tv Government Access Programming SFGTV January 17, 2018 2:00pm-3:01pm PST
order. welcome to the january 17, 2018 meeting of the rules commity. my name is supervisor ahsha safai, and to my left is supervisor jane fewer and to my right is supervisor yee. madam clerk, do you have any announcements today? >> clerk: please. please make sure to silence all cell phone and related electronic devices. items acted upon today will appear on the january 23rd board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> supervisor safai: thank you. unless there's any announcements other than that or any additional comments, can you please call item number one. >> clerk: yes. item number one is an administrative code to declare
the second monday of the month to be indigenous people's day. >> we're joined by supervisor malia cohen, so we're going to hand it over to supervisor cohen for her remarks. >> happy new year. i'm excited to be here. and i'm happy to be talking about this particular item with you. i want to thank supervisor safai and yee and fewer for hearing this item today. i think it's incredibly important and quite frankly overdue. this ordinance that we're going to be discussing today is very straightforward and it's really an update to our administrative code. it requires that the second monday in october each year shall be known as indigenous peoples day rather than columbus day and that all city communications, notices, calendars, and any other publication, whether electronic
or paper shall refer to that day as indigenous people's day. so i've circulated three amendments for your consideration today to the language that was originally introduced. first, wanted to recognize the muekma moloni as the original bay inhamburgbitants of the sa francisco bay area. and just a clarifying amendment to clarify that this ordinance shall not prohibit the city from supporting any event whose content includes references to columbus day or with -- or which comemorates the holiday.
i want to congratulate the indigenous people in this area who have done with town hall style meeting, particularly those italian proud american neighbors here in san francisco, so this is actually not a controversial item that we're coming here to discuss. so i want to thank all the people that made the work, and i'm very excited. i'm happy to answer any questions that the committee may have, and it's good to see so many folks coming out to hear this particular item. mr. chair, the rest, i turnover to you. >> supervisor safai: great. thank you, supervisor cohen. >> oh, one more thing. >> supervisor safai: yes, please. >> supervisor cohen: i just
want to thank my fantastic staff for pulling this all together. >> supervisor safai: okay. unless there's any additional questions or comments from my colleagues, we can open it up for public comment. unless there's questions from my colleagues. okay. we'll open it up to public comment. please speak directly into the microphone. please leave official copies of the document for the file, and please lineup to the right. please proceed. >> my name is denny len order. i lived in san francisco for about 35 years or so. in 1992, i worked with the san francisco foundation to change their columbus day to italian american week, and that was a meeting of the national board in washington d.c. and the local people here. and i travelled to italy in 1992 and debated columbus on
national italian television. the debate was very successful. 76% for me and 24% for columbus. the italians were really not supportive of columbus. the person i went with is joe travetto, a person who's lived here all his life. he and i became lifelong friends after i debated in italy. i thank the people of san francisco because it's important for us to understand the history and tragedies that have taken place with native american people. we can do some things to heal that and also bring about a connectiveness between the italian american community and the native american community and the rest of san francisco. i thank you very much for this and i look forward to a successful approve. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. >> supervisor safai: thank you. any additional members of the public wish to comment? please come forward.
