tv Government Access Programming SFGTV April 4, 2018 11:00pm-12:01am PDT
years is recognizing the increased budget analysis that we will be providing to the board this year, and i'm available for any questions you may have. >> supervisor kim: i don't see any questions or comments, but i do want to thank bla so much for their work. i really do -- i really do appreciate all of your work in your reports, and they help us in guidance in policy making. so at this time we will open it up for public comment on this item. seeing no public comment, public comment is now closed. can we -- i'm going to make a motion to move this forward to the full board with positive recommendation, and i can do that without any opposition. mr. clerk, can you please call items 4 through 12. >> clerk: agenda item numbers four through 12 are various ordinances and resolutions authorizing the settlements of lawsuits against the city and county of san francisco. >> supervisor kim: thank you so much. and before we take a motion to
go into closed session, we do open up for public comment on items four through 12. seeing no public comment, public comment is now closed for these items. we will take a motion to convene into closed session, and we can do that without opposition. we do ask members of the public to exit the room, >> clerk: madam chair we're back in session march 21st, 2018 government audit and oversight. >> supervisor kim: thank you, mr. clerk. mr. givner? >> deputy city attorney jon givner. during the closed session, the committee voted 2-0 with supervisor peskin excused to forward items four through eight, ten, and 12 to the full board with positive recommendation and to continue items nine and 11 to the call of the chair. >> supervisor kim: thank you so much, mr. givner.
mr. clerk are there any other items to -- oh, can we take a motion to not disclose? >> president breed: so moved. >> supervisor kim: so we have a motion to not disclose, and we can do that without opposition. mr. clerk, are there any other items before the committee today? >> clerk: there's no further business. >> supervisor kim: meeting is adjourned. thank you so much. >> clerk: all right.
. >> the meeting will come to order. this is march 16, 2018 regular meeting of the san francisco local agency formation commission. i am sandra lee fewer chair of the commission. i am joined by vice chair, cynthia pollock on my right and hill r hillary ronen on my left. i would like to thank the staff of sfgovtv for recording today's meeting. madam clerk, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: yes, please make sure to silence any electronic devices such as pagers and cell phones, and speaker cards
should be filled out and returned to the chair. >> supervisor fewer: do any commissioners have any changes to the february 27, 2018 minutes? >> no. >> supervisor fewer: no. okay. seeing no changes, i will open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public who wish to comment on item number two? seeing none. public comment is closed. is there a motion to approve the minutes? >> supervisor ronen: i make a motion to approve the minutes. >> supervisor fewer: motion by commissioner ronen, seconded by commissioner pollock. minutes are approved. madam clerk, call item number three. >> clerk: item three is appointing two members to the local agency formation commission. there are two seats and two applicants. >> thank you, chair fewer. members of the commission, angela calvillo. i am the interim administrative
officer, thank you. regarding the consideration of appointing one public member and one alternate member to the lafco, let's first discuss the public seat. it's our recommendation to the appointment to the public seat be continued until the next lafco meeting. three affirmative votes are required to appoint to that seat, and commissioner pollock may not vote for herself, so we're requesting the continuance so that you're able to consider appointing to the alternate seat, and in the meantime, commissioner pollock will remain as a holdover pursuant to the government code and to the lafco's policies and procedures. regarding the alternate seat, it is possible for the commission to remove the current alternate from the public seat, as you know, removal can occur at any time, and for without cause. the commission may pain a new commissioner -- excuse me, a new alternate to this seat, and this individual should be able
to assist lafco in its decision to fill the public seat. we've posted a vacancy notice for the alternate seat, and we have an applicant. she is here today. her name is miss shanti singh, and she is here to provide some comments. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. >> commissioner calvillo: thank you. >> supervisor fewer: miss singh. >> hello, commissioners. i'm just here to give a little bit of background about myself as an applicant. so my name is shanti singh. i've been living in san francisco for four years, five years, something like that. i am a woman of color, i am a daughter of immigrant public schoolteachers, and i am a beneficiary of critical school programs in my youth. right now, i work primarily in advocacy for truly affordable housing, first moon lighting while i was working in the private sector, now full-time.
