we have been doing that and committing to that ever since that time and that's usually when we're bringing go bonds to you, we try to make sure we -- done to the greatest extent. speaker: i see, thank you. >> so the next -- this slide, the next slide to show you more detail on the pay as you go program. we split it into sort of things we have a fixed allocation for, which we agreed we're going to fund it at 100% or a certain level. of the $128 million in this budget or

of the $137 million in next year's budget, this is how it breaks out. though i would just mention now we're looking at ten years so we're looking at the full ten-year capital plan. so routine maintenance, i should say this is the ada improvement plan and ada public -- that's our curb ramp, those are things we agree we're going to fund at 100%. street resurfacing which we know is an important issue, that's a net score of 70. that's the idea that we want to do around streets. that's the goal we've had that we've been committing to. the remaining dollars, um, go toward right of way renews which are bridges, guard rails, stairways and things in the right of way and facility renewals which are going to be roofs, hbac systems, exteriors

and fire panels and all those things that make up a facility and you need to keep in good working order to get the full life out of the facility or out of the building. and those you can see respect -- you know, we're restrictively funding at 59 percent. i'll talk a little about the implications of those in the next two slides so the next slide talking about the sale's measure impact. we talk about this because the street -- it was relying on $33 million that was going to come from the sales tax measure. the sales tax measure did not pass. and as a result, we know that we're going to be coming back to you to talk about how we fill that gap, how that affects the capital planning program or the capital budget. we did want to show you though, around street resurfacing if you look at that diagram here, you can sort of see the

pavement connection in escort is the dark line and we should say 70 -- net score of pavement is a c, maybe better than that because the highest point you would get is an 85. you would not want to have 100%. that would mean every street would be brand new. the goal is to reach a pci, potentially of 85 at some distant -- you know, some time in the future. but you can also see the funding sources and i think that's important. and that's what we wanted to show. earlier on, we started at the high levels and a lot of the money that was invested in streets would come in bunches -- in big bunches from the federal government and other sources. we invested a lot of money in streets before the 1984 democratic convention. that's the last time we made big investment in our street. our net score was going down, you can see the funding levels were relying upon a lot of -- a

lot of local sources, some of the sources were prop k and we have prop aa. now we have prop k which is coming through your half crepts or quarter cents sales tax. as we've done the capital plan, we have increased the capital fund, and that's the green bar. those are -- the [inaudible] bar was the gop bond. you can see that local general fund, that brighter green is taking up quite a bit, the idea was we were going to -- i would say the impact of not being able to fund these streets is the pavement condition score dropped significantly. this is

something we track very closely, and something that we think is of great interest to the mayor and yourselves and the other members of the board. the next slide shows the impact of the funding levels on our facilities and our right of away renewal program. the two bars at the bottom are hard to see, but they represent the blue -- the blue is proposed funding. the red is the annual need. and then the gas red above is backlog and again, the situation here is that we are still not funding our annual need for renewals. and in so doing, it means that the backlog is growing and you can see our backlog grows in the first seven, eight -- through the capital plan period. part of that is because we're able

to grow or capital plan at 7%. and we know that escalation is going up at 5%. once we hit fiscal year 2031, then you can start to see the backlog will start to level off some and will begin to -- you can't see it on this chart, but it will begin to come down. this, again, it's something we're focused on. how can we reduce the backlog levels to this great extent as possible. moving out of the pays awe go program, this program gets a lot of attention from our capital plan and these are the bonds the city is going to be proposing over the next ten years, the go bond -- this includes the -- it does not include the school district bonds and those are in our capital plan, but they're not represented on this table. it

doesn't represent bart bonds and those other things. city administrator kelly mentioned the c-wall fortification effort, this is a new bond. we did have i vulnerablity study. we know we have sea level rise that's further down into the future, but we really know that with the likely hood of a large earthquake in san francisco from the hayward or the san jose faults we need to address the sea rise faults and that has been introduced into the -- parks and open space, earthquake safety or we call our easter bond program, public health, and transportation, they're apart of regular programs, so every six years, five or six years we bring these bonds back, really until we feel like we're at a point

that we reduce those needs in those areas. park and open space, the last one was in 2012. we plan to do another one in 2019. easer, the last one was in 2013. another one scheduled for 2020. transportation, we agreed through the transportation task force, we would do a $500 million bond every ten years so that's why transportation is in 2024. if you go to the next chart, you can see how we're maintaining our constraint. the constraint we have is we issue new bonds as we retire old ones so it means the tax rate does not go up. so by having that constraint, we're able to sort of layer a new bond as we retire old ones so the grayish bar at the bottom, those are bonds issued and sold where we're paying them back. and often our bonds are 20-year

bonds but they can be 25 or 30 years. most are in the 20 year range. the darker bar, the light gray one, those are bonds passed by voters. we passed bonds but we won't sail -- we won't sale the bonds or issue them until we're ready for construction. the green one is the bonds we're planning for in the future of the that includes the park bond -- the green one is the port bond. and so forth that are layered on top. we work closely with the controller's office and the department of public -- under that red bar which is the tax rate, the out of warrant tax rate that shows up on citizen property tax bill. if we go to the general fund program, somewhat of a go bond program,

we have a constraint and that's to limit the debt service that we're going to use general fund dollars for to three and a quarter percent of discretionary fund revenue. so the state of california spends more than 3.25 percent on their debt service. we've created this constraint and i think it's codified in our city wide financial policies. the idea with this program is that there's certain things that are just not going to be feasible through a general obligation bond. these are also thing that's are critical that we really need to take care of and address that we have a responsibility for. so we have 101 grove. that's our worse seismically buildings and it has administrative staff in it. we really want to move people

out of that building as soon as we can and we have a similar situation with the admin building. if you look at 2019, we start talking about county jail number two and the hall of justice. a lot of these funds are working toward how do we address the needs in the hall of justice? if we were to recreate the hall of justice, we would need a building over 1.2 billion square feet of -- 1.2 million feet of space which is almost 2/3 of size of the da tower downtown and it's something too hard for us to take on in one bite. it's difficult to find land and an area to do that in. and we know that we have, you know, critical functions that are operating in that space. some we don't have control over like the courts and county jail and

so forth. so that's general fund debt program. you can see on the following slides, similarly the red bar is the three ask a quarter percent discretionary -- we try to stay below. you can see the challenge of this program, and these dollars compete with operating dollars and they compete with our pay as you go program dollars i was talking with you about a minute ago. so it's we want to be careful how we use these funds. you can see the programs that we have planned for it -- because we know there's a potential for a recession and changes at the federal level, which we know you had a hearing on the other day, we also reserve some of

the cop moneys where we may need to come to you and say we think we need to do civic participations to make up for the fact we're not going to have as much general fund cash on hand. so that's the concept behind that program. and yeah, i failed to mention it on the previous slide, but we have set aside -- it's $50 million a year between fiscal year 2020 and fiscal year 2022. really reserving that capacity. hopefully we won't need it. the remaining slide and i won't spend significant time on this because i think administrator kelly covered it. this is economic development, general government, you know, all kinds of different programs, health and human services from housing to the hospital that we mentioned. infrastructure and streets, again, and i should

mention that rachel is here from public works supporting us because potential for questions around street resurfacing but the work that public works does around our capital plan and the important partnership we have in working with them on these projects. and finally there's also public safety, recreation, culture education, and transportation. i know that's a lot to chew on. so i will leave it at that and happy to take any questions that you may have. >> all right. is -- you've put a lot out there. thank you for your presentation. supervisor tang. >> thank you, so much, mr. strong and of course everyone who work oz the capital plan. it's a lot of work but we have to think long term and he is specially with plans that cost a lot of money. thank you for that. going back to slide 10,

you had mentioned that you know, on the schedule line up our go bond program that transportation cycles every ten years but at a higher dollar amount. he didn't have time to follow or i don't know if it happened at the hearing that supervisor breed called regarding the sfmta ability to spend on the go bond, so given that, and that is a reality, has it ever been discussed whether this $500 million even though it's cycling every ten years is right level? >> yeah, i mean, i think that -- there have been a number of discussions at the capital planning committee on concerns around the ability -- the quickness with which those funds are being spent and we know it's an issue, i believe it's an issue that go back has taken up. our general bond oversight committee that oversees the spending of these funds, we have not, you know,

gotten into details with them about whether or not you know, a bond in 2024 at $500 million is the right amount as of now. i mean, i think that we are actually waiting and we're -- every year they have to come and report to us, and i think given the amount of needs and the transportation sector, we're confident the $500 million is needed in that area, and it's needed for the thing that's were identified in that bond. i think what we -- i think the capital planning committee perspective is we need to work with them on how to -- to better spend those dollars and i think peskin has talked about this. this is the first time they have done a go bond at this level, the department there. they haven't done a go bond -- i don't know that -- there was one introduced in 1966. so they

had not really, unlike public works, who is working with other departments or even rec and park and "space and if you remember the rec and park, their 200 0 -- the 2000 bond, it took them a while to spend that. they're betting at moving their projects forward. i think -- there's growing pains there, but i think it's a good question and it's something we're watching and you know, watching closely. >> thank you, and i'm sure that all of us will followup more deeply with smta more. there's a huge need and all of us supported the transportation bond. it's the largest amount, so i wanted to make sure that we are -- the department is actually able to spend it down and address the needs that all of our constituents write us about everyday. and also going to slide 13, in terms of the

debt capacity and so forth, i see there has been quite a bit -- starting in 2019, it looks like -- i think it's 2020. i can't tell if it's orange or red. i'm sorry. in any case, i see that starting around 2019 or 2020, there's a lot of capacity that you've carved out for hall of justice and the demolitionen closure, prisoner -- demolition encloser and prisoner -- it's important we have workers, employee and prisoners who are in a safe building, but i know there are still discussions about what to do with that site and what a new facility would look like in materials of with the prisoners and so you know, how is that conversation going? again, i see there's a place holder here which is good, but are we moving forward in those condition and i don't want to

get into a whole dive on, you know, that topic right now, but just what's the latest update on terms of where we are in progress? >> sure. no, so there's a community process that met for six or seven months and they made a number -- i think, we're waiting for those recommendations to come out. there should be coming out soon, the results of that community effort, but really we're looking at doing a number of sort of operational-type improvements. some -- and some work out of san francisco general hospital as well. and part of that is to understand where the jail population is going, and one of the challenges with any of our capital projects is we're trying to look forward into the future and trying to understand what the service levels are going -- or going to require down the road. that effort, you know, has gone -- we're waiting for the final report, we want to give some time for

some of those recommendations to bear out. to see how they work. and to see what that does with the overall number of admins we think we're going to need to house in the future and that's part of the reason for some of the delays or for pushing it back, and the other reason is that quite frankly, these projects take a lot of time to plan and to move forward, so we know that you know, for instance when we're not able to move forward with the previous proposal we had taken to the state, it means we would -- i wouldn't say start completely from scratch, because we had a lot of information, but go back and look at what's going to happen with some of these recommendations around the operations side. how is that going to impact our capital site and how can we put together a program that makes the most sense moving forward. we did make some decisions, for

instance, in previous capital plans, we were going to move forward with addressing the jail as soon as possible and we're going to address the admin functions and we're going to take the admin functions as soon as we can as well as the jail functions. we talked about setting a goal to get out of the hall of justice in two years. we're moving toward that goal. some of this may change based on whether or not we can move some of these departments out sooner, into lease space. we know the hall of justice is going to top priority in our capital plan since it was put together. we know we want to get out of that building as soon as possible. and i think this plan, you know, reflects the community process where it is, it reflects us setting aside capacity to make sure that if it doesn't work out, we have money in the program to take care of the, you know, the inmates so they are not

forgotten or not left behind. but it's really sort of the latest, i think, thinking about how we can do that, there's a grant, i should mention, so we're going to be -- we're applying for a grant and waiting to hear from a grant from the state to do a bunch of renewal work at county jail one and two which is not in the hall of justice. that's the new jail adjacent to it. it's 20, 25 years itself and has a lot of needs. speaker: when that final report comes out, i think we're going to be interested in seeing what those findings are. if you can keep us posted on those recommendations, that would be great. in terms of street repaving and one of the top things we probably get complaints about and i understand it's under the pay as you go program and we have not identified a long term funding force, so can you share

what are our thoughts going forward because we cannot sustain this -- >> i think so. so the mayor's office -- melissa is here so she can come. the mayor's office is putting together a transportation task force. i believe we have a schedule laid out for that. that's going to be moving forward and i think we're going to be looking for them to make some recommendations around some potential revenue sources. do you want -- >> sure. >> thank you. i'm melissa, director of budget. president breed asked president peskin and the mayor has asked chief of staff steve to work together to call the transportation task force back together and to make recommendations to the mayor and the board on how do we move forward and that will include, also in addition to street paving, there was money to be

