Skip to main content

tv   Government Access Programming  SFGTV  November 17, 2019 10:00am-11:01am PST

10:00 am
prepare yourself, family >> i'd like 20 call to order the regular meeting of the san francisco public utilities commission. today's date is tuesday, november 12th, 2019. roll call, please. >> before i call, i'd like to let everybody know that items 6, the citizens advisory committee quarterly update will be removed from calender at the request of the cac chair and we'll reschedule that. [roll call] >> we have a quorum. commissioners, before you have the minutes of october 22nd, 2019. are there any additions or
10:01 am
corrections? any public comments on the minutes of october 22nd? may i have a motion? all those if favor? >> aye. >> opposed. the motion carries. next item, please. >> clerk: item 4 is general public comment. members of the public hey direct the commissioner on matters within the commission's jurisdiction and not on today's agenda. >> president caen: i have some speaker cards. mr. decosta. >> commissioners, it's novembe november 2019 and the community in the bay view hunters point keep asking the advocates why is it smelling so much?
10:02 am
the stench? from the digesters that are now operating. the stench also is in the creek. so, i see that some of you commissioners have visited the is the east, what i call the raw sewage treatment plant, but what are you doing about it? for how long is the community going to be impacted? and i say this because we have all sorts of vultures -- i call them vultures because they're outsiders coming in, doing surveys and trying to ask questions of the citizens but
10:03 am
not once have i seen the sfpuc do anything linked to health, linked to blood testing, linked to the adverse impacts that the raw sewage treatment plant has impacted the community all these many years. and i know, among y'all, some of y'all have your heart in the right place. not all of y'all but some of y'all. so, who is going to stand up and speak truth? who is? not once have y'all discussed here with the accountability and transparency the so-called community benefits that is operated by assistant general manager of external
10:04 am
affairs/chief strategist. so the community is hurting. the most vulnerable in the community are hurting. the children, the infants, the elders, and those with compromised health. more of those who are physically and mentally challenged. what are y'all doing, commissioners? whatever is going on in washington d.c. something needs to be done there. a veron the matters i'm talking about. thank you, very much. >> president caen: thank you for your input. next speaker, eileen brocken. >> coalition for san francisco
10:05 am
neighborhoods here on my own behalf. at its october general assembly meeting, the coalition for san francisco neighborhoods passed a resolution supporting emergency firefighting capabilities on ter aville as part of theel tell aville project which includes transit, water and sewer upgrades. a copy of this resolution has been submitted to the commission secretary. the resolution supports dedicated high pressure, high volume resilient pipes and high grants as well as an ocean pump station. the merchants also known as pops, have voted to support the csfn resolution. they introduced the resolution at csfn and also at the merchants. ter aville is a transit corridor and a commercial corridor. to be consistent with the city's
10:06 am
policy, aish was included in the original puc plans for ter aville. it was not. therefore, the taraville neighbors and merchants have taken it upon themselves to note this glaring emission and advocate for the puc to rectify it. other issues that are being brought before the commissioner are as follows -- that the south base on of sunset reservoir has not been seismically retro fitted and they are reviewing the management plan. the cfnn are advocating for the waters off ocean beach to be included in the sanctuary. based on recent information, the oceanside treatment plant may still be an obstacle to national marine sanctuary status. thank you. >> thank you. the next speaker. peter.