i am the development and communications coordinator for tenants together. i am also a steering committee member and cochair to yet to affordable housing. as someone who advocates for robust public programs i am very excited by lafco's potential to tackle these programs in our city and distribute equitiablely distributive progress. thank you very much. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. any comments? >> supervisor ronen: sure. hi. thank you so much for your application. i'm really excited about it, and i'm just wondering what drew you to applying for a seat on lafco. what drew you to work on lafco. >> as a member of dsa, one of the things that we focus on is just expanding programs in our
city, and the one thing that we are really, really passionate about, we're passionate about a lot of stuff, we're passionate about cleanpowersf, and public banking. we just had a little happy hour a couple days ago. it was a great success. yea, happy hour, but these are things that we believe that are stepping stones to projects delivering better public services to people in san francisco. even publishes like cleanpowersf, clean banking, they have intersectional effects on all of the other work that we do, especially housing and land use, but also on, you know, continuants rights, immigrants' right, etcetera, and all these things are connected, and i think that's really something we can accomplish at lafco. >> supervisor fewer: yeah. commissioner pollock?
>> commissioner pollock: thank you so much for applying. when i saw your application, i was so excited. >> yea. >> commissioner pollock: i think that when you talk about the intersectional part of race and class and sort of the ripple effect of programs, it makes me think also how that's very similar to the way that lafco is structured in the sense of how our state programs and private, public, different areas of city government that -- that overlap in a way that aren't handles or have oversight from any one particular area, and so i think that's something that lafco has done really well is to provide a sort of holistic view of different things. and cleanpowersf, that and other projects that we've worked on, really do hit that nail on the head. and i was wondering what
type -- or how you see your role on the -- a public seat, connecting with communications so that you provide that sort of holistic view and can bring those, like, community thoughts and concerns to this body. >> yeah, yeah. and that's definitely one of the things when i first got into housing activism in san francisco specifically, i very quickly learned that you know, i experienced intersectionality firsthand. you might be working on a housing issue, but you have housing issues, you have environmental issues, you have to work with the mayor's office of housing. there's so many different things that intersect. over time i've tried to build relationships with people who are working on different issues. primarily my focus is housing, but that means i'm working with environmental justice work,
with tenant raise work, but even things like parks and other things that intersect with land use. i think one of the things as a member of the public that i can do is really make myself available in a way that i have before. obviously, i have some existing relationships through work that i've done in the past, but really make myself available to -- and specifically reach out on this sort of intersectional front to really look at all angles of a particular angle or projector initiative that we're working on and see -- it might not be intuitive at first, but what do you think about a public bank or how does cleanpowersf impact you if you're not specifically working for an environmental justice cause in your community? so i think as a member of the public that i got my job is to basically take all of the commentary and turn it into something that's actually a proposal, and so that's what i'm really looking for is just basically deepening relationships across that
sector. >> okay. we have a lot of entities that engage this body a lot about cleanpowersf specifically, and i'm excited about working with someone that can also engage on projects that we're taking on, you know, looking at different areas that this body will study and hopefully push forward to some initiatives. i'm really excited, and i was hoping that the person that comes into this seat would be a partner not only with those advocates, but also with me so that we're -- we're engaging the public and also representing what they really -- what they really want. >> yeah. i'm excited, too. >> supervisor fewer: so i would like to open this up for public comment. are there any members of the public who would like to comment on item number three? >> hello, commissioners. eric brooks, san francisco
green party, californians for energy choice, san francisco clean advocates, and especially in light of this particular applicant, want to strongly represent from our city san francisco which works on a whole spectrum of environmental and social justice issues and consumer issues that after hearing those comments and that cv, i would strongly support appointin appointing miss singh to this body. thank you. >> supervisor fewer: thank you. seeing no other public speakers, public comment is now closed. commissioners, can we have a motion to approve shanti singh to join lafco in the alternative seat number seven? >> do we have to first vacate the seat? >> clerk: no, the term has
already expired, and you have authority to appoint the other person. >> supervisor fewer: okay. all right. >> supervisor ronen: then i would like to make a motion to appoint miss singh to seat number seven. >> commissioner pollock: i'd like to second that motion. >> supervisor fewer: that's great. moved by commissioner ronen, and seconded by commissioner pollock. without objection, shanti singh's application is approved. welcome. madam clerk, please call item number four. >> clerk: madam, can we also continue consideration of seat number six. >> supervisor fewer: oh, that's right. seeing the recommendation also from our administrative -- interim administrative officer, i suggest that we vote on item number six at the next meeting when we have a full contingent to actually execute that vote. >> clerk: that meeting would be on april 28, 2018. >> supervisor fewer: on april 28, 2018. is you trech. madam clerk, can you please read item number four.