-- >> thank you. all right. thank you. colleagues, any other questions for mr. strong? no, all right. i think supervisor tang covered most of my clarifying questions. so i think we're going to go to public comment. thank you for your time. all right, ladies and gentlemen, would you like to call on item 2. please come up. seeing no public comment. public comment is closed. all right. colleagues, the matter is back in our hands. the same process. got it. supervisor tang. >> sure. so i'll make last comments and in terms of -- we have a board president who sits

on this committee, but i encourage you to follow what happened at the planning committee because it's important to keep an eye on the long term projects because they do have -- they can have daily impacts to all of us. it's something i wanted to state to colleagues. so with that said, i'll make a motion to file the hearing. >> all right. a motion has been made. is there a second? seconded by supervisor sheehy. you can take that without objection. thank you. >> all right. mr. clerk, any items before this body? >> that completes the 1:00 budget and finance meeting. >> thank you, we are adjourned.

>> very much smaller allocations for public safety grants for example, and at least in the fortunate flows, much smaller for transportation.

>> not all is flowing to the city itself. some payments are come directly to either residents or service providers from the federal government. and those are going to be outside of the numbers we talked about here. so a couple of examples of that, well, parts of the ihs program and home supportive home worker -- there's a chunk of money that flows to providers as wages. that's $200 million in directive support outside of the $1.2 billion that i talked about. cal fresh, food stamp workers are on the city budget in support of federal money, the benefits flow to recipients s san franciscan was receiving $5 million as apart of that

benefit. other benefits in the city benefit and it depends on city money. the school district receives $60 million in federal funds as apart of their budget and the city college receives $6 million directly from feds and then students receive $22 million a year in federal financial aid. the housing authority, director smith is here, should you have questions, the housing authority receives $76 million. it depends on federal money for their operations in particular there's a host of other non governmental entities here in the city that receive funds from the city outside of our budget process. to highlight a couple, we talked earlier this week regarding art's organizations that received money directly from the national endowment for the arts. about $6.4 million is our current estimate of how much those organizations are

receives. usf is dependent on federal funds for their research and operations and a host of other entities -- we've listed at the bottom of the page the organizations that received more than $10 million as of the most recent years from the feds. >> so looking ahead to some of the key risk areas and really they fall in three buckets in materials of how we're thinking about it, the risk related to the executive order regarding sanctuary cities and federal funds, risks created by risk known to the -- departments can speak in more detail. first,

the sanctuary city. as you're aware on january 25th. the president issued an executive order that generally indicated in a fairly brief memo, the goal of withholding federal funds from sanctuary cities like san francisco and over 200 other cities in the u.s. the executive -- i think the key points for today, and city attorney can provide you more information on this in closed session, but the key point for today is really that executive order is not clear about what federal funds are really intended to be covered by it. this city has -- it's almost certainly unconstitutional for the site government to withhold all federal funds from this city and withholding some of the funding we receive from the feds, the city has strong constitutional arguments that that's prohibited and the city attorney has filed a lawsuit to

prevent the used reductions from going into place. that lawsuit pending, but even during the 60 days since the executive order has been issued, their no clarity from the federal government by what's intended by it. there's a lot of uncertainty. a risk and uncertainty. we'll be keeping you up to speed on this as as the case progresses and also as we receive, if we do, degrees -- if we receive direction and what that executive order means. second, issue area. the federal budget itself which establishes most of the appropriations that flow to us. we're at an early stage where we're trying to understand even what's being proposed. as you're aware, the

federal budget process starts with a budget overview that's presented by the president in march which is called the skinny budget. that skinny budget eliminates $54 billion in domestic spending to increase military spending by an amount. the key thing i like to leave the committee with on this is that they call it a skinny budget because there's few details in it. the whole document is less than 50 pages long. it provides very -- it's almost like a blueprint of what the president will later intend to submit. but you get very -- you get some clarity about what's likely to come, but not specifics and so there are some cases where we can look into the skinny budget and understand what the local indications might be, but it's not clear. the budget timeline will go on for many months and the president releases a

blueprint in march. the president, then typically released a more detailed budget to congress in may and june. that will have of moesh information about what the president is proposing and we'll understand what those impacts will look like if they are adopted, but the congress takes time to adopt and amend the president's budget and those amendments are often substantial. the deadline for the adoption of the federal budget is october 1st. that's when their budget process -- that's when their fiscal year starts. we will likely have more clarity there as we work through the budget process in june and july at the board of supervisors, and congress won't have acted by the time we adopt a budget which creates planning problems for us. it's worth noting that congress rarely meets this october 1st deadline. i think in the last 40 years, congress adopted all of their appropriation bills by

october 1st four times. so, and the last time they did that was over ten years ago. and so it's very likely that even by october 1st, we won't really have final clarity on exactly what the federal budget will look like and therefore what the implications for us might be. we have a long road ahead of us in materials of understanding what those risk look like. a few of the areas where we can look into skinny budget and understand the amplifications and i'm not going to dwell here because you have departments that can speak more eloquently to this and in detail. there's implications in hud that has implications for the housing authority and in particular you can see in the skinny budget, the president is proposing to eliminate the community development block program nationwide. that's where it's $16.5 million in programming here in san francisco. home is also proposed to be eliminated. i believe $4.2 million. in

department of transportation, skinny budget, you can tell the president has proposed to eliminate any money for new full funding grant agreements for the new start's program. this is the program that we relied onto build the cal tran line. bart to san jose, a lot of the other big regional programs are counting on this which the president is planning to eliminate -- and the list goes on. there's some implications that we can read into that's clear for the department of environment and fema. the art's funding we receive directly from the -- some organizations in this city received directly from the mea, the president's proposed to

eliminate the mea. if that was adopted, that -- >> what does mea. speaker: national endowment for the arts. >> thank you. >> the last major risk area of the three is related to the repeal and replacement of the affordable care act. garcia and others from public health can speak to this in a moment. it may be the most significant impactful of any of the ones i have talked about here today. with that, i will -- if there aren't questions, i'm happy to turn it over to the department of public health to continue with their presentation. >> just real quick, many of my own constituents have just asked some pretty direct questions. and i feel like

i've given them a standard answer, it's too early. we don't know what's going to happen. but these cuts actually materialize and they are permanent. what is the process that we do -- that we will begin engage in to backfill, evaluate what programs we will cut, i mean, how -- what would it look like on the ground, if i was a nonprofit organization and i got the news that my cd bg grant money has been cut, how do i - i mean, i don't know the words, what do i tell people and if i were an executive director, what are the things i can expect? for example, i know i can expect to see changes, maybe not immediately, but next year so that would make it difficult to plan my long term budget next year knowing this money is cut. i'm assuming i'm in a holding pattern until mayor lee make

his formal budget proposal which may or may not have the back fill that i would be needing as an executive director of his organization. >> i don't -- it's a great question, madam chair. i don't know if i have answers for you or anyone else because it's the fundamental all face -- we likely have significant and severe federal funding cuts coming, but it's entirely unclear about the timing of them. what the ultimate scale will be. everything we're talking about here is proposals at this point. they take other people to make them happen. when congress act, when the timing will look like, and when we will know those things are unknownable. it's likely there will never be a moment. we're likely to be getting pieces of news over many, many months

when we hear new news in drafts as opposed to getting -- so we're going to be dealing with uncertainty and we really probably don't want to do two things. we probably don't want to begin eliminating programs. we don't want to react too severely. but given the magnitude of risk going forward, to ignore all possibilities of loss when they likely will be significant would be full hardy. it's a key question for the mayor and budget to consider. >> in your many years as a controller and many more years as the budget director -- you're qualified to give some kind of a window. so you say

that the information from the federal government will come down in drifts and drafts, okay. are we talking about the next three months, are we talking about the for the next nine months? there's a period, there's a season. can you help me understand what -- what season we're in >> i can give you from my perspective and i would suggest you ask those behind me who has expertise in this. when we see a detailed budget from the president, we'll have more clarity on what the impacts will look like in san francisco and we can quantify if that budget was adopted, this would be the harm to the city and in a couple of months, we'll have a sense of what is going to have support from congress and what's a non starter. so i would think late summer, we have a pretty descent sense of -- we can narrow that range of

losses in terms of federal budget implications. as it becomes clear of what the president is going to propose and how congress is going to react to it, there's been criticism of the president's skinny budget, not just by democrats but people on the other side of that aisle. so it's unclear whether some of the proposals that he's outlined here - whether some of those proposals have support among republicans whose constituents are also impacted by the losses. hopefully we'll have clarity. we'll have some in june and it will grow by the time we -- public health can speak better than i can regarding when we might have more clarity regarding the affordable care act. >> thank you. >> and the implications there. >> we're bring up barbara garcia and her right hand is calling [inaudible]. how are you doing.

>> yes, good afternoon, chair, cohen and board members. i'll share my presentation with our policy director and our cfo is here. there's no greater time for our city to come together and to continue to advocate and continue to fight for our health in san francisco at both of the federal and state level. several weeks ago, our mayor supervisor sheehy worked with a local union to call representatives to fight acl. health care is complicated and changes at the federal level will take time. in the timeline that we'll share, the changes will likely happen in 2020. we also know that as our control talked about the skinny budget, we'll have -- that will have impact and we're monitoring that on a daily basis. i want you to know our staff is working with the perspective -- with the national professional associations to continue to

advocate and fight. we're apart of the -- the health plan associations who are advocating to protect our health care system. our -- we'll advocate for the federal support given to our local nonprofit clinics. that's going to be important as well. that's outside of medi-cal. the federal government has not made a decision. if they repeal, the next impact will be at the state level. so i encourage us to work together and to be mindful of writing local legislation too quickly before we know what the federal and the state government will do. we want to work with you closely on this, so we are working together to protect the services. we'll continue to monitor this on a daily basis and we'll continue to work with all of our health partners at

the federal state and local levels as we turn -- as we determine the impacts of responses to the health care challenges. the mayor has just sent out a letter to all of the health care partners in the city to talk about bringing them together to have the conversation. of the 133,000 people that have received the benefits from the aca, 25% of those are within the department's services. and so 75 percent of those are within our other networks, and so it's going to be important for us to work with the kaiser, and cpnc to make sure we're working together to ensure that we're able to continue to provide care. >> you mentioned some of our stakeholders and partners in public health outside of the department, has there been a calling organizing between dignity, and [inaudible] hospital to begin to talk about what the landscape is? or potential cuts?