10:07 am
>> good afternoon. peter of the -- i was glad you had a conversation about the 265mgd and it was very clear that there are no demand studies that project 265. if there, they are should be posted for poem to see but 265 is really the sales tap, 184 for bosca and 181 for san francisco. and it was interesting that the bosca representative said a couple things, one, that they're revising their demand projections and her guess is they're le going to be lower thn 184. her customers don't want to pay for projects that are unnecessary. they're sensitive to rate increases. holding on to that 184 puts the sfpuc in a position where we have to come up with the water because if they collect on their
10:08 am
full contract, we need to be able to meet them and that money will be spread out across the system. that's an issue that's challenging for you, i'm sure, and something that needs to be addressed. now the current demand is, the last two years it's been less than 100mgd. our guess it's not going to get close to 265, even close to 223. but this is an opportunity. what happens though is the design drought is planning for eight and a half years of drought at 265 demand assuming no new water supplies are going to come online. what happened during the most recent drought was right off the bat, there was a dry year and it was like ok, he go into design drought mode. we release the minimum amount we have to. there are three years worth of water and storage at height of that drought. a different approach would be to acknowledge that well, right now, it's demand is 200mgd. we will voluntarily give up
10:09 am
water and early droughts. maybe the first two years we're voluntarily putting 40% down the river. and then we go back to where we takeaway that voluntary commitment and go back to base loads and we get through the design drought. you can model it and see. we meet the eight and a half years. that would, in these situations where we have shorter droughts, three or four years, at least of the river is benefiting for the first two or three and maybe we have a bad year, a bad couple of years and the system replenishing and we start over. i hope you would consider that and we would be happy to discuss these issues with staff. thank you. >> president caen: thank you. is there any other public comments? next item, please. >> clerk: communications, item 5. >> president caen: any comments, commissioners? i would like to address item 5e.
10:10 am
and i would like to have a public discussion on this. so, if we could do it now or scheduled it at next meeting. >> we can schedule it at the next meeting. >> is that 5e? >> yes. >> any public comment on this item? the next item has been removed so we move on to the report of the general manager. >> all right. the first item is the bay delta water quality control plan update. age steve richy. >> good afternoon, commissioners. steve richy assistant general manager for water. on the bay delta water control plan as i reported routinely the commission we are working with the state of california and our
10:11 am
partners on the river and environmental groups on trying to successfully come to a set of voluntary agreement that's can be reviewed by the state water resources control board as an alternative to their action to approve the water quality control plan last december. and i most recently reported, things are moving slowly on that front and the state is still working through numerous issues internally within itself. there was a hope and expectation that by mid-october the analysis would be ready to go forward to the state water resources control board. that did not happen and the projection is that might be ready by the end of the calender year or by mid-december, since the last two weeks of the year people tend to not be around. and so, we are hopeful that that can happen. i am not 100% confident that will happen.
10:12 am
hopefully we will make progress with the state on the important matter. and that's all there is to report. >> president caen: any comments, commissioners? any public comments on that item? yes, peter. >> peter jackmire. the voluntary agreements it sounds good. voluntary, it's an agreement. there's really no faith from the environmental community that can you produce more fish with less water. there are six environmental groups that are involved in the voluntary agreements. we are not. not a single one of them right now feels much hope for the voluntary agreements. we've lost about a year implementing some serious
10:13 am
promising changes and conditions to the and we hear the science is inadequate and the analysis is wrong. the specific studies that were conducted by the irrigation district, they hired firms that came up with what sounds great, wow, we can accomplish these things without putting more water down the river. staff argues that is superior to the state science. this is a really robust state agency and it's really disappointing that we're really at this point of battling science. there are some wonderful resources here in the bay area who under the science. it would be interesting to have a workshop and hear from both
10:14 am
sides. hear from the consultants who have hear from environmental scientist who's have been a lot of effort into this and disagree with that science and i would love to see the sfpuc take a leadership role and getting to the bottom of the best available science and how can we repair conditions and the we are really on the brink and this is our river. we're the stewards of it and we're not behaving that way so the report in a two month or two months we're still at a stand still with the voluntary agreement and at what point to are do we acknowledge the science is are not telling those who want it to say that these will work. these will work. the science isn't there. thank you. >> president caen: thank you.
10:15 am
>> commissioners, missing in this discussion are the first people that were here for 13,000 years -- that's 13,000 years before someone came and all the shenaniganses i have described to you before and they damned the most beautiful valley in the world, the hatch hatchy valley. today you commissioners have to know your history the history of the area. not ones as the sfpuuc met with
10:16 am
the tribes from the area. peter comes here and he does his best and gives you the data. i pay attention to it and i don't want to say anything much and it is one-sided empirical data. for 13,000 years, the first people to care of the rivers and the redwood trees, the entire area was pristine until someone came and within 200 years destroyed everything and we get the pristine water and flush our toilets and we have to make the
10:17 am
connection. so when they have this discussion in sack ra men co and they say ok, we'll do this and we'll do that and we deem the san francisco public utilities commission and within the act y'all have a right to fight and dyou ask silly questions and the whole area and the environment under the director of the environmental justice advocacy. the first people have not been consulted. try it. bring them here. only one commissioner saw that and they speak from their heart. they're not scientists.