>> item number four is a status activities report and a status update on the cleanpowersf program. >> supervisor fewer: i do believe that we have a brief staff presentation from mike hyams of the san francisco public utilities commission. is he here? not here today? okay. then can we hold this item until the end of the meeting if mr. hyams attends and wait for his attendance? thank you. so madam clerk, can you please call item number five. >> item number five is consideration and approval of the proposed lafco budget for fiscal year 2018-2019. >> supervisor fewer: i'd like to recognize interim administrative officer angela calvillo who has a presentation for us. >> at the request of the commission, i'm here today to provide the lafco updated budget and expenditure status.
i have three slides for you. it is also in the packet. the first two slides deal with the carrie forwards. the lafco general fund balance on slide two, you've seen this before. it shows the general fund appropriation and the year end over the years 2015 through 2018. i have to credit our office's admin deputy for kcollating al of this information. the current balance is 1 # 1,000 -- okay. i just -- want to just give him a moment to provide me with a more up to date -- okay.
oh, good. okay. so we have here -- i'll just repeat that the current available balance is 220,000, better news. the mou between lafco and the puc for this work order was extended through june 30th, 2019. very good news. on slide three, you've seen this slide recently. it shows the general fund appropriation expenditures and the balance for lafco over the years. this table does, however now set aside the reserve approximately 45,000. it is 15% of the annual budget. that is established in lafco's pal. in fiscal year 2017-18, expenditures balances is updated, and the current balance is 127,000. as a side note, as our last meeting, i indicated that as the clerk of the board in presentation of the board of supervisors budget, we asked
for the statutory amount for lafco, which it is entitled to as a place holder of 227,000. if lafco determines that its budget request is actually lower than that then we would just make the corresponding adjustment at the appropriate time during the june budget presentation. thank you, supervisors -- commissioner. slide four shows this year's expenditures as of february 28th. on the general fund side, lafco spent approximately 94,000 to date this year. the executive director's salary and benefits include his separation payout of approximately 18,000. lafco clerk and the clerk of the board staff support cost total approximately 21,000 and legal services is approximately 39,000. please note that the cost of services of other departments, such as sfgtv, risk management and the department of
technology will be bailed later in the fiscal year and is not yet reflected on the table. we expect approximately 17,000 to be associated with those services. on the kr ca work order side, the only cost charged as of february 28 is approximately 4,000, $3,908 for director's salary and benefits incurred prior to his separation, and a refund of 2,000 received from the marin clean energy for an incomplete portion of the study that lafco paid for in fiscal year 2015-16. i'm available for your questions. that concludes my presentation. >> supervisor fewer: colleagues, any questions? okay. commissioner pollock? >> commissioner pollock: miss calvillo, i have a question. in regards to the place holder for the 297,000, could you tell me when we must make a decision
on the return of the items? could we approve a budget at our next meeting for the 297 and have a contingency. >> through the chair to commissioner pollock, the answer is yes, i will not have to go back to the board of supervisors budget committee until june, so which is why generally it isn't -- the previous executive officer is here, jason freed. i think you determined your budget during the month of may, so you have some time. >> commissioner pollock: and then -- i mean, my goal or hope is that we will have staff in place to look at our drk-at our plans going forward in terms of creating a more robust budget and i would assume that you would work with our staff to do that? i think my concern is just making sure that we have an idea of that before may? but if not, if you would be