excuse me. hold on one second. if there's any additional members of the public please standup to the right so we know who's coming forward. thank you. please proceed. >> thank you for taking your time this afternoon, supervisors. my name's tony ortiz. born and raised san franciscan, and i have a rich history. i have a sicilian background. grandparents came here in the 1920's. paul costanza was my grandfather. had a tailor shop right there on pollard street. i also have a native american heritage. being a native san franciscan, growing up in the richmond district, going to washington high school, city college, harvard on the hill -- great
education there, and also, usf as part of the latina unidos and native american student alliance, and that's how i was raised in san francisco was to really bring inclusiveness with her families. i understand when growing up, it was columbus day. but i also acknowledge the rich heritage of the italian community here and also acknowledge the first people and my ancestors. as far as new mexico, my apache background, but the first people, which was the aloni. i'd like to say a kwiek hit out to mayor lee who recognized the alonis, and this is an opportunity to bring about healing in the communities, create dialogue with our
children and our youth, and thank you very much for your support for this initiative. thank you very much for your time. >> supervisor safai: thank you. next speaker? >> hi. my name is maria. i'm a district nine resident. first, i just want to say and recognize the land we're on. it's aloni land. it's still aloni land. still recognize the foundation for what we know san francisco is aloni. i first want to say thank you for malia cohen for taking this on and finally listening to indigenous peoples living in san francisco because we have said several times that we want to change columbus day to indigenous peoples day, to not just recognize the alonis, but all indigenous peoples, so thank you for that. i also want to thank you for
the last minute amendment. aloni is the key. i want to say this is a very important issue to vote yes on, and it's very close to my heart. a few years back i actually propose legislation to try to propose, and nothing ever happened to it. one of the reasons why i did is i was thinking about future generations, so as native american peoples were asked to think about seven generations ahead of us. one of the future generations i'm holding right now, my baby's name is the warrior that came out breathing the spring air. the reason i gave her that name is to fight for the people of san francisco because they all are native people. thank you. >> supervisor safai: thank
you. any other members of the public who wish to comment on this, please come forward. seeing none, public comment is closed. my colleagues, any other commen comments on this? >> supervisor fewer: i think it is a no brainer. i'm ready to vote. >> supervisor safai: i'd just say i had the honor and privilege of working in my first position out of college in -- under president clinton's white house, and the main constitch we know s constituency that we worked with were native american tribes that dealt with water, land, reparations. essentially with that was dignity and respect. i appreciate what supervisor cohen is doing here today, because in many ways, it's about dignity and respect for
that community. supervisor yee? >> supervisor yee: i was just going to make a motion. >> supervisor safai: yes, please. >> supervisor yee: to move that item from the committee to the full board. >> clerk: mr. chairman, we have a motion -- >> supervisor safai: oh, we have the amendments. >> supervisor yee: i'd like to make a motion to pass the amendments as suggested and pass it out of committee meeting as recommended to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> supervisor safai: without objection. that item is moved and approved. thank you. thank you. next item. >> clerk: item 2 is a chartered amendment for the june 8th, 2018 election to oversee the department of cannabis. >> supervisor safai: thank you. supervisor fewer? >> supervisor fewer: thank you. i proposed this amendment because i believe it is critical this is accountability and transparency for the public
and the best way to ensure this is with a commission, given that there may be other possible valid numbers relating to cannabis issues in november , i believe the november election is better timing for this measure. therefore. i am requesting today that we table this item. i plan to reintroduce this for the november election and look forward to discussing this further with my colleagues. thank you. >> supervisor safai: great. any additional comments from supervisors? so a motion -- so then, can i entertain a motion -- oh, you did make that motion. >> clerk: you need to take public comment. >> supervisor safai: because this item was agendaized, we have to take public comment. any member of the public wish to come forward for public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. and can we entertain a motion? >> supervisor fewer: yes. i'd like to make a motion to table that item.
>> supervisor safai: without objection, that item is tabled and moved. please call the next item. >> clerk: item 3 is an item for the june 18, 2018 election for members voting in an election that the board of execution that the board of supervisors adopt an ordinance at least 270 days before the election. >> supervisor safai: again, this is supervisor fewer's matter, so unless there's any questions or comments from my colleagues, please proceed. >> supervisor fewer: i am requesting that we continue this item about noncitizens voting in our school board elections until the next meeting. >> supervisor safai: okay. great. any members of the public wishing to comment on this item, please come forward. >> members of the rule committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak on -- on the new charter amendment. i just want to say that as
you're aware, lecture has fully and engaged in the demograduatic process. as you know, the process actually encouraged noncitizens to actively participate in the democratic process and affirmatively gives the voice to a crucial matter who implements and administers the policies within the school district -- in san francisco unified school district. the charter proposed on this ballot -- with the proposed charter amendment getting on the june ballot would undercut the community's power to advocate for children of all minority backgrounds and undermine the city's legacy of integrity reform. we understand the concerns of -- of the rules committee and of this particular action.
