in your packet, you had received the presentation that i and my colleagues at the puc had given at the san francisco public utilities commission meeting on tuesday. i am going to provide a high level overview, and i'm happy to take questions throughout the presentation as you see fit. one thing to start out, just to highlight is, we have been working together very collaborative lee -- very collaboratively. the chair of my commissioned it highlights how she would like to have feedback from this body. where we are -- i can just sort of go through a bit. first, as you know, the program, given the market research we have done in terms of where we think our likely participation would be and the ease of marketing 100% clean program, and that costs for the 100 percent premium will not be a driver of additional opt outs. we are looking at 100% renewable product. we are having the program be set so that our rate format is similar to pg&e's that will be going into effect in july 2012. that is a flat generation rate where rates do not increase with usage. pg&e will be rolling out a similar type o

what would be the total appropriation necessary, and what might be coming down the pike from the puc. based upon those items, the puc did not vote on the resolution before them and wanted to hear the -- some more information before approving the term sheet. the chair and others at the commission on tuesday expressed an interest in having a special meeting in august, so i think there'll be some work in trying to pull that together. on a parallel path, and i know this body is looking at the term sheet. quickly, in 2012, just going forward for launch, after getting a contract approved and have the terms taken care of, we would be finalizing rates for shell, executing a contract in the first quarter of 2012. we would be going through a public process around the same time, establishing the rates, and getting geared up for our marketing outreach plan, making sure everyone is aware of the program. such sending up the pre- enrollment opt-outs. again, we will be targeting 70% of overall residential customers, so it will be peppered brown the vast majority of the city. in 2012, july, flat gener

for decades the puc and pg&e got along famously. in fact, critics contend they were too close for comfort, something that strikes a nerve with the puc. >> i think it's offensive and ridiculous. this regulatory body, this public utilities commission is a model across the united states for renewable energy policy, for energy efficiency, for the safety of the rail network, for work we do all across the board. and anybody who -- >> this is the perception, though? whether it's true or not, you know, perception is reality in many cases. the perception for many people. >> yeah. this is what i have to say to anyone with that perception -- it's wrong. the puc in california is actually held up as a model by lots of regulatory agencies as a good one. we're a tough agency. that doesn't mean we haven't made mistakes, and it doesn't mean we didn't have to change a lot of the way that we do natural gas safety work this year. but lax, give me a break. >> there was no break given to the puc. they, too, were chastised on capitol hill by the ntsb. onc

i want to thank the commissions of the puc and recreation and park. it is our honor to introduce this. thank you. chairperson mar: thank you. >> now i get to do the fun part. i am going to give a quick presentation on the 17th and folsom project. i am here from the recreation and parks department, planning division. one of the things we are excited about is the idea of a new neighborhood park for the mission. i want to give you a quick overview of the really great funding story on this project. we have funding for all the different life expectancy of this park. i want to talk about that, about the community outreach, and an overview of going forward on this project. before the acquisition of the project, the total cost is $6.27 million. the rec and park portion is going to be coming from eastern neighborhood impact fees. the rest of it is from the mayor's office of house and budget. the buildup of the park is being funded by state grant money. we have already received that grant. it is very exciting. it was a competitive grant process, and we were abl

the puc staff to begin up and say, "that is not possible to do." they got up and did a report at the time saying it was not possible, so you had the puc staff and the city comptroller's office singing you cannot buy more expensive power and deliver it cheaper. they would say, "yes, you can." so every month, there was this, which did not make much sense to me, so the market would prove which way it would go, so in 2009, we petitioned a supplier, and we did go to the market and said we wanted to meet the goals that have been established. we did select a provider. they were not able to meet those goals even though they said they could when they responded, so those negotiations were ultimately unsuccessful. we went back to the board with the revised plan in march 2010. that changed those goals to talk about the rates, and green power and things that were important to us in that program, and then the puc issued an additional rfp last year, and no better actually met the reduced qualifications. we still have a program that the market wanted to be involve