available to work with our chair to create a sample budget or a proposed budget? cal c >> commissioner calvillo: i would be happy to work with anyone at any time even if i'm not the interim executive officer. >> commissioner pollock: thank you. >> supervisor fewer: commissioner ronen, any comments? let's hope this up for for public comment. is there any public comment on this item? >> jason freed, private citizen. the way the budget process works for lafco is by may 15th, you have to pass a proposed budget, and then by june, you have to pass a final budget. so there's two steps. you have to have all of your agencies that fund lafco, which is actually the city and county of san francisco can look at the budget, can make comments back, and then, you make a final determination at the june meeting. although that's the end of the line. it doesn't mean you can't do it beforehand, but given where you
guys are at, as long as you hit it by may 15th for your proposed budget, you'll be fine. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. any other public comments? seeing none, public comments are closed. so commissioners, in light of the last couple comments we had, i would like to mission a motion to table this item until the next meeting. >> seconded. >> supervisor fewer: okay. great. thank you very much. so moved by myself, i guess, commissioner fewer, seconded by commissioner pollock without objection. the lafco budget for fiscal 2018-19 year item has been tabled. thank you very much. madam clerk can you call item number six. >> item number six is the interim administrative officer's report. >> supervisor fewer: do we have a report, miss calvillo. >> madam chair, angela
calvillo, interim administrative officer. i would like to make one comment. i appreciate the help of teresa stricker. she has guided us through the process of changing of legal services and has assured us that all of the files on hand have been transferred to the public law group and everything seems to be in order with our legal services. >> supervisor fewer: that's great. thank you very much. are there any public speakers for this item? seeing none, public comment is now closed. madam clerk, can you please call item number eight out of order. >> clerk: item number eight is an update on obtaining executive officer services for the commission and possible direction to staff. >> supervisor fewer: is there an update, yes, for miss calvillo. >> thank you, chair fewer, members of the commission. good afternoon. to recap our office has issued
an rfq for the solicitation of obtaining officer services. i would like to thank wilson tang who has managed the entire process. as you know the anticipated not to exceed contract is $75 an hour. the contract may have varying terms of length depending on lafco's length but in any case no longer than two years. we are glad to share with you the results of the rfq and to provide you with an update. our office has completed the rfq process for establishing a prequalified list for executive officer services and had issued a notice of intent to establish this list to the respondents on february 27th, as we mentioned at the last meeting. our panel received a total of three responses and have p
prequalified all three as the responses were determined to have met the minimum qualifications for disclosure and as a general consideration, because of city and county of san francisco administers payment of lafco contracts, respondents must complete all necessary city administrative requirements to do business as a condition prior to the potential contract award. the next steps for us now are to conduct interviews, negotiations and in consultation with the lafco legal counsel, prepare a contract. lafco has sole and absolute discretion whether interviews will be conducted, and i believe it has been directed through the chair that we conduct interviews of the respondents for the negotiations. and at this time, they are scheduled for next friday, and we have had the great assistance of commissioner pollock thus far, and of course your staff, commissioner fewer, and our legal counsel, miss
stricker, and our clerk, alisa somera. i'm available if you have i any questions. >> supervisor fewer: do any of you have any questions or comments? >> supervisor ronen: no. i just wanted to tell you that i appreciate your work in this process. it's been a long time coming, and i appreciate your work. >> supervisor fewer: and i just wanted to say i appreciate your work. >> commissioner pollock: i have a quick question. miss calvillo, first of all, i want to say that it's been delightful to work with you, wilson eng, it's been great to work with you. i didn't realize the scoring process for applicants, and i was excited to see a process in action. my question has to do with the advocates have asked if and when the list will be made public so that they could look at the applicants and weigh in.