we understand that at the federal level, the white house is now being governed by an individual that does not share our values. but we can also -- we can have mechanisms in which we can avoid any unintended consequences, and that is to allow parents to opt in. there is no need to be able to have to change the current charter amendment. and then the fact that it only causes more confusion to parents and noncitizen voters. thank you, ladies and gentlemen of the rules committee. >> supervisor safai: thank you. are there any other members of the public who wish to comment on this item, please come forward. >> good afternoon. i'm marlene tran, a board member of the chai necessary american democratic club, and a retired teacher from 35 years of teacher in the first new kummer public elementary in san francisco. before the landmark decision of
lau versus nichols in 1974, although bilink well teachers were hired to teach youngsters who had just emigrated to san francisco with their families, we were not allowed to use any other language to assist them. now san francisco is proud of our successful bilink well immersion programs, however r for -- san franciscans pride ourselves of many basic rights and especially decision that affect about 50% of our school students whose parents are noncitizens. why is it after 14 years these parents are still excluded from decisions that affect the children's future? how can schools expect these parents to be more involved in school matters and have a deeper stake in connection to america? why should these parents who come from tens of thousands of
miles for their children's education and opportunity have to wait five years to become american citizens in order to have a say in their children's education. in this hostile political climate against many immigrants, we urge the board of supervisors to expedite the process and provide opportunities for noncitizen parents to participate in our democratic process. keep proposition n. by the way, as a former human rights commissioner, i was wondering why that commission has not posted any information about this important matter. maybe please alert them. thank you. >> supervisor safai: thank you. any other members of the public -- oh, next speaker. if folks wish to comment on this item, please lineup to the right. it will allow for more efficient movement of this. we have a lot of items in front of us today. >> i am victor cito. i am the chair of the chinese american democratic club, and i
am speaking in opposition to the charter amendment proposed by supervisor fewer. proposition n is -- reflects a lack of respect for the will of the people. it is the result of three tries at enfranchising noncitizens, and it provides a trial period and a role for the board of supervisors. the proposed charter amendment merely gives -- null identifies the right of noncitizens and -- nullifies the right of noncitizens and allows the board of supervisors to give noncitizens the right to vote. it does not guarantee the right to vote. the proposal not only reflects the will of the people by a
democratic vote, but it also defines and shows lack of respect for the -- for the action of the board of supervisors, of which ten supervisors in -- prior to the november 2016 election sponsored this proposal. a term proposal defeats the spirit of empowerment, and the -- the proposal -- the noncitizen voting # #ignores t significant proportion of noncitizens in the city who are part of the school system. so i urge a negative response to the proposal by supervisor fewer. >> supervisor safai: thank you. next speaker.
>> hi. i'm lotu 1ed hi-fong. came here in 1982. put both of my kids in spring valley school, which is the oldest school west of the mississippi. kids were bussed from the mission and whisked in addition to spring valley, other schools without any teachers or even paraprofessionals in place. cambodian were bussed out to bayview point, etcetera, etcetera. i can vouch for marlene tran's qualifications as a kindergarten teacher at cec. i think we are ten years behind the curve. if i'm not mistaken, new york and los angeles did this a decade ago, so if you look at the nature of the population in
sfusd, trace it back to the history of chinese children being excluded from the public schools and the case of mamie tape versus hurley. trace it back before that to the 1 882 exclusion act. there are many reasons that immigrants have been discriminated against. i thank aaron for mentioning the central american wars in the 80's. these kids and their parents deserve full empowerment, so we have three meetings a month in chinese, spanish, and english, and we had the first parent grant from the san francisco education fund when gladdie thatcher was alive. and those parents and their kids i think have come through the system and are in the higher education system now. so of all places, why would san francisco not allow voting
rights for the parents of the kids in sfusd? oh, and don't forget ethnic studies in k-12. thank you. >> supervisor safai: next speaker. >> hi. my name is leti montano. i'd just say what the person just passed said. san francisco's kind of behind on this. we have a lot of immigrant parents here, and i'm really thankful for supervisor fewer for bringing this up, and i hope that you can see the value of, you know, parents to be engaged and just given the power that they deserve. it's their kids future, and so