10:18 am
they're nature unlike someone's -- what i call the living dead. they have in soul. call the first people. and try to see if you can bring about some sort of a solution. thank you, very much. >> president caen: thank you. anymore public comment. >> madam chair, i have a question. i have a question and i'm now saying it into the mic. if i could ask council about the question that i was just about to ask before just on a procedural basis. >> president caen: certainly. >> so through the chair, you know, i attend union meetings and i belong to different organizations and very robust organizations just like this organization is and this commission is and the dynamic that we experience democratically right here. when i ask the question when
10:19 am
someone from the public comes in with accusatory questions, i was told that with no dis respect, that that's not the procedure and why it is out of order. i sometimes don't feel comfortable here being accused, this has nothing to do with mr. acosta, but i feel uncomfortable being accused of being in a process where i'm not allowed to enter change with public that comes to the microphone fully loaded and can say whatever he or she wants to and we have to just sit here and listen to it, which is wonderful. i have patients. i work on for the labor movement and i have many constituents. in my day job. so, i guess my question to you is why am i unable, as a commissioner, to engage someone who comes to the microphone and
10:20 am
says things that i have questions about or that i disagree with? >> so a couple of points, can you direct staff to follow-up directly with a public commenter about a particular issue? >> your first comment i was ruled out of order. >> i'm speaking to clarify what the rules are. i don't know that president caen will do out of order. >> with no disrespect to madam president -- >> the general rule is at least when the commission is holding general public comment that what is to be avoided is engaging in any kind of item not on the agenda which item pre includes you from discussing specific items in anyway substance or debt that are not on the agenda. >> this was not on the agenda.
10:21 am
>> with regard to matters on the agenda it's within the commission's discretion if they want to ask a follow-up question of a present erroer or a public commenter. the legal issue is proper notice to the public that the commission is going to discuss a particular topic or issue. and trying to avoid getting into discussions of items that have not been a again diesed o on the agenda. >> an example is that in the if it's voted on or heard as commissioners, that does not mean that the general public can come up and make public comment that may be germane to the issue
10:22 am
that's being topics, which means you know, where is the fuzzy line between the comments of the general public versus what is actually been agendad and that is not where i'm going but it's what i'm pointing out as little bit as to what i experienced. so, someone comes up and says something and i'm muffled from making a comment back. >> thank you for the clarity but that's why i am asking that question. i can sit here for five hours and listen or i can participate in the democracy that i so enjoy. >> president caen: what problem is that often times one question then leads to a discussion and then because that is not, as council said, on the agenda, that's where the problems come
10:23 am
in. >> in my world sometimes it leads to a fight. that's what we're not necessarily interested in doing. i am going to -- thank you for clarifying. >> president caen: good. >> moving on. >> i think that i would like to hear a conversation regarding the science. maybe we can schedule a meeting to discuss a lot of changes and climate change and rapidly. different sciences, i think it would be interesting to be able to have a public meeting to hear the different sciences. and i'm sure you have had them before but would it be a problem to update? >> no, certainly not. we can schedule that. we have discussed this many
10:24 am
times. part of the problem maybe that's the wrong word to use. there's a disagreement about the science. so i'd like to hear the disagreements and i think maybe people would be interested to hear the disagreement and they may not be so as far as we think but it would be a good idea. it's always brought up. i'd like to hear it. >> so maybe what we can do is we can refer you to -- because we made presentations at the commission meeting about our science versus their science. and maybe we can actually send you so that you can kind of see what our position was and what, you know -- >> commissioner maxwell: back into the past.