>> we will certainly share this letter with you. i'm sure the mayor's office will share it with the board. we sent it out today. >> i haven't seen it yet. >> we'll make sure you get a copy of that. it is discussing about what we did in the past when we had a large uninsured population in the city. >> my question is, where are the other companies? the cpmc, dignity health, are you talking to them >> we'll bring them together and as you know, this is all in the process and they're insured individuals. we've benefited from having the aca and people with insurance getting benefits, but [inaudible] that we will be taking? colien will give you more details and what it looks like and we're here for questions you may have. speaker: thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors. so i have a short presentation for you on some more of the

details of the repeal and replacement -- >> could you eye into yourself. identify yourself. >> colien, the director for planning -- i'm on slide 3 which is the proposed timeline which seems to change every time i update the timeline, but today is the light blue circles is where we are today, the house of -- the house of representatives had independent indicated that -- they indicated they were going to have a vote on the replacement plan. they're delaying the vote until tomorrow, but that hasn't been finalized yet. the -- director garcia mentioned between the time that the house of representatives passes legislation, if that occurs, and the time that the majority of the previsions going into effect is a long time, so it's 2020 when the majority of the previsions of the repeal and replace bill go into effect.

so just a little bit about the affordable care act to give you context around what the american health care act would do, the affordable care act was signed into law in 2010 and it does two things. it requires everybody to have health insurance and then it gives more opportunities for individuals to get health insurance. so the requirement that everybody have health care is called the individual mandate and there's three ways where it gave people more opportunity to get that health insurance and meet that mandate and the first was through their employer and that's the employer mandate, requiring certain employers to offer coverage to their employees or face a penalty and the second one is the health insurance exchanges. ours is called covered california in california. it gave subsidies to low and moderate individuals to buy health insurance on those exchanges and the third

one is for the medicaid adults and they can cover all low income adults where certain populations were covered before. and in san francisco, we have seen [inaudible]. director garcia mentioned, 133,000 san franciscans gained health insurance under the affordable clear act. 93,000 got medicaid coverage and that doubled the medicaid enrollment in san francisco. we're over double. 30,000 got insurance through covered california. 80% of those 4,000 got -- those are people who have 400% of poverty income or less. it cut or insurance rate by half. the lowest insurance rate we've had in san francisco. it has caused more people to -- more san franciscans to assess their

health as good and better and fewer san franciscans report delaying the care that they need. the american health care act is the federal government's repeal and replace proposal that is currently before the house of representatives. and as it was -- as its proposed it would repeal the individual and employer mandates. it would repeal the income based exchange subsidies and replace them with subsidies based on age. it would reduce federal funding to states like california that opted into the medicaid expansion program. this is affecting the 93,000 san franciscans that got medicaid. it would pre--- right now, the way medicaid works, if the state or local government spends money on a medicaid individual, then that expenditure is entitled to be matched at the federal level,

50 cents to 50 cents and we would cap the total amount of money available to california and we would need to restrain expenditures within that cap. the board may have heard that additional changes to the american health care act were discussed in the house of representatives on monday and may be adopted as well and these would impose additional requirements on states related to the medicaid program. so director garcia mentioned california's role and this is really important to note here because the way that california responds to what ever is passed, if anything at the federal level is as important to the health department as to what is passed at the federal level. so if the hca has passed in its current form, it's certain that california will receive less medicaid funding. in fact, the

department of health services issued an analysis yesterday that says that beginning in 2020, california will see $6 billion less in revenue after the passage of the affordable care act or the american care act in its current form. that would rise to $24 billion in 2027. and with less medicaid funding, the state has some tools within its tool box it can use to reduce its medicaid budget and the ways that it could do that if they chose to take cut in the medicaid program is reduce public health -- to reduce eligible for services, so not covering everybody who is currently covered today or to reduce the set of services available to medicaid beneficiaries and right now, california offers a generous scope of medicaid

services, but there's optional benefits that states can choose to reject to bring back cost to the covered population. so the potential ' impact -- it's not known as you've heard the control discuss earlier, these are still proposals and they're in negotiation. so it would depend on what the final bill is, if it's passed as well what california's policy response would be. but it is certain that it would -- it would impact californians who gained coverage under the health care act. also as director garcia mentioned, of the 133,000 san franciscans with aca insurance, a quarter received their insurance through public health

and others receive their insurance through health systems in san francisco. all these individuals would be at risk of losing their insurance or see their coverage eroded and as director garcia mentioned, in order to preserve the gains we have made over the course of the years -- that we need to work with our health care partners throughout the city to promote continuity of care and access to health care we have long held in san francisco. just one slide on the president's skinny budget as control rosen felled, mentioned it's low -- it proposed an 18% decrease in the health and human services -- this doesn't include medicaid

or medi-cal spending so it decreases in discretionary spending and the specifics on how it is achieved, it's not indicated. it does help with -- but it does not provide any detail on how it would continue to support those programs. and then what we're doing to prepare, so advocacy is still our number one -- our activity at the moment to oppose reductions to the american health -- to the affordable care act -- we're in communication with the state lobbyist and making with our state and federal delegations and the associations that director garcia mentioned. we're trying to maximize the current use of our program. so right now as chairwoman cohen said, nothing has changed. there has been to changes to the affordable care act and no

changes in reduction and services and we want people to remember that and take advantage of the services available to them now. we're educating our patients y and clients about that. >> so people should make dentist and doctor appoint manies now. y -- appointments now. >> we're analyzing the health impact in here san francisco. i'm -- >> colleagues, any questions so far? no. thank you for the presentation. >> okay. so next, we're going to hear from the mayor's office, brian chiu has a presentation on his updates. >> brian chiu with housing -- i'm here with benjamin, director of -- we have a few

slides for you that gives you a little bit more information about what we do with our lock grant program. so our cd bg program is a federal entitlement program. we receive 16.4 million. it's through a formula. we receive 3 other formula grants, one of which was also targeted through the president's skinny budget. we have cd bg and home as you see in your pocket. you have emergency solution grants which focus on homeless services and housing opportunities for person was aids. those two federal grant programs have not yet been targeted for cuts. i'm hoping that that does not follow through in this larger

budget. of the $16.4 million it's divided into two primarily areas. one is affordable housing development and the second is a list of a variety of services that goes to low income folks. as you can see on slide two, it has housing services such as tenant counseling and on evictions. it has work force training. we have an agreement with economic and work force development that administers funds for work force development and economic development, small business assistance, a variety of other public services and we are the primarily department within the city that provides funding for capital improvements to capital facilities and then of course it covers the program delivery for our -- all of our block programs and you can see next to each area, the list of

potential individuals that would be impacted by the loss of those funds. the next slide talks about our home program. it's a formula allocation we receive. at this point about $4 million that goes directly to fund new multi family housing developments. and then just the last slide, just demonstrates the fact we have seen this before, although not to this extent. in the past, the program has had popular broad support in congress. just in terms of the timing of how this would work, so the proposed budget for federal fy-a team, we would use those funds for our service grants that start july 1st, 2018. so right now. for 17-18, these cuts would not impact us. it would be for our city 18-19.

it's about the timing of how we receive information about this in the past, to your question, supervisor cohen, in the past, congress has not agreed on what the appropriation should be for this. we tend to get some advanced notice through the house sub-committee on transportation and hud funding. usually, i would say october, november, we get information from the house sub-committee. around that same time we get information from the senate sub-committee in the past. what we have done, we look at what the president's proposed budget is, and what the house and senate sub-committees look like. sometimes they're widely divergent and the extreme example was eight years ago where the senate proposed, i think maybe like a 5% cut and the house proposed a 60% cut. in the end, it had to come

through the joint committee. by the time they went to the joint committee, they brought it up and the overall cut was about 10%. the federal budget is on a resolution. we're at the end of the march so we haven't received allocations for funds that would start july first, but continued resolution extended through april 28th. we hope that congress will then take official action which would then give us our formula allocation we will use for 17-18. i think the hud regulations require that the formula allocations be given to us, i think around june 15th. so hopefully congress will come together and make that decision. so we will have some time before the city's budget process starts because again, if you're making your decisions in spring of 2018, we should have some indication through the fall of 2017 what that might look like. i guess i

will echo what my colleagues have said that it's premature for us to figure out what we'll do. we don't know if it's $16.4 million or 3 or 5%. we work with our membership organizations and we're a member of the national -- they have seen this coming. they maintain long standing relationships with those relatives from other red states. i think one advantage that the community -- it serves owe over state receives an allocation and every city can apply directly or through an application through the state april cajun, so we feel confident that this is over reaching. i will say that it's not impossible that we will see some decrease through that.

the home program had one bad year when it did receive almost a 40% cut in one year. and so we do have concerns, but as we move forward with this process and as we get further information from our colleagues in dc, we'll keep you posted, again. we have reshot to our federal delegation and our federal lobbyist to keep us informed as things change. we have a little bit more of a window than the aca proposal, but we'll keep you informed as we go forward. the budget for our 18-19 allocation of cd bg of course comes to you through the expend resolution, so you'll see that come to you next march or april of 2018. so you can make your comments on that. >> that's it. thank you.

okay. let me see -- any questions. president breed, thank you very much mr. chiu. come on down. >> chair cohen, rodriguez, san francisco department of the environment. thank you for the opportunity to present, this afternoon on the implications of the proposed -- the president's skinny budget on the environment. normally when i come to budget committee it's standing at the podium asking you to approve and accept and expend given the president's budget. you'll probably see lots of me given that a lot of opportunities that the city has gone after in federal funding opportunities are dramatically dropping in the president's proposed budget. >> excuse me. we were wondering if you had a presentation for us?

>> no presentation other than -- >> you're going to walk-through. >> do you have slides that you're presenting? >> not slides, supervisor. >> okay. >> with respect to what i wanted to share with you this afternoon is the policy implications of the president's proposed budget and cuts will have as has been referenced and shared already. likely you've heard the environmental protection agency is getting the brunt of the trump's administration cuts with the 31% cut of $2.6 billion. the largest percentage reduction represents largest reduction of any federal department or agency, and brings epa funding to the lowest level in 40 years. what does that mean for san francisco? the bay area? a couple of things. it halts are for example, the san francisco bay, napa river and

water shed clean up efforts including habitat -- they go after companies that are he leasing toxic fumes into the air or dumping sewerage into the bay. epa staffing cuts will impact the cleanup of 130 california super fund sites maybe here in the bay area. it will impact all of their research on chemical, pesticides, and other work that they do which have a direct implication on the programs and policies that san francisco manages. protecting the environment and climate change and addressing these issues is not just in the epa's jurisdiction. like in san francisco, many departments play a role in climate change. with respect to looking at the president's proposed budgets around the area and it's notable and i wanted to share a couple, the proposed cuts at

the department of commerce in particular, they're slated for a 16% budget decrease. the president target programs in particular the national oceanic and atmospheric, and -- they provide grant resources to assist communities and local governments in the resilience to climate change. some of the impacts to san francisco and the bay area, and the tide station and the oldest operations tidal gage in the western hemisphere. they collect information that's critical to san francisco and the entire bay area to understanding changes in local tides due to local global sea rise. they have support to the san francisco bacon -- san

francisco relies on coastal management agencies to maintain coastal access and protect our coastal resources. so significant impacts there. looking at the department of interior, they're responsible foremost federal land. and they manage 75% of federal land. they're expecting a 12% budget decrease. what we see with the cuts at the department of interior and the impact here is really a policy shift that this administration is making from resource protection to resource extraction. we'll be seeing more details as the president unfolds additional policy statements. but the department of interior and for us in san francisco, it plays a major role. the national park's service manages the coastal resources within the golden gate national recreation

area, including [inaudible] field, and baker beach. and these bay and beach habitats protects san francisco from the impacts of climate change, serving as a buffer between -- [switching captioners] >> as you can see a lot of these