they should be able to vote, and they should be able to have some saying when it comes to their board of education and any kind of proposals that they bring, so i hope you guys can see that. thank you. >> supervisor safai: any other members of the public wish to comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. supervisor fewer, do you have any last remarks? >> supervisor fewer: no. i just wanted to make a say that we hear the public. we actually share the same sentiments. we think that everyone should have the right to vote. and as i mentioned that i am asking for a motion actually to continue this. and i will bring back amendments next week. >> supervisor safai: thank you. >> supervisor yee: go ahead and make a motion to continue the item. >> supervisor safai: great. without objection that item is ordered moved. >> clerk: just to clarify, mr. chair, we're continuing that to
january 24th, 2018. >> supervisor safai: yes. so ordered, moved. thanks. >> clerk: item 4 is a charter amendment for the june 8, 2018 election to appoint the charter, forfeit their office upon declaring candidacy for state or local elected office. >> supervisor safai: thank you, madam clerk. i see we're joined by supervisor peskin here today, so unless there's any other comments by the board members, we'll hear from supervisor peskin. >> thank you, chair safai. as i recall in october of last year, i publicly requested the city attorney draft the charter amendment that was before this committee today.
so historically during the eight years of willie brown's tenure as mayor, there was a rule that was almost uniformly foer enforced by then mayor brown regarding the moment any city appointed board or commission member took out papers to run for office, that they would resign. since those days, that good government practice that really leads to avoidance of conflicts of interest, of misuse of those offices has been on the wane.
and as i indicated in october, i believe that the best way to make sure we don't have play to pay politics and that we have commissioners that are independent and discharge their duty to the public would be to codify this in the city's charter. i want to thank rules chair safai, supervisor yee and supervisor kim for their cosponsorship and answer any questions that this panel may have and hear from any members of the public who may be interested in commenting or testifying on the matter, but simply, this would remove any temptation for corruption or misuse of office and would be applied evenly and fairly, irrespective of political stripe or allegiance. >> supervisor safai: great. any additional comments my colleagues on this item? we can come back if there's --
we can go to public comment. any members of the public wishing to speak on this item? you have three minutes to speak. please come forward and clearly state your name. seeing none, public comment is closed. supervisor yee? >> supervisor yee: thank you. just want to thank supervisor peskin for bringing this charter amendment to our attention and i'm fully supportive of this because i think this is good government practice and hopefully the rest of my colleagues will see -- have the same opinion on this. so if there's no other comment, i will make a motion. >> supervisor safai: i will just say one thing. i just want to appreciate being a former commissioner and been in this situation. i think many of us have been in similar situations. i think it is important to remove the semblance of any
type of conflict of interest, and i think that's what this is about. it's about removing conflict of interest and being very clear and direct to the voters so when you present yourself as a candidate, you are a candidate and not multiple things at the same time. unless you're currently an office holder, and then, i have no problem with that. but i appreciate you bringing this forward, supervisor and thank you for advancing this. thank you. >> supervisor yee: okay. i'll make a motion. >> supervisor safai: please. >> supervisor yee: go ahead to pass this out of committee to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> supervisor safai: thank you, and that -- without objection and second, that item is ordered and moved. please call the next item. >> clerk: item number 5 is a charter amendment for the june 5th, 2018 election to the reduce the mayoral appointments to the retirement board from three to two members and require the city attorney to appoint one all be subject to a hearing by the board of supervisors and require the disclosure of certain
investment information. >> supervisor safai: so again, the primary sponsor is supervisor peskin, so i'll turn it over to supervisor peskin. >> supervisor peskin: hopefully, this microphone -- >> supervisor safai: miss clerk, maybe we can set this chair up, because we have other members -- supervisors coming in here today and there will not just be supervisor peskin, but we'll also have a few more, so maybe we can get that fixed real quick. are we live? yes, i believe so.
