kim malcolm at the sf puc. nancy miller and jason. >> thank you. >> thank you, any other member of the public would like to comment? we'll close public comment. >> one thing about lafco staff, when talking about the pg & e tariff, one thing to keep in mind, it not a green litd program yet. it's on hold. no one should assume that that program will ever see the light of day because there are a lot of complaints that sf puc submitted a letter with a bunch of questions that need to be addressed. there is direct access providers and others providing other questions and comment. there is still a lot of issues to be addressed. even though it's a potential product, it's something not occurring yet. it's on hold depending on what happens with the state legislation. >> thank you. colleagues. we can continue this item. >> if i could. this is, this could be an action item as well. if you have direction for us, i think this would be a good time to give it to us in terms of either -- >> you mentioned a letter from lafco expr

what i want us to be able to do is work with puc and we want puc to be more aggressive with helping to support us to move this forward and to make sure that it more competitive in doing so. so, i just don't feel that the support is there. i know we are talking about and you are investing in the local build out but we are pretty much ready to go on it now. we can do those things simultaneously and we are just trying to understand at this point what's the hold up? abets besides the commissures disapproval of setting these particular rates. what's the hold up to looking at an alternative to something that would be successful? >> i think that's the plan for a local build. that's an area whe we saw a lot of mutual interest across the board from policy makers. to try to put more detail to that, is what the general manager has asked us to do. so that's what we are engaged in at this point. >> part of my concern is the fact that we are trying to move the this program forward has really forced pg & e to finally step up to the plate and provide a product that they have had a long at a particular

that's the puc. for rec and park, our responsibilities are listed as plan, program and manage recreational activities at the lake focusing on active outdoor recreation and water borne activities. currently at lake merced, we offer ka >>ing, both lessons and exploration of the lake. canoing ~ [speaker not understood]. stand up padling lessons in lake explore asian, and we have come summer day camps who use the tract and surrounding area quite heavily. continuing, we are to minute term the permitting process for the rec activities. respond within 7 days to the puc to any notices regarding the need to change activities that impact the lake, maintain the facilities surrounding the lake including paths, rest rooms, natural areas, those particular areas include 150 acres of up land natural area, 4.4 perimeter -- 4.4 mile perimeter trail around the lake, adjacent landscape. four park rest room facilities, and a large picnic area and its adjacent landscape. continuing, our responsibilities they are to restor

>> the staff did not present a specific build out plan to the puc. we did present some ideas and suggestion for how we might proceed at lunch and there after. >> okay. thank you. >> all right. thank you. >> so next we wanted to -- some more questions. sorry. lafco staff informed me that staff presented a not to compete rate at 11.5 cents. what do you see at the prospect at the program going forward that we would actually be able to meet pg & e's rate if we were not doing that but it's still a possibility for that happening? >> we started to do some analysis of whether we can get down to the pg & e rate with a hundred percent renewable product. we haven't completed that analysis and it would depend on many things and how the commission and supervisors would want the build out if we get at or below the rate of pg & e, we might not meet any margin. it also would depend on the type of what it looks like we execute because they still haven't given us any final number. that will happen after we get a rate after we would get a rate for our customers. >> and

being understood that it's the puc commission, not shell. michelle: ~ shell is completely separate from all of this. the puc commissioners dictate what occurs just like you dictate to your staff what occurs. if the puc commission said, we are going to have pl, as, this is all going to be how you structure this program, ~ staff will have to do it faze that's what they're getting authorized to do. it's more of an issue within the city family itself. the price sets limits to how much money we potentially have for a buildout. if you wanted to buildout all this stuff right away but you have prices that would be so high you wouldn't have customers to be participating in the program. >> i'm clear about the we be customers so that we have cash. i get that line. [multiple voices] >> i think everything that you guys are talking about here wanting to have the discussion about is what needs to be figured out over the next 6 to 8 months. we need to have rates in order to figure that out, though. if we don't have rates, there's no ability for us to say ho

a couple of years ago, the puc received a water quality grant from the u.s. epa, it was about an $8 million grant and really the purpose of the grant was to help monitor potential contaminants in the water supply, but there was also a public education component to the grant. and, so, what we did is launched a education program that was really about what people should do if they were concerned about the water, concerned about water quality issues, is to call 311. but it also began to be a vehicle to talk about where, you know, our pristine hetch hetchy water. it was a really successful -- a successful education program. we saw the signs on muni bus station, you saw them on tv. and what actually happened as one outcome of that is anecdotally, people told us that they started to drink more water once they understood where it comes from. but also as people had water quality concerns, some of the concerns that christina alluded to in her presentation, people started calling 311 more. so, we had a 10% increase in water quality concerns and that again became another