different cuts and the different departments represent things that are significant it's unfortunate the cuts come at a time the programs are yielding significant results. these investment the departments have made over the last several year have yielded significant results. for example in 2015 solar employment had over taken oil and gas and coal employment as jobbings contributor equally electricity generation and capacity in the united states came from solar more than any other source when you look at these cuts others are slated for targeting the vulnerable. the home assistance that is managed is for reduction and elimination that helps low income family

with wter ization is also slated to cut so specifically to the department environment controller shares we receive grant funds from the department of energy, epa, approximately 1.3 million what the proposed budget cuts mean for our department is opportunities to apply for additional resources these representatives funds, that give the department the opportunity to be creative in working with major academic institutions to provide this board with good policy that is rooted in science in what is effective for what moves greenhouse effect emissions down. also the federal cuts are specific to policies. so, for example, the department of energy the president is suggesting elimination of the star program it's a volunteer program we build public policy

on those. san francisco's current building efficiency ordinance relies on the energy star program as our benchmarking component that program goes away we will have to come back to the board and look at ordinance of using federal standards of pressurements for success and finding alternatives and replacements the only thing i wanted to close with is the irony last week when proposeedded skinny budget the same time a new report came out indicating programs and policy and regulations in place in the united states we were able to hold down our emissions which impacted globally which we didn't see increase where we see increase nationally we're going in the wrong direction. it's going to be challenging as you heard from my colleague and the other departments the environment sits with all of the other agent cease and try to gain the attention of delegation

who are working together this mayor and the board of supervisors you both resolve to continue to move forward on progressive climate reduction effort and continuing to keep that positive. we thank you for your leadership. we will need that leadership going forward given the policy and budget cut implications we can expect in the future thank you very much. >> thank you very much. any questions? okay we're going to move onto the barbara smith did you have presentation or public remarks ? then i have questions for public housing . >> good afternoon barbara smith acting director of the housing authority i will be brief. it's a long hearing but it's very important to us, we have worked very hard to provide descent

services to our residents within a very lean budget and preliminary estimates this is based on the president's budget blueprint that said $35 billion dollars is cut from suddens housing there -. >> excuse me can you repeat that again and also identify your title. >> yes sorry. barbara smith acting director, of the san francisco housing authority. we're very concerned about this budget. the president's blueprint did say there would be $35 billion cut in housing subsidies there was information pr vieded to the washington post we don't know, this is the early stage of the budget process. but public housing in that information was expected to

receive 32% cut which is the loss of $1.5 million and would equal to about 15 staff persons a lot of our staff are maintenance workers. also workers who administrator the program and meet all the hud requirements that would be a major blow to the housing authority. the capital fund is expected to receive a cut of about $1.5 million. that would reduce it from 4.4 to $2.8 milli $2.8 million from six we're managing there are enormous costs keeping up with the minimal capital bones to keep

the property safe and descent for the residents there is probably going to be a cut in the housing choice voucher administrative fees which means a loss of staff and difficulty keeping up with renting freezing with the landlord and all that is required for the programs these are preliminary we're active in bay area housing organizations and national organizations we're going back to washington next week to meet with legislatures and talk with them about the continuing affordable housing programs. and the devastating effects that the suggested cuts would have on public housing we are most thankful we were able to convert 28 of our properties to the rad funding this past year on schedule and that working with a lot of city agencies especially the mayor's office of housing

and community development will protect 28 property and put them into a different program that is less likely to have direct impact on the ability to maintain the property and the residents who live there. so briefly, that is where we are with this budget situation. >> thank you very much. questions? supervise? >> thank you for your presentation. i do have a few question based on your presentation i wanted to go back to capital cuts, specifically, your budget is 4 million and you anticipate $1.5 million cut are we talking about capital as it related to real estate or in terms of the properties themselves? >> those are funds that we use to repair collapsed suer lines

transfermer where we have to do work on boiler say, at potreroo with building serving two units. maintenance for properties . >> are there any other dollars for maintenance besides these dollars? >> the housing authority is pretty much totally depend ant on the federal subsidies that is the main source of funds we have for capital work at the properties. then we have a maintenance budget under operating funds really, that helps us keep up with the day-to-day small items that break and clean up of the properties . >> actually it's not enough even do that from my understanding . >> no. >> so these cuts are going to be more devastating can you tell me

how the rad program has helped with that. because one of the biggest challenges housing authority face in terms of all of it's properties we know based on assessment of the properties there was at a time a couple of years ago over $260 million of deferred maintenance which is why a lot of the work wasn't getting done. since the rad program have you done any analysis to understand whether or not that figure has been reduced and if doing this program has helped considerably. as it relates to capital work for the properties? >> well it was greatly reduced the overall capital needs now we're managing u14,000 units converted to rad program that

can leverage $1.2 billion to fix up those property with the units we have left of course the operating budget was cut and the capital budget was cut so that we get pretty much the same amount per unit we're struggling with a low level of funding for each unit of public housing we're managing. that is really the challenge we have to work within the funds we have available to keep up with very old property deferred maintenance. the capital needs we're growing at a much faster rate than capital funds from the federal government already. this kind of cut is going to really impact to keep everything working during the hope build sf process. >> yup that is a scary thought

you come so far getting the entire process and getting petrero. hill almost over the finish line. particularly sun sunnyvale. working with water heaters not working this is very, very serious. this doesn't impact it doesn't rise to the level the media and press may not cover this. this particular cut is because it's concerned to me how fragile people are after publicing house it's two steps forward one step back. we have come so far in rebuilding with rad program and getting these housing structure to an acceptable level people can live and be healthy and take pride in where they're living. at some

point we need to have creative ways to partner with folk anytime the business community and other parts of the development community to begin to organize and raise funds i'm talking about stuff that will scratch the surface like that water heater we need to relace. i think it's in alice griffith. >> the boiler that 7s 25% of the households it can't be repared it's underground boiler with underground pipes that are corroded and decaying we're just a little bit ahead of the construction process. so we still have all of these residents we're trying to serve. but the new housing isn't quite there yet so we have to do our best with what we have. we're working with other agent cease and the city as well to try to

prioritize our capital needs and identify any funds that are available. we have a few things we're working on that will bring in a little bit more funding with the six site we're transferring them to rad so they can bring a little bit of cash flow to help with operations. >> thank you. >> supervisor cohen can i add to this? i think you bring up a good add about partnership is not just about the cuts but possible solutions how we can prepare for what we know is to come. when i think about all the work we have done on public housing and how far we have come, it is exciting to ride passed roberter pits and to see the work being done and the

excitement of those moving back to the units it is amazing i want to continue that but i want to think creatively what this means for our future and the possibility to do more you know how desperately i want west side courts to be rebuilt it's possible not only to do it but to add 2 or 3 times more units on that particular block more importantly in a way that doesn't displace the residents who live there and i think the reason i wavent to bring it up similar to alice griffith around the same time as well as burnal and alamani these places and conditions and the amount of money we need to spend in order to get them in a state of

descent repair with west side courts it's money down the drain it helps right now with the conditions that sadly some people live in but it's not a permanent solution i want permanent creative solutions and the possibilities like i said, looking at west side courts and tripling the number of units we're doing one side and the other side i want us to think more creatively outside of federal and public dollars in general. there is a better way for us to start making some changes because we have the land and how do we take it to the next level? those are some of the things i want us to start thinking with is the san francisco housing authority and the mayor's office of housing and trying to put ourselves

together to do that with rad and hope sf will be addressing properties like west side courts that could benefit from being built housing and mixed income. >> alice griffith. is the perfect example we're building the units and no displacement and the residents will be moving to the newer units and having their own priority at the units is wonderful i want to make sure and remind people of plaza east where i grew up. 300 units removed and only 200 rebuilt. that was a huge mistake where there could have been an incredible opportunity. i want us to think about those sorts of things moving forward and taking

advantage of properties that provide housing opportunities for people. >> thank you very much. a couple questions for you garcia if you can come up and for you colleen don't go too far. with health care is there something people can be doing right now. >> yes they should be continuing to come to care that is the most important thing one of the initiatives i will be working on hard is hepsi right now with medication that eliminates hepsi you don't get that much in health care to eliminate that disease and working with the health plan to ensure those seeking that kind of care that is one time medication they can and that hepsi will go away then

when you think about the cloud of sanctuary and make people feel safe to come to care that is one of the areas we will communicate and sent out flyers to all of our clients to continue to come into care and working with the providers to do that. that is part of what we need to do in bringing the entities together in terms of all of the providers to really make people feel continue to come and in the next two years we do a lot of service and care as you know preventative care is one of the most important things we can do on tuesday we had a conversation about fluoride and also issues of trying to get to little kids and putting flour i'd when you talked about denial care that will impact future generation those are things we have to focus on we don't want

people to be fearful of coming into care we need to work on immediately. >> for what reason it wouldn't be fearful. >> sanctuary city. that is part of the urban ewe fearful taking public benefit they might not have care now because of the confusion in the conversation. >> what have you done or we done as a city to communicate those -. >> we have done a campaign it's safe to come here communicating to patients how important it is to come to care. we're working with the mayor's office with cbo's and providers to ensure there is safe coming in as you know the city has passed a sanctuary law. that is for certain immigrant population for the entire community it's important for us to continue to talk about continuing to come to care. >> here's a hypothetical one if

congress were able to get their act together and were able to pass the american health care act, how would that impact people immediately? >> first of all, it won't be seen until 2020. >> so there is no immediate. >> right. >> then it goes to the state. that's what we will have to advocate at the next level there will be a cap on resources medicaid will be impacted and we will have to work closely with the state we are working with michel cap that have mills at stake and having conversations with los angeles this week to have the conversation what we're going to do with the state piece in terms of what strategies they're looking at for 100,000.

>> we quantum fide millions would be left out in the cold how do you quantify that? do you have any idea what it would cost the city and county of san francisco should this measure go forward we know that 125 million is part of what we get for the medicaid expansion we're using that data, that base it depends on what the state does and if they reduce the match for us or reduce services of that 125 hl there would be a portion of that impacted. so when the legislation gets passed, what is the time gap between legislation passing and the city of san francisco needing to begin to pay? >> it would be 2020 and potentially passed that because we will still have to see legislation that will come from california as to how they're going to organize their system. so we do have a couple years our strategy right now is document,

bill efficiently, increase the revenue we have, see if we can do reserves to ensure we do have reserved for these cuts and continue to help people come into care, come into preventive care stay within their medical home at the same time we are working with medicals locally and the inshurd sured and before aca and with everyone. >> thank you garcia i want to call up mr. chew a couple questions on block grant you see over that program, right? >> yes so needles to say you send out a letter to nonprofit organizations explaining their cdbg grants were not going to be

extended no? >> no. we didn't send a letter. because we will have money through the current formula allocation that will be in place for 1718 this impact will not hit until july of 28y. >> a lot of the impacts we're looking at will start in next fiscal year is that right. >> yes july 2018 to june 2019 when is the cut will hit our city. >> our portfolio and the department of public health in 2020 we just heard. >> correct. >> what can the nonprofits do now to stabilize themselves for the impending or potential hit. >> i think the minute the skinny budget came out, we have begun

to strategize how do we work with cbo's to put them in the best position. we have a number of our addiction defense efforts are funded through this akin to director garcia's preventative work if we prevent hundreds of evictions through funds and lose that ability the cost become intense these folks are homeless or moving out of the city we don't want that to happen we had some conversations with some of the entities for example we had a recent conversation with the new director of equity of northern california grant makers that is the umbrella organization of philanthropy we talked the day aphrodite skinny budget came out how is private fill anthro pea - however i feel

they're in a - they may be able to weather that cut and smaller organizations who do rely on our funds what we like to do is partner with philanthropy to figure out what they can do to better put themselves in a place to access nongovernmental sources it's highly unlikely in the worst case scenario we're able to $514 million for the