the only investors would be the puc. if we don't have any program, we have no customers. thinking that there is a program that you could build out local generations without a source of funding does not really work. i think that some of the stakeholders have understood which took us several years to explain that they're not free. if you issue bonds, someone must pay them back. if you're going to issue bonds, you have to of customers to pay them back or have some revenue stream to pay them back. that is not a clear concept that is in this scope. this scope says that you should be building. that is not something that works for me. there is a lot problems to try to go out and see how you might do a pro forma so that you could build something, be happy to work on that. if you would do solar, how you would afford to pay for it, all the regulations that you deal with, that would be a great scope of work. you have to go out and change the permits or two different things to be able to do these build ounce, happy to work on that. if you want to pick out the sites and figure out whe

president vietor: i think this is a bigger question on puc land policy stuff. we have these various parcels that we own, and this question of recreation has come up. the liberal on the parcel -- laguna honda parcel. they are habitat corridor related, whatever, and i do not think there is a way to encapsulate his policies so as we move forward, we can say about the terms of the relationship with other city departments or community groups because this really is our mission and our charge, in this is what we should be doing, but it is complicated. particularly in a situation. i do think it is part of the conversation around p.c.s. sets and how we either contract with other agencies or with stakeholder groups -- it is part of the conversation around puc assets. >> clearly, as we work with the trailheads, there is an organizational aspect but also a safety aspect, but inside the city, the charter gives the recreation and parks department authority, so if you really are talking about boating on the lake and fishing on the lake, where does that fit into their charge v

this amendment to the agreement with the puc covers the puc's procurement and installation of the valves. this is the scope of the agreement, and that number to a wheel. happy to answer any questions. >> i just have one question on this. when we see on the agenda that the "not to exceed" price goes up when there is added scope, does that mean that the prior "not to exceed" for each of the two or three parts, each of the three things -- that those can utilits commission no overrun on one and make it up and under run on another? >> in a sense, and the initial agreement and second amendment should be approved. once it gets approved, we issued a task order or a series of task orders to the puc for specific items. the puc then is obligated to provide those services within the task order budget amount. in effect, -- >> so those subcaps still hold. >> yes, but we do that here strictly to the budget. >> any questions? motion for approval? second. >> no members of the public wanted to address you on item. >> no objections. approved unanimously. >> item 10 is approved. Ï»¿item 11. appointing sa

again, thank you to all of the members of the city staff, whether it is puc, the arts commission, the environment, all of you for making that happen, and i look forward to the future. thank you. [applause] >> and the arts commission has some new ideas about what we can do. thanking the puc staff and the art commission staff, they are the ones who run it, the department of environment people, our in trunk cards -- in trump arts -- thank you. if you have time for a quick tour, we can go around and see the things in the building. thank you very much for coming today. [applause] captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org--

the increase to pg&e, if the california puc hasd estimated -- if they estimate incorrectly, the world would be responsible for making up the difference. >> i am not comfortable relying on the puc to take care of my ratepayers. i just do not. >> but ioff [unintelligible] that is the process we have. >> than you would have a class action. why should we have to pay? >> i am not an attorney soil will not speak to class action. >> we have an attorney here. >> the payers could a class action. i could check and get back to on that. >> one of the difficulties here is we do not know how much this is. it is hard to make decisions on a program when you have something that is undetermined. if that is under litigation, the methodology that cpuc is under litigation. are we involved in that litigation? >> yes. >> are we making the case that they pg&e should be obligated to assume whatever energy contracts are freed up by virtue of our default? >> that is one of the points we made. >> one of the points you made or one of the points that was negotiated? >> one of the points we made in litigation that

again, thank you to all of the members of the city staff, whether it is puc, the arts commission, the environment, all of you for making that happen, and i look forward to the future. thank you. [applause] >> and the arts commission has some new ideas about what we can do. thanking the puc staff and the art commission staff, they are the ones who run it, the department of environment people, our in trunk cards -- in trump arts -- thank you. if you have time for a quick tour, we can go around and see the things in the building. thank you very much for coming today. [applause] captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- >> hello. 9 judge terri l. jackson. the court is now recruiting prospective civil grand jurors. our goal is to develop a pool of candidates that is inclusive of all segments of our city's population. >> the jury conducts investigations and publishes findings and recommendations. these reports them become a key part of the civic dialog on how we can make san francisco a better place to live and work. >> i want to encourage anyone that is on the fence