10:25 am
send me the information. >> we did a presentation on it. when you look at it if you want an update or something and you want, we can tailor what you would like us to do i'm here to serve, right. >> i trust what the professionals are looking and i assume that many of them are scientists looking into the things happening. i am a little bit leary of setting up a forum for someone that disagrees with everything that the puc is doing just because they have not been able to make sure that a differing
10:26 am
opinion ends up being the result of what is moving. setting up a forum just to have not debate but just to have disagreements to get back is not something that i'm terribly interested in and promoting. >> commissioner maxwell: that's fine. i would be interested in your suggestion and if there was any further information. >> as commissioner max well said, i would like to see on that information well because things have been done and -- we're both new commissioners. >> also, we can send you stuff that peter has done at other -- i think it was recorded at bosca? your presentation? so we can send you a lot of stuff that we have. >> it's a good beginning.
10:27 am
thank you. from there we can move. >> president caen: next item for you, mr. kelly. >> the next item is a clean power sf quarterly update. barbra hail and mike hines. just you. ok. >> barbra hail assistant general manager for power. this is our quarterly report schedule. we're coming to you less frequently to talk about our clean power sf progress. what we'd like to do with these quarterly reports is provide you with our usual clean power sf customer enrollment and service status updates. then go into some highlighting of some of the activities of what has been happening currently and since the last report and then share a bit about what we expect to have coming up for you.
10:28 am
and specifically a couple of items that we'll bring to you to weigh in on over the next quarter. so we propose that as the basic approach we'll take for etch of theseach ofthese reports. what has been happening since our last report and a look ahead. it's not working. so first up are enrollment stats. you can see we have over 400,000 accounts that we're serving. city wide. that is about 3.6% have opted out so we're happy to report a 96% retention rate since launch. we have 1.8% of those customers that signed up for super green and products and representing
10:29 am
about 4% of our annual energy sales. here is what is happening. i'm super happy to report that we -- over the last month we received an award. it's an award that was issued by the c40 cities, bloomberg philanthropies for the launch of our clean power sf program so this is an award that the city received due to the your work and mike will show you the actual award. your work and our work. it connects 94 of the world's leading cities to take bold action towards a healthier and more sustainable future. the award is a honor that
10:30 am
provides international recognition for cities that are demonstrating climate action leadership and c40 cities received 195 climate action projects submissions this year which were evaluated on certain criteria, climate action, benefits, and innovation, governance, and sharing and scaling. san francisco was one of only seven winners from across the globe. who were announced at the c40 world mayors summit on october 10th. clean power sf was selected as the winner by c40 cities in the category titles the future we want, requires transformative change. mike hymns, traveled to copenhagen to accept the award on our behalf. we're passing it around. you can feel it's weighty. you can do your work out on this
10:31 am
award. and we're -- i'm personally very proud of the fact that we stood up this program. we grew it from may of 20616 to serving over 400,000 customers today and we did that just really, with the passion and determination dedication and intellect of our existing clean power staff under the leadership of mike hymns and i want him to stand up here with me for you to recognize his great work from the beginning of this program from the launch to where we are today. i'm really proud of what the city has accomplished and so happy to have the c40 cities recognized that accomplish. it's nice it feels good. [applause] with that, i'll ask mike to walk us through the rest of the accomplishments. >> i'm curious, as we pa pass ts
10:32 am
around, this is a very -- for those who are looking on it, it's a very heavy cylinder of steel with something on the end of it and i'm curious what it is and what the significance of that is. >> this is mike hymns. yes, it's intended to represent carbon emissions avoided. and it is -- i believe it's a concrete or cement mix. it's intended to represent the voided carbon emissions. yeah, it's not a very shiny award. [laughter] it raises questions when you are going through security. [laughter] so, bringing it back i was a little sweaty going through security. fortunately, they were congratulatory when they found
10:33 am
out what it was about. i'll say bringing it into this building i got some looks from security as well. i do just want to say that it's really a tribute to everything that the department has done and the staff. it's a great honor to receive the award but also to represent the city there in copenhagen. so, let's see. in the same vein, we wanted share a news about a new program we're rolling out, and we are in the process of launching a budget billing program for rain
10:34 am
power sf customers and this is an opt in program and with seasonal variations and usage and this monthly bills. under budget billing, participating customers will be billiobuild on an average of tht 12 months of usage to estimate a levellized bill so the idea is consistent billing. predictable billing for budgeting purposes. currently, when a pg&e electricity distribution customer that has signed up for pg&e's version of this joins clean power sf, the budget billing calculation only applies to the transmission and distribution charges, the exit fee and the charges that pg&e collects not the electric generation component. so, offering this program fills
10:35 am
a gap in clean power sf service for customers enrolled in pg&e's companion program. this is the first offered in pg&e service territory and the generic term for the kind of program that clean power sf is in the state of california. so, to help illustrate what this means, this slide gives you a visual representation of what it would look like compared to current billing for an average residential customer. the stacked bars in this chart represent the components of the average customers' electricity bill today so the blue segments are pg&e distribution costs and
10:36 am
the light green segments are pg&e exit fees collected and the dark green is the clean power sf charges for generations supply provided our portion of the business. the electricity business. and you can see from the shape of just the bars across the 12 months of the year, that there's a dip in the middle. so on average, san franciscans use more power in the winter partly driven by base heating and lighting than in the summer. that yellow line across the top, where customers' bills will be more consistent. we will be using a 12 month challenge for customers that elect to participate.