city we can liverage other sources in brief i would say one of the primary efforts is work with the organizations identify the ones that need assistance and not take those cuts and put them in place to access those other dollars more effectively. >> i appreciate the thoughtful answer. supervisor fewer has a question for you. turn your mic on. >> so sorry. so, this is really frightening actually as we look at proposed skinny budget and within one hour getting bombarded with all of the possible cuts. to me, the elimination of the block grants it's terrible, but the amount i fool like some of it could be

absorbed a little bit from our general fund or as you said maybe some of the organizations that are larger might be able to, i just feel after the last hit many cbo's went under they couldn't survive it. with the increasing rends for them they're having a hard time, too. what frightens me the most are budgets that are heavily depend ant on the federal funding personally i'm terrified about the cuts to the epa because it's not just us, it's the whole world. it's the future generation which is so frightening. but i'm thinking that with the block grants, that is the one that is coming so immediately because as we heard from garcia that is 2020 times for the state. although, that is

such a huge percentage of the public health budget. that is so frightening i feel like with the block grants we might be able to do something that is because it's 16 million, so crazy i'm talking like $160 but 60 mile we may be able to absorb it. what i wanted to ask the controller if he's here still, tank you, is you mentioned by may , we will know a little bit more about the skinny budget and what is really serious and what is not so serious because they're going to be bantering and back and forth and trading and this and that i have never been through a budget cycle in the city so my question to you is, does that give us enough time to adjust our budget

to prepare for the cuts we think will be immediate and the most painful? >> supervisors what happen in may and early june the president will release detailed budget and remace skinny with a full budget from the president we can use that to estimate the impacts if that's adopted we won't know whether that budget is adopted at the federal level that is action by congress to approve. that action will stretch for months after that. well passed the time line we will be adopting a budget locally we will have a better sense of what impacts could look like at that point from the federal budget cuts but we won't know xa exactly will so the mayor and

the board should be considering how you deal with that adversity or uncertainty in this years a's budget process the city has used in the past strategy of creating reserved or allowances where we don't know the specific reductions but have an order of magnitude the losses set aside money as you know about specific cuts later it will reduce your requirement to reopen the budget and make cuts on the fly. >> when we had a bad budget time at the school district and much smaller level, i know, we did set aside a reserve. it was hard to do actually but we anticipated a bad couple of years not just one year but a couple of years they were bad you remember we had to send 700 lay off notices which is painful. that is good advice thank you very much.

>> thank you mr. chew for your presentation and to all of the department heads that participates thank you very much. we will see you soon. this is only the beginning. okay colleagues is there last minute discussion? we need to take public comment. if there is public comment do so, come on up. welcome. >> hello i'm dena lawn for policy and advocate at the san francisco consortium and here to talk briefly about our role in providing health care for our mainly lower income san franciscoians. i want to emphasize we worked closely with the san francisco department of public health we have been sharing information about what makes our department share most of the patients are hospitalized at the agenda in terms of

primary care we serve 100,000 patients. that is over 1/10 of san francisco's population we're nonprofit we're independent of the city we don't get a lot of city funds we work closely in our networks most of our money, most of our revenue come father-son the federal and state government for medical we have done a great job enrolling in medical which is great unless the federal government retreats from this. we also have something called the 330 health grant which gives basic money to the nonprofit community health centers. that is up about 70% of our funds are up in september of this year we're going to washington to fight for those. i'm here to say it's a tremendous impact even though it's not tral funds and not give up the fight on the federal side

and work closely together on the state side. our first fight is to preserve as much medicaid and funding at the federal level if it goes to the state we got to work with the state to keep the expansion that's what keeps the primary care going. >> i assure you, we are not giving up a fight. if there is anyone one else come on up so we can hear from you. >> good afternoon. i'm richard i'm the executive director of conner house. i want to thank you for the discussion you have had this afternoon i want to say quickly my organization is part of several other local provider groups nonprofit organizations the human services network, the support of housing provider network choo choo so all of us who are watching what is going

on down over the horizon in our funding streams are the same things you have been talking about. a lot of us have more immediate things happening now where the business community is reading the paper and when we go to reapply for credit facilities at our bank, even when we have a conversation with one city department that's depend ant on assuring continuity of funding for long term projects they're not necessarily communicating with one another we have a great need for looking at business continuity where decisions are being made now that effect our long term regulatory agreements on housing building we own credit facilities that allow them to operate the time line in which contracts get renewed and outside funding sources and

donors and granters ask questions about viability we need to answer those questions they have and many times w efind ourselves saying, well, you we need to talk to the city. the city needs to give reassurance to people we do business with and those things are actually in front of us right now. i also want to commend the department of public health for issuing rfp's. [speaking off the mic]. >> thank you very much for your comments. and to the public that stayed for this hearing we appreciate you. public comment is closed at this time. all right. may i have a motion to file this? >> yes i make a motion to file this. >> thank you. i will second that motion. mr. clerk will take that without objection. is there any other business before this body.

>> that completes the business for today. >> thank you. this meeting is adjourned.

>> the matter will come to order. >> just a moment. sfgtv is catching up. >> here we go. >> the meeting will come to order. this is the march 22nd, 2017, special meeting of the local agency formation commission i am the vice chair of the commission, i am joined by ronen

to my left and fewer to my right. and i would like the thank the staff of sfgov tv for bringing us live, madam clerk do have you any announcements? >> yes, be sure to silence devices, speakers to be included part of the file should be submitted to the clerk. >> madam clerk, could you call item number two. >> item two, approval of the lafco minutes from the december 9, 2016, regular meeting. >> do any of the commissioner vz any changes to the december 9, 2016, regular meeting minutes? e seeing no comments, i would like to call public speakers. >> does any member of the public have any changes to the meeting minutes? >> no? seeing no public speakers,

public comment is closed. can i have a motion to approve the minutes? >> so moved, by commissioner rohnen and a second? >> by commissioner fewer. and these minutes are approved. >> madam clerk, could you please call item three. >> election of the chair person and vice chair person for 2017. >> great. >> do any of the commissioners -- before taking nomination foz the chair and vice chair, let's open this up for public xhenlt, are there any members of the public that wish to comment o iment it em three. >> no. >> seeing no public speakers, public comment is closed. could i have a motion to elect -- could i have a motion to elect the chair and vice chair for 2017. >> move. >> oh, can i make a motion, may i? sorry chair, this is my first

meeting. may i make a nomination at this time? >> yes. >> i nominate hillary ronen to be the chair person. >> are there any other nominations? >> wait, are we calling these together? >> you can call them separately or together. >> would i like to call them together chair if that would be permissible. >> i would like to nominate hillary ronen for chair person and cynthia for the vice chair. >> okay. >> are there any other nominations or second foz that motion? >> second. >> seconded by commissioner ronen. >> and do we want to take this to -- i can't -- so moved. >> yes. >> and nomination rz approved. >> the nominations are approved. >> congratulations, chair, ronen

and to myself to continue to serve this body. >> could you call item four? >> consideration and approval of the proposed lafco budget for fiscal year 17, 18. >> i believe executive officer jason frieed will be providing an overview and direction on this matter. >> direct, executive officer for lafco. in your packet you have a proposed budget that goes over what the spending will look like over the course of the next fiscal year. as always we look to the state amount of 297,342. because we have access to another fund of money outside of our general fund, we normally do not need to use that full amount in that he given year, at some point we will. what i would recommend is that we will continue to keep our rights to that money, but that

to the degree possible that we return what we can as is the tradition of lafco and take what we need and give back the rest of it to the city and county so that they can ko do all of the functions that they need to do as well. on that note, we did since a couple of you are new, normally in december, the borz comes and say what do you need for the following year. this is much earlier than what the state requires to us do or responsible to do by the state law, we are covered by the state rules not by the city and county of san francisco rules. our budget process is by may 15th. we need to pass a proposed budget, by may first, we need to pass, and by june 15th, we need to pass a final budget. what we are doing today is that proposed budget not the final budget whashgs we do is we transmit whatever actions we take today will transmit to the city and county of san francisco and here is what we are looking at and opens it up for any

comments that they choose to make or anyone else choose to make and at our next meeting we will pass the final budget. one of the things to keep in mind since this is our first meeting of the year, and we have for the most part a brand new commission. we have, and thank you for returning to this body and being the one lone body that was returned from last year. we were not sure exactly what this body was going to be doing this year. because last year's body most of them were termed out and left. and so what we transmitted to the city and county, was what was the very basic status quo budget? if we did nothing different than what we are doing exactly today whashgs would that budget look like? and what that budget looked like at the time was we would need about 144,000. since december, we have gotten new updates and that number seems to be consistent, the reality is that we are going to hold a discussion about the future agenda items, if we take on a new item, depending on what we take o there could be the

potential of needing additional money, what i did do is i looked back for the discussions today, when have we used outside consultants outside of the cta, they are expensive whshgs we have done those project therz large and bigger than what we would need to do for the next calendar year, based on the sug matter discussion that we have it, i look to the report that we did on how the garage collection is done in the city, we spent did $50,000 without sult ant and i will put that report together. so i used that as if we did one of the reports oefr the course of the next year, we would need to add that amount to budget in order to make sure that we have the correct amount to do things. >> and that amount comes under the 297 number and so what i will be proposing today is at a mun mum that we approve a budget that we know where it is going to need the 144, based on fsh further discussions between today meeting and the next

meeting we, may need an additional 50,000, we are retaining our rights to the 297 number, but that we are figuring out what that exact number is less than that, and i don't think that we are going to need that full amount and we are trying to full out the exact details given that it is the first meeting of the year and commission. and we need a little more time and i am hopeful that the city and county will be understanding of that and give them a range of here is what we think is going to be needed for the budget and on that i will if you have any questions on that part or process, i am happy to answer it, and miss miller is here to answer any legal questions of how the budget process itself works, if you need it. >> great. and just to clarify for the new commissioners, is that the state regulation is that or the state legislation says that we must ask for the same amount that we asked for last year, which is the 297342. could you, do you remember the amount that we paid for the

report which would be a more robust report than the garage collection? >> the report was more than one fiscal year, the entire report itself ended up costing us, i want to say $200,000, but that is a much different type of thing that anything that we are looking at right now at doing, outside of the cca so i don't know if we will need to get that level for that report. and we might want to have that discussion and we to have a much different budget as that will eat up the entire budget just to have that one report done i want to keep that in mind if we talk about the future items going forward. because there is a difference between 250, in the budget that is small, and if we were for do an indepth report based o you know, an item that this commission wants to we want to mindful of that if it is a

prelim report this year and something larger that we would have to go to the board of supervisor foz funding. >> the thing to remember is that it is not -- it is a final product report, you are looking at something that is multi year, we may not issue an official like report t was a specialized report. >> right. >> i would view what we are doing as something that is not, it is detailed but not in the same way and not with the same level of expertise, but i do agree with you, that they can range widely and what, i think that we more need would support for at least the next year would be more like outside the legal tech support of exactly how to do the stuff that we are looking at doing and maybe, an expert here or there might be needed as well. >> okay, great. >> i have one question. >> chair, thank you very much. >> mr. fried, just for clarification, so i pdz that the 297,000 that is in the lafco

budget. >> correct. >> if we don't, if we actually are looking at a budget proposal of like we might spent, $144,000, and retain another $50,000 in case we need to hire an consultant, but dwoe have the remapder of the funds that we can access if we should need to; is that correct? ? >> no. we get one bite at the apple. >> once we give it back that is it. >> once we do the -- not today's budget, once we get to the budget we approve in may, we get one time to say yes or no to our money. that is it until the following fiscal year. just as for those of you that may be familiar with the board of supervisor these like to put money on reserve. they cannot, we are separate agency, they can't say that we are going to take that $50,000 and put that on reserve, it is one time that we get to do it. there say provision for some reason we spent more money than we had, we couborrow money off the next year, there is language