the puc believes that due to the highly specialized nature of the work, it would be more costly for the puc to conduct another competitive process that have those responsibilities added to the ae com agreement. our recommendation is to approve the four resolutions. and for the reasons stated, we consider the last resolution, 11.0875 to be a policy matter for the board of supervisors. supervisor chu: thank you. are there any members of the public who wish to speak on items 5 through 11, and keep in mind that we intend to continue item 11. >> ♪ it is also vides candy the water taste stays in my mind that in finance you leave me thirsty for some fresh water fine i have got a bad for your water and i am glad you found a cure and i hope your program it does endure i'm hooked on the water feeling and i am high on believing that you're going to work out good and i will drink to chris daly i will drink to that

again, approved by the puc commission. we do have a general plan conformity letter on this as well. ymitem 11 is the same project. the city of tracy, san joaquin county. across the street from the golf course. this involves the acquisition from the dole family of eroded easement and a temporary construction even that lies along the road of 1.39 acres. this is also a settlement slightly above appraised values, below the requested amount. really, reflective of the temporary construction easement time line. so it is not above the appraised value. simply a technical issue on the settlement. $10,000 to acquire those two rights. again, approved by the puc commission through the same resolution as the prior item. general plan conformity as well. those are the three items before you now. supervisor chu: thank you for the presentation. from my understanding, and these items do not have a general fund impact. they would be paid for through the public utilities program. is that accurate? colleagues, why don't we open up these items f

there's also an element of frustration with the puc because this discussion of what the work should be has been ongoing for quite some time. it has been weeks of discussion. we still have not finalized that scope. i think it is important for lafco to strike the right balance in san will only pay what is needed. at the same time, we need to make sure we take actions to move the process forward. this action does not guarantee the $100,000 will be spent. is simply authorizes the executive officer to finalize and enter into a contract that specifically provides for work that needs to be done for the bill out. that is all it does. it went beyond that, i would not be comfortable with it. that is why i am comfortable with that. commissioner pimental. commissioner pimental: is local power interested in a negotiation on their proposal? is it an all or nothing proposal? commissioner miller: i have heard both depending on the level of frustration. sometimes people say things that they then retract. i also do not know the total answer to that question. i have received in writing and have heard fro

the puc says it is permitted work. but pg&e said the permit starts tomorrow and the street had not been marked indicating where gas lines are located under the street. pg&e also says the gas line in this location is not 24 inches deep. it's more shallow because of what's underground. >> the gas line was buried at 15 inches. the reason it wasn't down to 24 inches was it was protected with a steel plate. it had to go up and over a city facility in this case. and it was protected with a steel plate. furthermore, the contractor was only supposed to cut down through the concrete. the blade was too long, too big. it cut through the concrete and the steel blade. >> you can see crews are working right now to repair the pipe. mason street between superintendenter and geary is closed. crews are expected to be here several hours. and they're work to go restore gas service to people who were affected by this interruption. while that work continues, the investigation by pg&e and the san francisco puc is also getting started. >> oka

we invited the puc, pacific institute, and others to talk to us and help us think about what we should do, putting it desalinization in proper context. first, i am not here to support desalinization or building any specific facility. it would be too preliminary to adjudicate that, and it is not the question at hand. we are talking about a feasibility study that can answer the remaining questions about the impact and opportunities of this water treatment. we think it is a responsible thing to do. not just that. it is good planning. we support the continued study of feasibility for desalinization at the east contra costa site. this seems like it has been a bargain, with the grant funding as well as a great deal of regional cooperation and funding put together for this project, which in and of itself is a worthy pursuit, as other countries have mentioned. with 2 million more people moving to the area by 2040, we are going to need more water supply in the future. where are we going to get them? we need to know the alternatives in order to have that discussion. even in the retail area, it i

i feel like you and the puc are going out of your way to look for something to give them a contract for at this point. i am not hearing anything in this that i am convinced we need from them. if we're just looking for work to give to somebody, these are lean times. there is not enough money for anything in government that we want to be able to do. there are things we need to be doing. we need to spend more time and need more staff for those. i am not hearing why this is so necessary. $100,000 is a substantial amount of money. i feel like we are being told we need to pay this money to them and are looking for some reason to do it. by understand you are not saying that. that is how it feels from here and from the proposal that local power wrote. i just do not appreciate it. beyond that, i have had my own concerns with the quality of their product in the past. supervisor campos: i think it is really important for me to respond to that. i do not know that anyone can sit here and say that anyone is trying to make work. my role as the chair of this commission is to make sure that we move this