10:37 am
we're conducting a soft launch of the programs this month to handful of customers that have volunteered and that's intended to test out the billing system that our contractor has developed to support this effort before we scale it. and we intend to make it available to all customers and begin marketing the program in january. i'd like to recognize a few of our team members, kaitlyn mcgee who is here. julia ole mond and justin pine who worked with our billing contractor to pull the program together. so, what's coming up, it wouldn't be the end of the calender year at the discussion of clean power sf rates. i guess it's only funny to me now. under its normal rate-setting
10:38 am
cycle, pg&e gets approval from the california puc to implement new electricity generation rates and the pucia power charge and difference adjustment exit fee on january 1st. typically, we don't know what the rates are going to be we get forecasts and based on the forecast we receive we are expecting the pcia exit fee to go up and pg&e generates to go down. the combination of these two changes may mean that we would need to decrease clean power sf rates to continue to offer a competitive service. so our team is looking closely at that and in anticipation of changing pg&e rates, we are planning a rate action soon. similar in approach to what we did last year and a conditional delegation of authority to the general manager and staff to finalize rates on the condition
10:39 am
on the rates recover cost and other policy goals. following the rates with a formula. we plan to bring another rate action to you at the same time. a companion. that would address time of use rates for residential customers. the driver here is at the california public utilities commission and the investors owned utilities were districted by the state legislature a few years ago to transition residential customers to time of use rates as their default rate option. under the state's plan, all residential customers within the investorrer-owned utility service area will be defaulted to time of use rates at a particular time. time of use rates means that the rates for electricity used vary over the course of the day. based on the time that the energy is used. customers will have the option to return to a different rate
10:40 am
plan, their previous rate plan and associated support to help customers understand what might be the best option for them. in addition, the state has a bill protection for customers that participate in the first full year of the program and pay more on the new rate. this is a preview. we'll bring you more information about the program in our recommendations on how we would participate soon. >> we're also in the process of pulling together our second biennium resource plan. this is referred to as the i.r.p. we use a lot of acronyms. you'll hear this one a lot. the i.r.p. is a plan that forecast customer demand over a 20-year period and identifies energy resource options to serve that demand with the goal providing customers the lowest
10:41 am
cost energy supply that will also keep the lights on and the other policy objectives. so for example, reducing or eliminating greenhouse gas emissions. they're the best practice and they will develop a i.r.p. for clean power s.f. on a regular basis. in 2015, senate bill 350 made it state law for ccas to prepare one every two years and to submit that plan to the california puc. and i.r.p. does not replace budgeting or capital planning but it can influence them by identifying likely energy supply pathways. and that is how we're treating our i.r.p. in the context of this current upcoming budget and capital planning process. the plan must be approved by the commission and submitted to the california puc for certification in the spring of next year.