that allows for us not to be insolvent but to be able to pay the bills. would i never want to get in that situation, i always have a little bit left over, a small amount, this year we will end up with 5 or $10,000 left in our account, little bit of wiggle room not too much. >> then i would say, it would be my preference to be more cautious. if we decide that there is something that we would like to investigate and do a report o that could be more extensive. than 50,000 is the minimum amount that we would put aside. >> sorry. thanks. nancy miller council to lafco. i just wanted to say just a couple of things because this process of where we adopt the

budget at 297 and we don't use the 297 is has a historical context. which is we used to have a very large reserve, close to million and we would not have to take from the city general fund every year. because we had our own reserve that was set up years and years ago. we have spent that down and we have also received funds from other sources such as the sfpuc account that was set up to help us monitor and work with the sfpuc. so what we are trying to do is say, well, the revenue will come from other sources. and then the city and county of san francisco. so we have this accounting that we go through, which is we adopt the budget for 297 and we actually say that is our budget, but we are going to give back to you, a certain amount and only keep what we really need for that year. >> that is, the the one time that jason is talking about. we do have to figure out what

that amount is. >> you are entitled to the same budget and so if the other sources of funds go away, our reserves are mlu, and you would still have funds to continue to do what you want to do with respect to the activities of the commission. so, we do have this one time, where we talk about it, but i want to be really clear that we talk about it in terms of we are starting with 297,000 and then we are deciding how much of that, where that is coming from, and only so much of that will come from the city and county each year. >> correct. >> i hope that that is --. >> sure. >> so, what i think we should do now, since the final budget won't be decided until may, is if i could make a motion where we sort of estimate the range of what we will probably end up

using and to p that we will return the rest to the city and county of san francisco for other needs and then while we are figuring out sort of what the focus of lafco will be going forward and refining that and having a better estimation of the budget when we need it and if we are indeed going to have contribution from other source and then we can revisit this at our next meeting and perhaps give a more exact figure, does that make sense? and i can make a motion to that effect? >> sure. >> sure. >> i think, so let me just clarify. you are saying that you would ask for the 297, but not include a number that we would return and just leave that part open? >> so ask for the 297,342, and reserve our right to request that amount going forward. but it suggests that we are going to keep amount lesser than

that. within a range. and then when we further flush out the role and sort of the focus of this body and that at our next meeting or in the future meetings, certainly by may. we will settle on an exact figure. >> okay. >> sure. >> and i just also twoont say i think that is fine, i agree. personally, i know that there is some maybe, some political things we should consider, but personally, i don't mind spending the 297,000, the full amount even though it has been practice to rush some of comblont to the city. and i know thatvy been in this position for two months,vy seen the city spend money. so i think that really if we should need it then we should use it. because it is what allocated for. and it is not a huge amount of money. when i have seen what has come before the board and what we have approved, the million and hundreds of millions, of

dollars. actually this money, very little amount of money for the work that it does. >> thanks. >> thank you. >> so with that is it okay if i make a motion? >> i want to clarify one more thing and we should open it up for public comment before we entertain a motion. so just to clarify with miller, do we have to specify today the amount that we will return? or can that be left open until may? >> we do not have to specify the amount that we will return, you can estimate it today and come back it may and finalize it or june whenever you choose. >> okay, great. so like to open this up for public comment. is there any member of the public that would like to speak on this item? >> hello commissioners, eric brookz. i am representing san francisco, the coalition for san francisco clean energy advocates. which has been working on clean power sf and community choice.

also, california for energy choice which does that kind of work on the state level. i didn't speak to your previous item because you are all great and it didn't matter who was president and vice president. i just want to get that out there. and we are not dising you, and on this budget issue i kind of like would launch off of and amplify which is what commissioner fewer said. we now as council miller pointed out. we have burned through our reserve, and this lafco is going to have important things coming up like public broadband is something that we have talked about in the past year. and that is going to be on the horizon and it is going to be big this year, especially with the trump trying to privatize the internet. we need to get that on this year. that might require more studies if we find that the department of technology does not get off the dime and do what needs to be done to set up public broadband and then with the clean power

sf, we are finding that, you know, sfpuc staff has done a great job of moving the ball forward when in far in the past that was not happening, but we are finding that because the sfpuc is an enterprise agency that is focused on the rate and pair and protecting the rate pairs and the things like getting a local build out plan, are dragging a little. and in the past things like that, that would be on the level of the expanse or maybe even the report were needed to get the vision of clean power sf moving for ward. we might need the lafco to create a build out of a local build out plan like sidny australia, for san francisco. and in that case, not only do you need your whole 297 budget but you might need to do what was done before and which is request from the board and the mayor's office, some added funds >> are there any other speakers?

>> public comment is closed. >> can i have a motion to approve the proposed lafco budget for physical year, 17, 18? >> moved. >> sure, i am going to make a motion to approve the proposed budget for fiscal year, 17, 18, at 297,342 dollars and reserving the right in future years to the full amount of $297,342 that is receives in the city and county of san francisco to keep between, $144,000 and $200,000 for use in the next fiscal year and return the unneeded portion back to the city. and that staff should make needed adjustments to the final budget in may. >> could i have a second for that motion. >> second >> seconded by fewer. >> seeing no objections, the

motion is passed. madam clerk, could you call item five? >> community choice activities report, status up date on the clean power sf program, status up date on the proceedings of the california public utility commission and up date on the state legislation. >> all right. i believe that we have presentations from general manager bar bra hail and executive officer, jason fried? >> thank you. good morning. assistant general manager at the san francisco puc. welcome, i am pleased to be here to present the status of clean power sf. i will also address, if it aappropriate, chair, all of the items that the secretary read together before turning the microphone over to executive officer fried. snaechlt is great. thank you. >> and just to kick things off i

wanted to introduce the support team at clean power sf at the puc. that you will be seeing over the course of the year. making presentations responsive to your questions here at lafco. i introduce myself, i'm bar bra hail assistant general manager for power, with me is mike heinz, if you would stand. the director day-to-day director of the clean power sf program and the clean power sf staff report to him at the puc. charles, our acting communication's director at the puc is here. and his staff person, pasaro and we are happy to welcome, this is what? week two? and marina report to charles. she is the communication's lead for power enterprise at puc and as i say she only just joined us. so you will be seeing us as a team responding to your inquiries. so i wanted to take our first meeting as an opportunity to introduce the team. so now move og this to where we

are at with the program and if i may i would like to switch microphones. so by way of making sure we are all understanding the program opportunity here, san francisco program is enabled by statute that was passed in 2012, excuse me, 2002. >> go ahead. >> yeah. did we receive a powerpoint for this? >> i am happy to get you copies if you you like, i thought that you were able to see them. >> yes. >> in the future, and miss hail, i think that i work bet we are a hard copy, and it is difficult to see it on the screen, quite frankly. >> we have some 1980s technology here. it is a little fuzzy. >> thank you. >> no problem.

so there is some hand copies there. so we were authorized as a jurisdiction to implement the program through this assembly bill, 117 in 2002. and by statute cca is the program that allows an injures jurisdiction like san francisco to take over the supply and responsibilities to delivering electricity to residents and businesses. cca customers by statute are enrolled automatically and are noticed about the program four times. during that noticing period, they have the ability to say, no thanks, you know, i'm opting out. so when the board enabled the puc to go forward with the program, it basically said, okay, we will have a program that allows san francisco residents and businesses to make the choice. so we are enabling that through

the clean power sf program. and again we just provide the supply portion of the electric service. our goal for the program have been defined through our commission and board processes. we really want this to be an affordable program for san francisco residents and businesses. providing comparable or better service to pg& e through cleaner electricity and making choices for the electric supply that serves our residents. and emphasizing local, we have defined, local as within the 9 bay area, counties and we are looking to take that revenue stream, that would otherwise have gone to pg& e and make the local investment choices with it. and all focusd on having a sustainable program. >> we have these three or four,

we have these four objectives that can be competing against each other at times and depending on where the market priesz are and the local development costs are and so we are in needing to balance those objectives we are offering two services, the first service is the default service, when you move to san francisco and want to initiate electric service now, you don't automatically get enrolled in pg& e, program we get enrolled in our program, so we are the new default provider and that provision is at the green service offering. and we are providing 40 percent, california compliant, renewable content that exceeds the renewable content of pg& e default. and it is the premium product, what is referred to as bucket one, or pcc one. in the energy lingo. and it is where we purchased the

kilowatt hours and the attribute foz a california provider. we also offer a super green service and that is if you wish to take 100 percent renewable service, you pay a little more for that. but it is 100 percent renewable for ghg free product and we have had quite a bit of success with customers signing up for that. ze been operating the program since may of 2016. we have had an additional enrollment in november. and we offered the program city wide for anyone who raises their hand and says that they want in. they are enrolled. and we have also performed some auto enrollment the power enterprise, at the sfpuc supported the launch of the program with the working capitol from our operations with a commitment to pay those funds back. the program has been operate with 15.5, full time equivalent

staff and a reserve requirement, excuse me, a revenue requirement and by that i mean, the total cost of the program for the year of about, 38 million dollars.

that total, and that combination of our rates, and pg& e's fees that influence ours customer's bill. and so we have designed our program, as have the other operating ccas in california. and in recognition of the fact that there is this additional charge that pg& e makes on our customer and so we try to set our rates to buffer our customer's bills from that impact. and in april, we will be bringing our next rate adjustment to our commission through the city's statute or rate making process, which imaging that you are familiar with. and it begins with the presentation to the rate fairness board and they make advisory recommendations to our

commission. and our commission then through a 30 day noticed hearing process, adopts those rates. and that it sees fit. and those rates then fit before the board of supervisors for 30 days. if no action is taken, they become effective. so we will be bringing to our commission, for rate consideration, some recommendations in april. so stay tuned for that. and we will be reporting at a future lafco commission meeting on that item. >> miss hail. >> yes. >> i just wanted to ask really quickly, i think that this is maybe the first time that commissioners are hearing about the pcia which was a big topic for us last year. do we anticipate any changes to pcia in with the pg& e new rates that they put forward. >> yes, so they adopted new rates, excuse me, the california puc adopted new rates for pg& e, that is effective on january 1

and they increased their fees and rates. so we saw an increase in the power charge and adjust sxment i should take a moment to explain that and i will. the effect of that is that right now, from january 1, until we adjust our rates, the effect on our customer's bill is that they are paying, a tad bit more for clean power sf service under the green program they they would if they were a bundled utility customer. the power charge is the california puc implementation of the state policy, that says, rate payers in the electric system, should not have to bear the cost of long term commitments. the invest on the utilities made. and when those costs were enkured on behalf of a larger

set of customers. so, when cca customers leave the invest in the utility electric supply portfolio and join a cca, urndz this state, statue need to take a share of those long term commitment costwise them frshgs a policy perspective, i think that actually the city agrees with that. that makes, a good policy sense to make sure that everybody pays their fair share and as the members of the commission, who are also supervisors know you are representing cca customer and pg& e customer and so you have an interest in protecting both of those sets of rate pay sxerz this say policy that treats them fairly. the implementation of that policy, at the california, puc is where they establish this methodology named the power charge and different adjustment, they go through an annual

revision process that begins with an application from pg& e in june and that application then is in the public setting and, there is opportunities to comment on it. and it is really just a calculation proceeding, and it is not a proceeding that allows to us argue about the methods. and that has been one of our challenges because we do have problems with the method in november, that projection, of what the pcia should be, that pg& e, they typically issue a decision in december. pg& e takes that decision and revises the calculation, posts if as final, on their website. on p the december 31st, and then it becomes effective on january first. now i described to you, that our rate setting part of our effort is to buffer our customers from