please proceed. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, mr. chairman. i believe the summary that the clerk to this board just read the amendment to the charter amendment which would change the authority of the retirement board. let me be abundantly clear. i think this is about having the san francisco employees' retirement system meet its fiduciary and investment position on the fossil fuel system. i hope that mayor lee's announcement that he was going to announce on the 12th would be going to this board. i am hopeful, given the timing that we can send this to the board of supervisors and hopefully, we will have some
progress on january 24th relate to fossil fuel divestment, something that this board has voted for unanimously, not once, but twice. first five years ago in 2013, and then again last year. it is my request that we forward it to the full board with a recommendation. >> supervisor safai: okay. i have a few questions, but we can do that after public comment. any members of the public wish to come forward and comment on this item, please do so, and there's more than this gentleman, can you please lineup to the right so we can move the process forward? please proceed. >> i'm a retired city worker, speaking for myself today, and i have no problem with this, although i do have a problem with the city attorney appointing somebody since the city important is suing the retirement board over supplemental colas.
and i think this is a conflict of interest having the city attorney appoint somebody to the board that he is suing. i suggest amending this and having the city treasurer appoint somebody. while he does not deal in the complex finances that tat the retirement board, he does deal in short-term lending and dealing with banks and does have some background, and i think ecoappoint somebody with the knowledge that we need to be on the retirement board. so i would urge amending this to a point -- have the city treasurer appoint somebody instead of the city attorney. thank you. >> supervisor safai: any other members of the public wish to comment on this item, please come forward. seeing none, public comment is closed. supervisor yee? >> supervisor yee: yeah, from the gentleman's testimony or comments, i just want to ask
supervisor peskin, do you have any remarks or -- >> supervisor peskin: sure. i'd be happy through the chair to address that, supervisor yee. the city attorney is not suing the retirement system. the city attorney has filed litigation against five fossil fuel purveyors. chevron, mobil, british petroleum -- i forget the other ones. maybe mr. givner remembers -- on the theory that they have created sea level rise and other issues that are costing the city money. so i don't think there's any conflict there. it is not uncommon for the city attorney to make appointments to certain commissions as is the case in the ethics commission, and so i don't see
a conflict of interest there. i see a convergence at least as the policy position of this city attorney has been to go over fossil fuel companies, and the mission here is to divest $478 million from fossil fuel investments, many of which have been huge financial losers over long period of tims of time fo retirement board system, so i don't see that conflict, but i repair his testimony. >> supervisor yee: thank you. >> supervisor safai: so i have a couple of questions. you and i haven't had a chance to talk about this, but one of my frustrations have been with the retirement board is -- i don't want to say policies because they're trying to less policy oriented and more kind of if i swoofiduciary in their.
my concern is when you spread this around, there's less of a directive instance. i know in the past from some of the work that i've done in our conversations about housing, new york has a wonderful system of working with targeting investments, particularly as it relates to housing that's under funded. we tried to implement that here in a particular manner. i think having the mayor have three appointees, and so we talked about -- i guess the mayor talked about that with his office and with this board. and then, the elected members are elected, and they're usually elected to represent certain constituencies that are vested in the retirement right, so they come predisposed with their own agenda -- i don't want to say agenda, but they certainly have their own issues that they're trying to accomplish. so when we're trying to do
things like fossil fuel divestment or divestments that have responsibility, it gets harder to achieve that. i'm not saying i'm not with what you're proposing, but i just -- i worry that if you don't have a unified body then staff is able to fight back consistently, not to say that the mayor appointee and the city attorney's appointee wouldn't ultimately be on the same page, but that is my concern because i think we have missed an opportunity with this retirement board to do more targeted investments. we're the seventh largest investor in the afl-cio's housing investment trust. that's a dig bobig deal, but w comes to some of the other things that we're trying to accomplish, they haven't been able to meet that because it's
been purely about one way of looking at things. so i just want to see what your response would be to that. >> supervisor peskin: so let me start, mr. chairman by saying in the ten years and one month that i have been on the board of supervisors, i have been extremely reticent to second guess the investment decisions of the retirement system. i am aware, as i'm sure all of us are, about other steps -- moral steps that the retirement system has taken over time, when it's divestment from the arms and munition industry, divestment from big tobacco. but i believe that this issue of climate change and global warming and sea level rise and greenhouse gas emission is the