>> that is on hand out the puc has. in of the plumbing code which works hand in hand. looking at the code will be more from the plumbing standpoint from inspectors and then you have the handout that will be able to give them the basic information of what they need to do and where they need to go and what type of situation you have. >> so both in combination is able to provide the current guidelines for both conditions of sight and code? >> yes. >> terrific. >> the department has a standard set of plans or specs? does the department have handouts as far as plans for specs for a system? >> know, we do not design a system -- no, we do not design a system. every system is different as far as the gallon that what they put in their backyards and the location. we do not have a guideline as to how would is supposed to look. their own design is their own design. >> does the department had a list of people? >> not as far as i know. there are some different groups out there that do designs for these systems that do installations and to -- and do the design for the systems. your h

the puc has expressly extended the contract to do this buildout because one of the things that hasn't been stated that we've had seven meetings that resulted in near armageddon with the puc and community advocates about the fact that the program was you moving forward without a plan without a local buildout. without local buildout, the program does not work. i say that because we've gone out over the past few months to test that proposition and we find it to be true. so i don't know -- i don't even know what the tasks are other than if the tassbs are no move the conversation and move the plan to do a local build wouth this program then that's what we need to do. the scope that nancy mentioned, you know, we've had seven meetings with the contracter, the sfpuc staff maybe 14 hours of dialogue that led to the scope that's before you. yes, the p.u.c. did put out its own scope believed what it is the local buildout. but when we tested it, it was a failure. it went nowhere. and so the scope that's been developed now and i suppose there could be more conversation in the next couple of weeks

i want to look knowledge the mta, the puc, the office of work force development. thank you for the work you're doing in our neighborhoods. the partnership of the police department, making sure we are all safe. and finally, again, supervisor cohen and mayor lee. thank you.

i met with members of the puc last week. we spoke to the acting director of the dpw who is affected by this, corporate security from pg&e. we will be assembling a task force within the next 30 days to attack this going forward. people are taking out manhole covers and leaving by whole -- the hole. i know that one school was affected over the summer months. i know when the east bay terminal came down, that was scavenged. we will be working with the district attorney's office to gain successful prosecution. ♪ >> hello, and welcome to the department of elections right choice voting instructional video. it is part of the department of elections right choice voting outreach campaign and is designed to educate san francisco rig franciscoht choice voting. today we will learn what it is and who is elected using this voting method. we will also talk about with the ranked joyce l. looks like and how to market correctly. finally, we will see how the ranked joyce voting process works and to you an example of an election using ranked c

i met with members of the puc last week. we spoke to the acting director of the dpw who is affected by this, corporate security from pg&e. we will be assembling a task force within the next 30 days to attack this going forward. people are taking out manhole covers and leaving by whole -- the hole. i know that one school was affected over the summer months. i know when the east bay terminal came down, that was scavenged. we will be working with the district attorney's office to gain successful prosecution. >> welcome to the largest hotel in this beautiful city. it is wonderful to have all of you with us in this magnificently decorated room. in particular, i would like to recognize the honorable meier and when -- the honorable mayor edwin lee. we are equally on it to recognize the chinese deputy counsel. welcome, gentlemen. [applause] also with us today, we have officials from california tourism, community partners, and partners who are all part of bringing the chinese to this wonderful city. today, we are launching a new hote

i met with members of the puc last week. we spoke to the acting director of the dpw who is affected by this, corporate security from pg&e. we will be assembling a task force within the next 30 days to attack this going forward. people are taking out manhole covers and leaving by whole -- the hole. i know that one school was affected over the summer months. i know when the east bay terminal came down, that was scavenged. we will be working with the district attorney's office to gain successful prosecution.