that charge. that process i just described where we find out what it is on december 31st and, it becomes effective on our customer's january first does not really allow us much opportunity to buffer. and so here we are in this period, where there is no buffer, our customers are seeing a little bit of bill impact as a result of pg& e cost increases and we are hoping that through the rate making process. that is schedule for april, we will be able to make some adjustments. >> great, and i just also want to ask one thing thanks if you could just clarify, i know that some san franciscans have seen a dramatic increase and that has nothing to do with clean power sf. >> right. and so the pg& e rates have changed for the electricity as has the gas costs. and i think that some folks, we saw the inquiries come across our desks about why is my bill so high? and for some of those customers

that was actually gas increases that made the bills dramatically different. so we have been taking calls and trying to help folks understand their bill, when it is an electric charge issue. you know, we talk them through the clean power sf rates. and the effect of the pg& e charges. we have not seen a mark, you know, really, a change at alln how many customers are opting out of our program. and so, i think that the work that we are doing and helping folks understand the bills, is helping them to see that there is continuing to get a good value, or from the clean power sf product, especially since it is so much more renewable than the pg& e product, thanks for clarifying that. >> you also asked for activity on the pcia going forward and i will dress that during this part and, i think that it was con the agenda. okay? >> great. >> and we are really, you asked

the questions about the bill, we are really looking at the clean power sf program as the seamless customer experience, the customers receive the same pg& e bill that they have in the past, there is an added page and the summary of the bill is shown here, and you can see that there is an additional item there, the clean power sf electric generation charge which replaces the pg& e, electric generation charges on the bill and the extra page included in the bill prosides the detail on the charges. >> so as a mentioned we began enrolling customers in may. we are continuing to enkwurage preenrollment where customers let us know on our website or through other less computer oriented methods. that they are idnterested in participating in the program.

and we also contact automatic enrollment in phases. i mention that had we had a phase in may and in november. and what we are seeing, is about 75,000 customers, participating in the program. today. and we have a very low opt out rate, just 3.percent and it seems to be steady around that 3 perng level and we are very excited to report that 3.4 percent of our customer vz said, sign me up for 100 percent, demonstrating an interest in both the better product and a willing nsz to pay a little more on their electric bill to achieve that 100 percent renewable and that ghg reduction. >> miss hale? i am sorry i just want to jump in here about this super green enrollment. this is great, i am just looking at the december minutes, and it looks like we had a 2 percent enrollment and so this is a good bump. >> yes. >> moving for ward to the 5 percent goal, could you break

down which super green enrollments were in district five and eight. and verses what is in the city wide, because i know that super green, any one of us can and should join the clean power sf, super green team, and get clean power sf even if their district has not auto enrolled in it. and so, i just want to ask, does this report, include city wide? >> yes thanks is city wide. >> okay, great. >> and i neglected to mention at the top of my presentation, that charles will be making a presentation for you, about our out reach today. so before i surrender the microphone to executive officer fried he will come up and do a deeper dive and how the out reach is influencing enrollment. >> great. thank you. >> we are also doing additional work to determine what our next

phases of enrollment should be. and we are characterizing that work as a growth plan. >> and our growth plan covers these 6 topics. really focused at this point on completing the growth plan where we are intending to make a presentation at our commission in the april, may, time frame. and we will come to lafco as well. to share the results of our growth plan analysis. and it is really an effort to hit those same goals that i mentioned at the top of the meeting. in a, you know, a financially responsible way. growing our program from the 75,000 or so, account wez currently serve, to the 320,000 or so, accounts that are active in san francisco. by the time we complete that, that enrollment, just to give you a perspective, we will be serving more accounts than the

water department serves. and we will be an enterprise fund with a revenue requirement larger than the waste water enterprise at the puc. so that just gives you a sense of how big a change this is for the city. and how impactful the program can be. so some of our challenges in the opportunities looking ahead. and key challenges, clearly financing, financing constraint and our trade off foz growth and, how quickly can we grow? how much electric market risk are we willing to take on in order to achieve the positive impacts that the clean power sf opportunity presents. is there a lot of unpredictability and the instability in the rates and in particular the influence of this power charge and different

adjustment, and this exit fee that we talked about, it really, it is really quite, it swings, dramatically, that we have seen. and so we are spending quite a bit of time working with the legislature, and the california puc on educating them about our program. and about the influences that the pcia has on us. and looking for methods that they can adopt to make it a more stable, less volatile and more predictable component. because as i said we are not looking to get out of our customers getting out of the responsibility for paying their fair share. we are just looking for it to be a cost that is more predictable and fair. >> and a key challenge as i mentioned already is the fact that for this period, between january and july, when the new rates would go into effect, we expect our rates to be higher excuse me, our bills and impacts

on our customers tore higher than pg& e and i say that we expect, because we know that pg& e is going to have another rate change, probably in the may to june time frame, the puc will issue another decision. and wher not exactly sure what the influence that have one is going to be. but, we do expect to get our rates back into alignment, after our rate making process goes before our commission, in april. >> in terms of opportunities, the market place and the electric sector is getting familiar and comfortable with the idea of community choice arrogators which is great. we now have banks that are indicating new interest in providing financing, you know when we started our journey, on cca, we would have to explain to all potential counter parties whashgs it is, what the state's foundational statutory foundation is for it. you know whashgs is the opportunity is. we had to do a lot of

explaining. and now we have folks knocking on our doors and saying, hey we would like to provide your cca service, which say much better place to be. we are seeing expanding cch community readiness within regulatory and legislative environment to really push on these key issues like the power charge and difference adjustment. and we have been at the forefront of organizing a trade association, among the operating ccas and the local government communities that are interested in embarking on a cca. and in fact, i am the president of the trade association. we have done a lot of work this past couple of months. educating legislators, and engaging with the california puc commissioners and we had two new commissioners come on in january, and so we have what i would characterize as meet and greet, opportunity tlz that we took advantage of, and really helping to emphasize for them,

that we are sort of the new kids in town, as a cca community and the electric sector, but we have a lot of work to do with them. and looking to influence their decision making. and then when we looked more internally, the key challenge and the key opportunity is to really finish that growth plan and identifying what our sort of charting our course forward from the 75 counts that we are serving to the city wide service. and on i am going to pivot now to talk more about the legislative activity and unless have you more questions about the presentation. >> i do. >> if we could just ask a couple of questions and i want to allow commissioners to ask questions before we move on to the legislative up date. could you just remind me, or the next roll out is that city wide or additional, or just the

incremental districts? >> yes, so we have a small enrollment that is happening in may. and that is to, take on into the service offering, everybody who raised their hands city wide already, so the waiting list we are bringing the waiting list into the program. and we are also going to bring in to the program, some of the net energy metering customers in districts, 5, 8, and 10, and because this is a good time of year, to enroll customer whose have solar on their roofs. and so we are going to take that is and those customers again that is a small enrollment and then he after we get direction from our commissioner on the growth plan s when we will be able to answer the question of what is next? the whole rest of the city, some increment of the city? you know? what is the pace of enrollment going forward? and that is what the groerth plan is intended to answer. >> great. >> when do you present the plan to the commission? >> yes, we are presenting the

target is to present the plan in late april and, early may and then we will be looking to work with your executive officer to get on the agenda here to make the same presentation. >> great. >> and i just with the opt out rates so, low, it seems really positive and encouraging that we would move forward with the city wide roll out. sooner rather than later. and so, if your commission and lafco obviously support that growth plan, then when or what is the ramp up that you would need to move from this 76,000, to 323,000. >> so looking at the plan slide here, you can see the topics that we need to make sure that we are addressing in the growth plan. i would say key to kwet you are asking, is we know that the

customer demand is thereof from the low opt out rates and i say that recognizing the areas of the city that we new would be most amenable. and the districts that we continue to enroll in the san franciscans we would find the. and higher through, and with such a low number, manageable amount for us. and the key question is whether there is supplies, in the market, to service, at a cost effective rate. i think that we put in the problemry and the thanks and the words like that and words like that in front of it until we actually put out a request for an offer and see the bids come

in, we will not know that for certain. >> and then the financing needs is a key issue. you know, we will need to have the capacity to transact the business in the market. and the more capacity that we will need, could we get that cost effectively, letters of kred sxit we have a $40 million with morgan stanley right now and, we would likely be able to get another letter of kred fit we needed it, but those are again, we will put out a request for offer, for the financial support for the program and perhaps the one that is the most in our control, but challenging is the issue, and what is the additional staffing need? we have identified what we think that our ad dishing staping needs are. but the pace of being able to hire within the city may be one

of the constraining factors for us. we are working with the hr, and the dhr, and every position that i request to fill, even if they are already authorized in the budget needs to go through sort of a gauntlet that takes some time and so that operational readiness issue, is a key factor in being able to make the judgment of how quickly could we go in we can take off all of another questions. great, i know that at the time president breed had moved for the, or moved through the board of supervisors that contract that you needed to procure, is that something that we will do again? >> so we have authority to contract without coming to the

board again. >> great. >> so it would depend on what particular form of contract we do. but we do have because of that good work that the board was very supportive on, we do have some discretion to contract for additional power, subject to the budget utility's commission approval and not having to go to the board. i think that we have good readiness there. super. >> commissioners do have you any questions before we move on to the legislative up date? >> no. great. >> thank you. >> you bet. >> so on the legislative front, i already mention that had we have been doing quite a bit of education and out reach. and we do have a bill senate bill, 618, sponsored by senator brad ford that we are concerned will under mind the community in the community choice ago agree gages, and specifically, it requires that any community

choice aggregate perform an integrative resource plan thanks was actually part of a prior piece of legislation that we supported. it is a good utility practice to take a look at what your resource needs are and to have a thoughtful plan put together. and to take that integrative resource plan in this new bill and require it to be reviewed and approved by the california puc. so instead of that plan being subject just to our local jurisdiction review and approve ashlths senator brad ford's bill 618, would require the california puc to review and approve. and we are officially now opposed to that piece of legislation. mayor lee has signed an opposition bill that has been transmitted to sacramento. and it will be heard on april four and this we will be at the first read and so stay tuned on that.

i imagine that you will be hearing more about it. that is the primary legislative activity. turning to the regulatory activity. we have participated and the various proceedings and the most unique for this setting would be what they called an on bonk hearing. they had a hearing before all four and all five seated, commissioners. to talk for the full day just about the cca programs in the state of california. and how they influence electric service provision, and the ability for the state to achieve its goals. so we spent a day there and they have a large auditorium that was

full, the spill over room, hearing room was also full. they reported that they had over, 800 participants on the video line. electronic feed of the meeting. it is probably one of the best attended meetings that the california puc has held in a decade or two. so there is definitely a very strong interest. and the growth of community choice ago gages programs across the state, and programs at a future meeting we can take a little bit of time, more on my cal cca role to describe what the other ones are doing, and i think that our very positive aspect of the attention, and the industry sector is getting, is the ability to identify all of the interested parties who want to see this type of programming really succeed. and so we are finding a lot of strong partner to work with, and make sure that in getting best practices and learning new things that we can bring to the san francisco customers which i

find very positive. we are very active on the proceedings that influence our cca program, pcia being the biggest, and the general rate case that the pg& e has before the cpuc, and the pg& e, resource plan and the plans to retire deablo canyon, the nuclear generating station. and their interest in replacing that resource was additional resources that they would then charge not only their customer foz, but also their cca customers for. so, those are all areas that my staff, together with city attorneys office, collaborating with like minded individuals, are participating in at the cpuc, it is really quite an active area of work.

very complex and technical as well. >> and so, i would like to conclude my remarks and move to the communications up date, if you are ready. >> sure. >> i just want to ask, i think that it might be beneficial. this is such a huge topic. it would be great if you or someone from your staff could take a moment and even a couple of hours to talk about you know, just where we have come from, where we are, pca in a nutshell, how we compare to other ccas, and maybe a basic primer on energy and how we procure energy for the commissioner's staff who will be staffing them on lafco just moving forward i think that it would help just to have a general understand and maybe the executive officer, fried could do a review of the report and how we got here and not today.