moral imperative of our time. we won't get to argue about trust funds and many other things if the city and our coast are inundated with water. projections for a meter of sea level rise by midcentury, and we need to do what new york did last week. and it has been five frustrating years since 2013 when the board unanimously passed it -- our representative that this board appoints to the retirement system. that is actually the appointee of the president who was just before this panel. supervisor cohen has been steadfast for divestment for all of the years that she has been on the retirement system, and it's time to shake things up. i believe the best way to do that -- i believe in large part, this conversation has moved forward because of the presence of this charter amendment. i am hopeful as i said at the beginning of this conversation that this issue will resolve
itself at their meeting on the 24th day of january , and that we will do as well or better than the city and state of new york has recently done in that we will be a trend setter in getting institutions and municipalities to start divesting from fossil fuels, from thermal coal, from coal, from all sorts of fuels that the federal administration is now recommitted to. it is as i said the moral imperative of our time. so for that reason, i think it rises to level. my hope is -- >> supervisor safai: no punish intended, right. >> supervisor peskin: we will see meaningful change on the 24th, and that will obviate the need. i think we need to put our money where our mouth is and it's the right thing to do.
>> supervisor safai: so just to follow up, just so members of the public understand what you're saying unless i missed it, what's happening on the 24th? >> that's when the sfers, san francisco employees' retirement system is meeting to consider a devestment. i want to thank the chief of staff, jason elliott for the work with my office and staff at the retirement board for moving this conversation forward. >> supervisor safai: so that's clear. but i guess what i didn't hear is how changing the appointment changes that dynamic. so has there been some resistance from some of the appointees? if so, that's fine. let's put it out in the open. >> the answer is it has been a 4-3 split, and this would result in a 4-3 split the other
way to pass. >> you imagine that would be the case. >> which is precisely why having the city attorney who is pursuing fossil fuel lawsuits is the right person. >> supervisor safai: no, that's clear. i just wanted to put that out there. you're saying if they do make the decision on the 24th, that might obviate this, and that might negate the need for this? >> supervisor peskin: yes. >> supervisor safai: okay. any other comments or questions from this committee? all right. seeing none, can i entertain a motion? oh, did we do public comment? yeah, we did. >> supervisor fewer: all right. i make a motion to move this to the entire board with a positive recommendation. i know number 171 -- >> supervisor safai: yeah, i'm just thinking if i want to do a roll call vote or not or if you want to se want --
>> supervisor peskin: or, if you want to send it without recommendation, that's fine. >> supervisor safai: you can do that? >> supervisor peskin: yeah. >> supervisor safai: that's fine. let's send it out with positive recommendation. thanks. next item? >> clerk: item number 6 is a charter amendment for the june 52018 election to authorize the public utilities commission to authorize revenue bonds for the power utilities when approved by two thirds vote of the supervisors. >> supervisor safai: again, supervisor peskin is the coauthor along with supervisor tang. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, chair safai. we have here from the public utilities commission miss barbara hale who has a presentation to make and hopefully by the time that presentation is done all of you want to send this to the full board with a recommendation. miss hale? >> supervisor safai: before we do that, are there any members of the committee who would like
to make any additional comment? supervisor tang, did you want to say anything before we hand it over -- okay. and i just want to say to the clerk, miss clerk, can you add my name as a sponsor on this, please? okay. please proceed. >> good afternoon, supervisors. barbara hale, assistant general manager for power. i am going to make a presentation that describes the charter amendment that would provide the public utilities commission that would have the power for new power authority. the puc has been providing power to our customer base since about 1918. we've been generating electricity, putting san francisco's water supply to work. we passed water that's consumed here through generators and
generate greenhouse gas free electricity. we provide that electricity service to all city departments and to public agencies like the san francisco unified school district, community college, and -- and to other purposes such as our affordable housing development. our provision of service provides the city the ability to take some of the savings we have relative to pg&e rates and share them with our customers. and as a result of that, san francisco's budget saves about $40 million every year with lower electricity costs. and what we do with the revenue we receive from our customers is we reinvest those revenues into our facilities, so we're getting reinvestment back into our clean and renewable energy
if si facilities that the puc enterprise manages. we've seen a reduction in our carbon footprint of about 387 million pounds peryear, so we're strong contributors to the city's efforts to reduce or carbon footprint. under current law, the puc is able to revenue bond finance replacement facilities and new water and waste water facilities. but power facilities, new power facilities are not allowed to be financed through revenue bonds under that charter provision. we are allowed under a separate charter provision to issue revenue bonds for certain power facilities, but that is quite limited, just to renewable and energy efficiency facilities.