if the puc owned that building and we could make that the icon i can sustainable building puc represents, wouldn't be a dramatic idea? >> so, one of the major decisions we made was we wanted to make a statement with this building. we wanted this building to be a lead platinum building which is very few buildings in san francisco that achieved this mark. >> leadership and energy environmental design, it takes a look at the way we think about the places where we live and work. i like to think of it as designed for human and environmental health. lead addresses five categories that enhances environment. indoor air quality, energy, water, materials and resources, and sustainable sites are the five categories for the lead. you can go for several gold or platinum certifications. >> the city wanted to be silver lead status. . maybe gold was a stretch. and people said, if we're going to be a sustainable organization that the pucs this has got to be the top of the line. it's got to be a lead platinum building. what does that mean to us? we run water, power, and sewer. so, those are some of the bi

at the puc we also believe it's be enough to just let people know that the benefits of tap water and that their tap water is of high quality. we also have a commitment to promote access to clean drinking water. and this is really part of our commission and our staff commitment to community benefits and environmental justice. i know there's a lot -- you have a big agenda for [speaker not understood] to interpret our sis [speaker not understood] community benefits and how we're doing community arts work, urban agriculture work, et cetera. another piece of that community benefits work is really around education and access and we really have a broad portfolio of work that we're doing, but wanted to particularly lift up the drink tap component. so, in 2010 we started this city-wide global tap initiative. christina mentioned the bottled water filling station in the airport. we have them in the zoo. we have them in a number of places throughout the city that we have installed so that, again, tap water is publicly available in places where it might not be so easy if you're at the marina gree

makes a commitment to a program, so we're asking the puc to do three things. one, adopt a rate structure that has rates competitive with pg&e. two, to make clear that the city does not want to be -- does not want to be depend not on recs in the future. >> bingo. >> and that the program will meet our greenhouse gas -- the city's greenhouse goals and that they will design a program that ensures local living wage jobs, or have a commitment to ensuring the program, local living wage jobs that are unionized. >> and local hire. that right there is as succinct as i've heard it. >> okay. so, it's a program that maximizes local jobs, right? >> yeah. union. >> and that -- and that has living wage -- >> if it's local living wage it's redundant f. we just say union that takes care of that. ~ if >> so that the program maximizes local union jobs. >> there's a couple problems here. my wife is waving at me on tv. [laughter] >> what i'm going do ask is a friendly amendment after throwing out some thoughts here is that there also be the direction within the motion, if it can be

so, the puc has discouraged environmental review until a future date. they have determined the contract is not subject to c-e-q-a. the contract with shell energy. and we disagree with that legal position. >> thank you very much. counter point from ms. malcolm. >> public comment. is there any other public comment? >> actually, commissioner king has served with distinction to quadruple quintuple the time. we might ask for the counter point at the end. >> yes, just to dot flow if it's okay. we should wait until public comment is through. okay, next speaker. thank you. >>> [speaker not understood]. i'm karen huggins, [speaker not understood] a lot of other groups that you know about. but to the commissioner wald, i firmly agree with you. when it comes to the green deal, come to public housing. we're ready for it. the building up in hunters point, it would be an excellent time to put some windmills up there because a lot of the residents up there are paying over $100 in pg&e bills. a lot of residents are paying pg&e and a lot of residents are not. we need to

from the puc standpoint we would have to clarify. we would be indifferent as long as up to the 33% statutory standard it was there. the purpose for the three buckets when the legislature was drafting the statute was that the goals of the rps were multi-fold. it was greenhouse gas reduction. it was local air quality. it was job creation, and it was overall fuel diversity in the electricity portfolio in california. so, the fuel diversity part is to make sure that we aren't the actual electricity coming in to service california, isn't all natural gas or all one resource so there's less chance of market manipulation. that was a lesson from the energy crisis in 2001. local air pollution, again, it matters where the power is coming from. if it's a wind farm in texas and it can't be delivered into california. you still need to have generation in california so it doesn't clean california there. it reduces carbon, but it doesn't eliminate nox or particulate matter. that's how the buckets were set up. however, the reason some bundled recs are

a couple of years ago, the puc received a water quality grant from the u.s. epa, it was about an $8 million grant

simply ask the puc staff, i am 100% willing to bet with anyone that ken malcolm and anyone else with the puc would be willing to come back and have those discussions with you here or if you want to have more sit-down meetings one on one with any of you that have questions, we can do all of this. i think what you're about to do is going to seriously harm this program and i would encourage you to volt no on that resolution at this time. thank you. ~ vote >> thank you. next speaker. >>> well, what a night. derek burks, san francisco green party, local grassroots organization in our city. so, i want to scare you a little bit and reassure you a lot. the scare you part is that commissioner arce, you're absolutely right. they could set the not to exceed rate next week. they could move forward with a shell program and no other program, which as i said is only less than 4% of what we envision. so, but with that said, the reason that advocates have recently voted and said to the sfpuc and to lafco we would like them to proceed with these not to exceed rates is because they are now competitive