10:42 am
we commenced work on clean power sf2020i.r.p. this last july and just to give you a preview of what we're doing, they are a forecast of customer demand over the long-term including sensitivities on the demand that our customers may have. accounting for things like building decarbonization and increased electrical vehicle demands and expanded energy see efficiency targets for buildings. and we're work on identifying options for meeting clean power sf renewable energy and greenhouse gas while investing locally and that includes a key baseline constraints of our plan is that all energy supplied by clean power sf must be 100% renewable and greenhouse gas free by 2030. we'll also be analyzing alternative energy portfolios
10:43 am
and performing sensitivities so for example, what happens if we accelerate that goal? what might be the impact to rate payers, for example. on that vain, it's an optimization exercise that looks at the resources available, the cost, and what the optimal mix would be to remain competitive with pg&e and other market optin the marketplace. here is our schedule for the next six to eight months. and as i mentioned we kicked off our planning process in july and we're in the process of preparing a draft i i.r.p. that has been informing our draft 10-year plan and a renewable energy plan. earlier this year in resolution,
10:44 am
9919, the board urged the puc to develop a draft renewable energy plan so that plan, we've incorporated it into our i.r.p. and we're preparing a separate report that can be shared with the board so it's a component of our i.r.p. so it's being prepared and we're working on a draft to deliver into december. we intend to engage with stakeholders in the first quarter of the calender year. and, submit the capital plan to the commission in january along with the regular cycle. the california puc hasn't yet issued final guidelines on what it requires us to submit and the other market participants. that is scheduled for february of 2020. so, this is a challenge for us as staff to prepare the plan and
10:45 am
have a really tiny little window than react to the state that wants it also in a different format. so, just to give you a sense that that's an important milestone in our schedule as well, we'll use them to finalize the plan and bring that to the commission we're targeting march of 2020 with a currently due delivery date of may 2020 for submission to the california puc. and the last milestone here is adoption of our capital plan by the board in june. i think that concludes our presentation. i'm happy to take any questions >> president caen: commissioners i have a question as soon as i get my voice back. was there a thought that pg&e might raise the exit fees? who a proves the raise?
10:46 am
is that the california puc? >> yes. >> president caen: ok. so i mean, what i'm seeing is they raised the rates and then we have to compensate to keep our rates lower. so this might be a wonderful ploy on their part to continue the squeeze. am i wrong in this assumption? >> well, they are bound by the rules that are in place. there is a proceeding that takes place at the california puc that develops facts to support a decision that the california puc will ultimately vote out and the city, along with other communities that have programs are active participants. the pcia calculation, as it is now, is fairly form you layic. you might recall last year in october are there was a big question that the puv issued we
10:47 am
had a lot of discussion about its painful impacts to the cca model. that decision laid out revised method ole good eveninmethodoloe the -- they need to follow the guidelines. i think what the city is doing along with other ccas is advocate. they're considering additional reforms. one of the important areas is to make sure the energy that pg&e purchased on behalf of rate payers before we launched clean power sf is appropriately valued because that is ultimately the benchmark that sets the pcia. the pcia just recovering without a market. the excess cost of their portfolio. and we think that there' there'm
10:48 am
to improve in that regard. we have a similar situation last year, i mean, this is a challenge that is fluid. we thought it was going to move a lot more than it did and by the time they finally put out a final rate, it was quite a bit different, actually than what they had been forecasting. i think the rate action we're going to bring to you will help raise some of these issues of mechanic how the rates given its business model. so i hope i answered your question. >> president caen: you did. i do have another question, which your answer prompted this question. for how long do we have to pay for their future contracts. it seems to me there has to be, at some point, they say well, these folks are no longer customers. is there an end to this or what? >> in theory, yes, there is. so, what is really important is
10:49 am
that pg&e isn't making new commitments on behalf of exiting clean power sf customers. so they're no longer planning and that's what our i.r.p., we're assuming the responsibility for planning to serve the customers. pg&e is no longer making those commitments to the term of the commitments made prior to the city officially launching clean power sf are the commitments that our rate payers are responsible for so those contracts will expire. and this also touches on sort of the on going discussions that the california puc, there's a lot of discussion about liquidating some of these contracts, assign something or allocating some of the products to the ccas and ultimately especially the renewable contracts were made on behalf of all customers and so we're trying to make sure the benefits of those contracts are translated to clean power sf
10:50 am