>> i understand. >> but sort of moving for ward, but for the next meeting would be great. >> we would be happy to provide that kind of support to you and your staff. we did a similar presentation to legislative staffers in sacramento. and we could add on a little bit to that to fill every topic that you just mentioned, chair. and happy to do that when you are ready. >> great. i just want to add one last thing which is that senator brad ford is my favorite senator in california. he has kept me on my toes in terms of watching legislation every year for how he tries to destroy clean power. and cca and so, i thank you and p v the other ccas for the hard work in keeping an eye on his legislation and trying to neutralize anything that would you know, take away from the hard work that we have done here, thank you. >> thank you. >> i think that also, when you

meet with our legislative aids, just the political relationship between the california puc and the cca. >> okay. >> that would be great, too. >> sounds good. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> p good morning, commissioners charles shen director of communication for the san francisco public utility's commission sxishgs moved some things around and i am glad to be here and a poll guys for the confusion yesterday. and i am here to talk a little bit about some of our out reach initiatives and specifically how they track with super green up grades, and super green, sign ups throughout yeert. and so i am going to just kind of jump right into it and i am certain that you may have questions. on the first slide, the line on top the blue line that is those

are our up grades with the super green and so those are customers that we enrolled or customers that we have had since the beginning of the year that we are already serving clean electricity to, that have proactively elected to upgrade themselves to super green. the line below that are the customers that we have not enrolled, those are the sus mers that have siendz up early and raised their hand and said that i want to be a part of your program in the next enrollment phase and so that is the line below that, that is mostly yellow orange. >> and before i walk you through some of the events, because when i put in there was some of the big ticket items that we have done throughout the year to both, encourage those early sign ups as well as the up grades. and i want to preface my comments and state that we do activities throughout the year. and so, so you are always seeing

this constant weekly increase in up grades and in sign up and so you see that, like we are kind of always above zero and we are always working with our 350, sf partner and represented in the room today torques keep the information going and, keep the clean power sf in front of people at fares and festivals and sets and, we have done a good job at making sure that there is a steady green for the up grades and sign up tluz out throughout the year. and we see a lost success around the times when we are actually enrolling customer and so i am going to jump into the chart here. and so you see in the green bar, represented below the chart thanks is the time period when we were enrolling our first customers back in may 26016 and, it was 7,000 business customers in district, five, 8 and 10, so at that time we are spending the enrollment notice and being enrolled in the program and, presumably they have heard from us from the out reach and etc.

and you can see automatically, the difference in activity between the spring enrollment which is a smaller enrollment and focus on the business customers which was focused on the residential customer and it was enrolled around 75, 8,000 customers. >> i think that the earth day events in 2016, were kind of a water shed moment for us. we worked with our 350 sf advocate and we staffed numerous events throughout steet and the big earth day festival. and we got like 50 sign up frz that one weekend and we all just stood back and said wow thanks was a good event and we need to do more things like that and we need to partner with 350, sf more and so we have got more aggressive on that front. and society earth day event that i have note there had, you can see the spike and there say correlation of the nuchl sign ups, and that reinforced the

need that we need to do more of these. >> the second item is our business times ads. and we did those because we were enrolling businesses, and we wanted to make sure that again, all of the businesses knew the business community knew, the businesses boekt that we were enroll and the businesses that may have wanted to sign up throughout steet and so we did the business times advertising, we saw a little spike, it was not as dramatic as the, you know, earth day that i just mentioned. but going forward, there will probably continue to be a resource for marketing out reach when we are enrolling business customers. and the next item were the linked in ads, this is our first time that we had advertised on linked in for clean power sf and it kind of came right at the tail end of a spike that was probably from, the out reach activities that we were doing. and we did not find them as effective as facebook.

we were targeting businesses because that spriet mare customers that we were enroll and so we may revisit them in the future, but i am going to talk more about the facebook ads later. definitely, i found facebook to be the most compelling on-line form of advertise thag we have done. we do want to branch out and do other forms of advertising as well. and the faflt forward a little bit. we did a phone bank in partnership with the see-er ra club, where they provided us a list of members in san francisco that we called and, explained the program to, and encouraged them to sign up, we had the club volunteers in the office and we had volunteers from 350 sf and it was a big effort and we saw a spike over the next couple of weeks, kind ever like a reverbation effect that continued to reverb brat and so we found that to be effective and we want to do more of those volunteer phone banks and again with the club and, the league of vote sxerz there is probably other like minded organizations

that we want to partner with. and so all of that leads up to our fall enrollment, which is mostly residential customer and this is our first large, you know, 80,000 customer enrollment for the first big residential enrollment and so it is going to be different than the business enrollment earlier in the year and we kind of prefaced that with the ads that began, in september, october, time frame. and that is right about when our enrollment notice started going out and what we saw immediately when the enrollment notices went out and they kind of go out on a rolling basis and, so it is like 2shgs 0,000 for the first week, and that is about 80,000 and then 20,000 for the next month fer week and, so you are mailing about 160,000 mail pieces before you actually cut the customers over for service and we started seeing huge spikes in super green, up grades for these customers is that were enrolling and so it kept getting big sxer bigger each week.

and we had always suspected that the enrollment would be our best vehicle to advertise the program, to market the program and to create a buzz in the communities, because there is one thing to talk to someone and they, you know t may not be on the radar, you are talking to them about it but you are not going to enroll them so they may not take action, the enrollment, kind of the people stand up and notice. they are getting enrolled. and so, you know, they are going to make a decision, do i want to stay with the program? do i want to opt out? fortunately we have a low opt out rate. but they also commit to the opportunity for the decision to upgrade the super green and we saw that throughout that entire enrollment period and we would like to think that we were kind of fanning the flames of that desire to upgrade and we have the lead stories and the outdoor advertising. and we have the welcome events for the new customers that we invited everyone to and we have seen a surge in the super green up grades, and you can see that

during that enrollment period. >> i have a quick question. just to clarify, we are looking at page 2 of the presentation that you are giving us, this chart that is, let's see comparing super green sign up and up grades with the out reach activities. if you could just have that back on the screen. thank you. >> sfgov tv, so we are looking at the period between say, october 31st 2shgs 016, and december, 31, and so i see that spike that is spike is only between, 200 and 250 customer snz >> no, i think that it is probably more than that. because this is not cumulative. and i just don't have the cumulative number. >> but that is the spike number. >> correct thanks is the spike number for that week. >> that week >> i see. >> so yeah, i don't have the numbers, i could probably track those cumulative. >> what is the total number of

like number not percent so i don't have to do math. >> the super green, numbers. >> 2500 right now, i am looking. approximately, 2500 super green customers right now in the program. >> going forward we will cluster activity in terms of out reach, education burkes during those periods, between enrollment werz going to be doing, education and out reach and encouraging the people to sign up for super green, early and so it is always a work in process. and so that is slide two. and we will move on to slide three. this is a snapshot of how individu communication or field communication activities did in terms of super green sign ups. >> i am sorry to interrupt, but could you just switch to the

slide three for us. okay tlshgs we go. >> i am sorry. >> i am using my paper version right now. >> thank you. >> so the san francisco department of environment at our behalf we contracted with them to increase our presence out there in district five and 8. and our field presence specifically because they have their own on the grouped field team. and so, they did a number of activities for us, they augmented our tabling at fares and festivals, they went door-to-door for us in district 5z, and 8 and they held their own networking super green initiative and they did intercept and that is when the people stand on the corn sxer say hello, do you want to talk to me about clean energy. and a few other things as well. i followed up on phone calls, based on conversations that they had. and for each day, they did intercepts forks each festival. they table that, they kept you

know a record of how many super green, sign ups that they generated. we kept those records as well. because they give us those forms. and so, i asked them to prepare a graph that kind of showed what were the best performing activity and what did not perform as well as others. and so it is self-explanatory and it thinks up of what we are experienced as well. the tabling events like what we did at earth day was a successful event in the department of the environment found that they are tabling the one timetable and the reoccurring events were successful. and so we are going to continue to do more that have going forward. >> but the door-to-door was a little more challenging, because we are going door-to-door to customers that we were enrolling. but you need to give folks some time, you know, they have gotten their enrollment notice, so what they found when they went to the door and people were re-septemberive, but they were doing more education about the program, and then, we tracked a few of those conversations and some of them did result in up

grades like a month later. but those are or can be hard to track. and so they were productive conversations but they did not always, immediately result in a super green upgrade. you know, just as we found with organizing it in the communities, you know, if you got, and have you friends and, have you family, if you reach out to your het works you will get and encourage sign up and so they were successful on this front and intercept some, and probably of all of the activity and perform, you know, did not perform as well as the others. >> i don't know why that. >> it is a little hard on the sidewalk. >> it can be, hard on the sidewalk. >> so we did learn from these events and if did sync up with what we knew and it is interesting to seat numbers on paper. >> i think that this is very helpful and so thank you for put thanksgiving together. i think that it gives us an idea of the types of activities that staff and advocates are doing and how we partner with the

department of the environment and where the successes are and where the opportunities are. and just to clarify, you will be sfpuc will be out there on earth day this year. it is going to be april 22nd. >> yes. april 22nd, i think. and yeah, i believe that we have a sponsored booth at the earth day festival and it is now at the big festival in the civil center plaza it is not on the street that is disappointing because it was a great event last year. but we will be there at that same event and, there will be a few other events that will be out as well. >> if you are watching this at home make sure that you come and you might want to take note of your pg& e account number and sign up on the spot. >> or sign up on-line. clean power sf.org right now. >> thank you. >> i two more slides that i can be brief. this is our budget for 2017. it is fairly self-explanatory, we have a number of mailings

that we have to do, they are statutory obligations. the enrollment notice and move in notices, people moving in and out of area that we are serving customers when there is a new person that moves in, they become our customer and send them the move in noise so there are hundreds going out each month, we also have ab bli indications to those who subpoena grade to supper green, since it is certificated by the center for resource solutions you can earn lead points, there are a number of obligations because we are leafed accredited and so every super green upgrade, triggers a noise notice to the customer about the program and it is a good notice and explaining what it is and why they are getting that notice. >> there are a lot of mailings and we turned into a bit of an instruct mail shop. we also have a line itd em for video and animation and especially as he wei look to the

future, once the growth plan is finalized we want to be gearing up for larger enrollments in the future, for the line item for advertising as well and of course, the out reach and sponsor ship and another community organizing, initiatives. >> and so great, and like at the total budget of 746,300. how does that compare with something like the sf water customers s that like small they are year and will be larger weighs look at and enrolling the entire city? i mean, how does that, how does that compare? >> off the top of my head would i say. >> it is okay. >> i would say that the clean power sf marketing and out reach budget on an and we are going forward on a year to year basis, will probably be larger than the

market and out reach budget for water. because we are proactively enrolling customer and communicating with customers. and we are competing for customers. water enterprise, does not really do any of those, functions and now they have different educational and marketing opportunities and investigation buzz they are different with what we are doing with clean power sf. and so i think that over all advertising clotteral, direct mail and, i do believe that clean power sf has a larger marketing budget than kind of like the equivalent functions in the water team at the sfpuc. >> great. >> yes. >> sure. thank you so much. >> sure. >> for the presentation. >> thank you. >> i just wanted to tell my own personal story. in the context of the president trump and his administration's dismantling of the epa and a roll back of all of the progress that we have had around protecting our climate.