of course at the puc we recommend that you store our wonderful delicious tap water. it's free. it comes out of the tap and you can store it in any plastic container, a clean plastic container for up to 6 months. so find a container, fill it with water and label it and rotate it out. i use it to water my garden. >> of course everyone has plastic bottles which we are not really promoting but it is a common way to store it. >> yes. it's an easy way to pick up bottles to store it. just make sure you check the label. this one says june 2013. so convenient you have an end date on it. >> and there are other places where people have water stored in their houses. >> sure. if you have a water heater or access to the water heater to your house, you can drink that water and you can also drink the water that the in the tank of your toilet. ; not the bowl but in your tank. in any case if you are not totally sure about the age of your water or if you are not sure about it being totally clean, you can treat your water at home. there is two ways that you can treat your water at home and one is

a couple of years ago, the puc received a water quality grant from the u.s. epa, it was about an $8 million grant and really the purpose of the grant was to help monitor potential contaminants in the water supply, but there was also a public education component to the grant. and, so, what we did is launched a education program that was really about what people should do if they were concerned about the water, concerned about water quality issues, is to call 311. but it also began to be a vehicle to talk about where, you know, our pristine hetch hetchy water. it was a really successful -- a successful education program. we saw the signs on muni bus

the puc has increased the grant assistance to provide up to a half of million dollars for implementing on site water use. those must offset the gallons of water every year. this legislation is to help to amend the water resources that are sharing the non potential water uses in order to include the district projects. we have some city staff i'd like to invite up from the puc >> thank you for sponsoring this legislation and thank you to the building inspection who have long been partners. supervisor did a wonderful job in smooir what this ordinance it about but there are two main resources one is including the definition of the district call and the second is if we're to move forward with the project that's the role of the department of the public works to help with the water services so far the public right-of-way. happy to answer any questions you might have. >> colleagues any questions? i'd like to acknowledge from the department of public health department i want to thank other departments. my other comments >> good afternoon i've been working quite sometime on this project and feel

staff has made and that the puc commissions have approved in the past. the puc commissioners say they would not support a shell contract moving forward, but they already have. and, so, i just think it's important to be able to point that out. i how we move forward in the program when the politics are getting in the way, i think calling out the politics when you see them happening is one way to start moving forward and that's what i've done. i'm trying to do today. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor avalos. supervisor breed. >> thank you. in april i introduced a resolution that enabled the city to apply for a california debt limit allocation committee for a bond allocation to retrofit -- retrofit and approve western park apartments. it's a 182-unit affordable housing development in the western addition sponsored by the northern california presbyterian house and services nonprofit. the project received a funding allocation and today i'm submitting a resolution that will allow the city to issue the bonds and close the financing service sponsor can begin co

cares about the environment and the puc is going to show everyone else, you can do this, too. and you can do it in a way that makes sense, that's affordable, and that is better for the environment. >> and this is the most energy efficient government building in the united states today, if not the world. and it is an example that the entire united states can look to and say, that's what we need to do to save our city hundreds of millions of dollars in energy consumption a year and set an example to everybody of how to save energy, to be green, to be sustainable, to be responsible. the city is leading the way. >> it will be immediately recognizable and iconic from various parts of the city or even if you see a picture. that's the sfpuc building. it's a wonderful building. ♪ ♪ . >> this class is managing a disaster. what happens and how do we fit in? emergency operation plan, everything is going to go through the mayor. you have the office of emergency services, everything is supposed to come together over on turk street. that's where the ham radio base station is going to be

i think we at the puc share your ambition for local build-out. it's not going to happen tomorrow no matter what we do. it takes some time. we do have a conceptual plan. we need to do more work on a plan. and i guess i'd ask you, it's really up to the commission at this point and the board of supervisors to decide whether they want this program to go forward. but i think you need to consider or all public officials here need to consider the alternative. most of pg&e's power, one solar power right now comes from arizona. our solar power hopefully will not. bucket 1 resources are not all in california. they don't have to be. they have to be delivered to california. and there is a commitment -- there is a commitment because of the direction of public officials among puc staff and managers to go forward with the buildout plan given the constraints that we have and the opportunities that we'll have. >> but you know what we mean by the green new deal. we talk about jobs and we talk about doing this as a city and local renewables and all this stuff that'