customers. but, to give you a more specific customer, it's probably about a 20-year time period for a lot of these contracts and we expect the pcia to start to decline. electricity costs will go up. a lot of these contracts are fixed priced contracts. they're relative value in the market will improve. so we are expecting that it will decline overtime. >> president caen: good. >> the commissioner is way back in the year 2000, we had a cca and we attended meetings in sacramento. so, when sfpuc speaks about the
10:51 am
clean energy, they do not mention the 58 homes where we put solar a long time ago. the other thing is, some of ours would work with a gentleman called addbot who worked for the smpu-c he is mentioned. people who say we did this and that and it's just a rod or made of concrete, that's fine for y'all to rejoice. what we need to see, holistically, is real time of our carbon footprint. real time of the pollution with out aggregate, our mercury and
10:52 am
our lead. you don't talk about that -- [applause] so we need to be frank with the citizens this population 840 or so -- [please stand by]
10:53 am
>> for what they did. and i say this because pg&e has noted that part of the history of our community, but not sf p.u.c. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you very much, jed holts man, regional climate advocacy. i worked with your staff to get clean power sf launched many
10:54 am
years ago. i think it would be interesting to see a graph of the p.c.i. a charge from 2016 to the present. for some reason your staff never presents that. that is money drained out of the local economy and out of the ratepayer's pockets to go to the shareholder-owned corporation which has engauged in any number of antisocial behaviors in the last several years, not going beyond that so you know every year i have been involved since 2013 the p.c.i. a has gone up. i think, you know, this is a black box process at the california p.u.c. where the utility provides information. we rely on them for accurate data about the transactions
10:55 am
decades ago. i guess my comment would be after repeated negligent and criminal behavior from this particular organization over the last several years, it is really hard to continue to bear this, you know, strange arbitrary taxation. i know it must be hard for you to plan without knowing the fate of pg&e. i want to advocate that they make our position very clear. berkshier hathaway attempting the grid regannal lie -- regionalization of the state. our governor served as mayor of the city and on the board of supervisors. the city needs to make it
10:56 am
extremely clear moving from pg&e to berkshire hathaway is a net negative and something the city will not support. especially in light of the "washington post" reporting this week about the impact that pacific gas & electric has had on the governor's career. i think that the city making its position known in the world of our politics is critical. lastly, i would say in the world of increased wildfires and kind of utility incompetence, our grid reliability requires distributed generation where possible. clean power sf needs to move in that direction going forward. thank you. >> any other public comment? mr. kelly. >> quarterly audit and
10:57 am
performance review. charles pearl. >> deputy chief financial officer. can i have the slides, please. this next report is on the audit for the first quarter of the current fiscal year as we are showing here we have 24 audits so far in the current year, 12 in progress, eight upcoming. we have completed four of them. in terms of the audits in the past quarter our work force development and community benefits is under audit. in terms of audits wrapped up it is and year end. as you know the fiscal year 19 concluded on june 30th. a lot of the work in this past
10:58 am
quarter is all about the financial statements and closing out the fiscal year. we had four physical inventory count audits for each of the enterprises. two were 100% and others were based on estimates. then we had a disclosure report related to clean power and the power content label. that is very important about the promotion of the program. that is the work completed over the past quarter. just a few details on the annual inventory count. as i noted, this is related to the fiscal year end. as any big store needs to count the stuff that is in the store as part of the financial statements, we also go to our warehouses to make sure that the physical inventory on the shelf matches what is in the systems. that audit was -- those audits
10:59 am
were performed. we have a third-party that comes in and does that. as noted in the reports we makee adjustments in the financial statements. there are areas with further follow-up and improvement. some of those have to do with making sure we record things in a timely way. another part of it is process needs to be improved to make sure we are recording transactions properly when inventory comes in and out. we are working the finance shop is working with the enterprises to make sure those recommendations are followed through on. overall, we have made adjustments so the financial statements are reported accurately when those come out in the next few weeks. in terms of looking forward, in
11:00 am
the current quarter we are closing out the crystal springs construction contract review. we have a cyber security review underway. we also have our wholesale revenue requirement audit for fiscal 18 wrapping up issuing in the next couple weeks. the financial statements as i mentioned. we aim to issue those towards the end of this month, november. after the financial statements are issued we will issue the annual financial report and popular annual financial report towards the end of the calendar year. just our tracker that shows open recommendations, we are in terms of the bubble on the right side we closed out a fairly old audit from 2015 associated with