so with this existing authority, we are constrained. we can only cash fund new power if a ilt ises, which isn't a particularly efficient financial approach, and it keeps us from really being able to strategically invest in facilities that could serve multiple customers, because we have a financial cap -- an annual financial cap, basically. since 2015, we've been required by federal law to own more electrical facilities in order to serve our customers, and so that cap is becoming more of an operating problem for us. we can't serve new customers if we don't have new facilities to serve them with. the bonding that's needed will help us keep our costs and our rates low for our customers and to allow us to better serve or existing and future customers, to better serve the city. but i understand that supervisor peskin has distributed the charter
amendment, and i just wanted to take a minute to talk about how it would work. under existing city practice and requirement, bonds go through a particular process, and this bond would go through the same process that has requirements and certain controls. we would need to receive permission from our mayor, supervisors and public utilities commission before we could obtain any bonds. we'd need to obtain independent engineering certification that the bond funded project meet cost, so we wouldn't be able to fund any bond project that we don't have sufficient revenue to support. and we'd be receiving the necessary planning department
ceqa compliance certifications. and of course, we'd anticipate having ongoing review by the public utilities commission's revenue bond oversight committee. >> supervisor peskin: and it would require a two thirds vote of the board of supervisors. >> yes. thank you. any project would be brought here would require the standard two thirds vote of the board of supervisors. so what -- what we're looking to bring in terms of benefits from this amendment is to really increase the amount of clean and affordable energy that's delivered to san francisco. we generate more electricity from our hydro system than we currently consume here in san francisco, so we end up selling it off -- the excess off into the wholesale market. we don't make as much off of it, and we don't get to bring the benefits of that clean power to san francisco. it goes somewhere else, so we'd really like to see the bond
authority allow us to increase our customer base, create greater reductions to the city's carbon footprint by doing so, and reduce the health risks that are associated with dirty energy. we'd have a greater ability to incorporate innovation, the kinds of innovations that san francisco's known for: solar, electric cars, grid control, as we build out our electric facilities. and that would give us greater independance. that would allow us to reduce delays in project city departments and reduce disruptions. we also see it as an opportunity to increase some of our resill wriency goals and i
would allow for more efficient and cost effective finances -- financing of projects, and with that, i'm happy to answer any questions that you have. >> supervisor safai: thank you. supervisor peskin, do you have any additional comments? >> supervisor peskin: the only thing i'd add is in 2002, the board of supervisors put on the ballot a virtually identical measure to give the puc pursuant to a two thirds vote of the board of supervisors revenue bonding authority for improvements to the water system, and here we are a decade and a half later, and that has worked wonderfully. it's given them the flexiblity that they need and it's allowed for the whole scale improvement of our then ageing water delivery system not only to san francisco but to municipalities all the way down the peninsula and over to hayward, so i think
the puc has proven that it has the ability and the fiscal wherewithal to do this properly. the board maintains oversight in each and every one of those cases since 2002, and i think it is time to give us all that same ability as it relates to power facilities. >> supervisor safai: thank you. supervisor yee? go ahead, please. supervisor yee? >> supervisor yee: just some -- -- well, first of all, this is -- thank you again, supervisor peskin and supervisor tang for bringing this forward. i guess i can make the assumption, by i didn't hear you say it, so i'll ask. if we're creating new power facilities, can i assume that the power