do you know when that is? >> commissioner calvillo: we do know when that is, commissioner pollock, and i would like wilson eng to provide that information. >> wilson eng reporting to the current administrative officer. currently, the public document posted on office of contract administration website outlines the three top respondents or the three only respondents who met minimum qualifications, that that is a public document, and the three names are brian goebel, kelley croft, and plan west partners, incorporated. outside of that, at this time, we are subject to admin code. we can't disclose the actual response -- the bids yet until the time of contract award. that's what we've been advised. >> commissioner pollock: thank you so much. >> supervisor fewer: colleagues, i'd like to make a motion that we conduct a closed
session meeting before april 20th, and i can schedule that meeting with your schedulers if that's okay. so do i need to make a motion for that to schedule a special meeting? >> clerk: you need to take public comment first? >> supervisor fewer: oh, yes, i'm sorry. is there any public comment on this issue? seeing none, public comment is now closed. so colleagues, i would like to entertain a motion to conduct a special closed session meeting of this body before april 20th to be decided upon by the chair -- date to be decided upon by the chair. >> commissioner pollock: i have a quick question just in terms of scheduling. >> supervisor fewer: yes. >> commissioner pollock: would this be before or after the applicants are screened. >> supervisor fewer: this would be after the applicants have been screened. >> commissioner pollock: thank you. i'm available. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. so i've made a motion. can somebody second that motion? yeah. thank you very much. thank you. so this motion has been made by commissioner fewer, seconded by
commissioner ronen, and without objection, we take the motion to hold a special closed session meeting at the call of the chair before the april 20th meeting. thank you very much. madam clerk, can you please call items seven and ten together. >> clerk: item number seven is discussion on lafco's strategic plan and ten is future agenda items. >> supervisor fewer: i realize that we are still in the process of hiring, but i think it would be good for us to discuss some of the possible projects that we are interested in. i'd like to open this up to comment to my colleagues. >> commissioner pollock: just carrying forward the discussion that we've had in terms of projects that would go forward, i would be really excited to see if we could ask miss stricker and miss calvillo if
we could talk about what the rfp would look like for some of the projects that we discussed in terms of special reports prior to having staff come on. you noi that we've talked ab t about -- i know that we talked about cca 2.0 and other possibilities, and when we talked about our proposed budget, how much we should earmark for those special studies and see what the process would be to begin either before staff comes on or at least begin the process before staff comes on or create a transition. >> commissioner calvillo: chair fewer, members of the commission, angela calvillo, interim officer, it is quite possible for teresa and i and the staff to the chair to begin to future vision the capacity of the lafco based upon what we know today. i know that there was a
workshop that was handled, and there were some projects that were mentioned, and i know at some point, there's going to be a -- decisions made around what the priorities will actually be, and so what we actually know to date, we can try to present a report to you based upon what we know. and the rfp process, commissioner, you're interested in the timing of it or what it could look like. >> commissioner pollock: exactly, the timing of it and what it could look like. >> commissioner calvillo: so if we are aware of what our projects are, then, there would need to be some time taken with those projects to understand what the scope of services would actually be that would be expected to be provided. in the city and county of san francisco, rfp's can take up to 15 months. that being said, there are ways that we can try to speed up the process and certainly scopes of services that don't include
handling all of the approval authorities that would necessitate 15 months. so it's really going to be conversations with your offices on what the expected scope would be for the prioritized projects. >> commissioner pollock: thank you so much. just answered my questions. >> supervisor fewer: colleagues in light of the items that we had at the retreat and workshops, there were some issues of concern to the the advocates, and one of those was private public partnerships. we've heard a lot about hospital services and also community benefits concerning hospitals and in the agreements. this is something that i'm very interested in, and i think it's within the scope of lafco to dive deeper into this topic. i am wondering if this is something that would meet your approval that we could initially start to investigate
what type -- just type of speaker we could have on this issue and dive a little bit deeper into what some of community benefits are. who sets the boundaries of the agreement, who monitors the agreement, what are the particular agreements in particular with hospitals, and if this is something you're interested in, i think it's something that i would actually like very much to explore within the lafco commission. >> supervisor ronen: and you're specifically talking about hospitals with nonprofit status who have an obligation of providing community benefits? >> supervisor fewer: yes. >> supervisor ronen: yeah, i think that's a great topic, and i'd be very interested in it. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. >> commissioner pollock: i think i would be interested also in exploring this topic and hope that we could perhaps
have a hearing at our next meeting? and perhaps i'm jumping ahead, so it might be item ten? but just understanding also from staff what our jurisdiction jurisdictional boundaries are under the purview of lafco and what it would like exploring this item, whether we would create a special district to study this item further. >> supervisor fewer: so i'm hearing some direction from colleagues that this is something you would like me to explore with our colleagues and also with our administrative officer to see what our boundaries are, our jurisdictional boundaries and making some preparation for the april 20th meeting. let's open this up to public comment.
mr. brooks? >> good afternoon, commissioners. eric brooks speaking on behalf of the san francisco green party, our city and also public net san francisco. so i would want to give a big thumbs up to what you just raised and note that it's very, as i'm sure you all know, it's very imminent. we have cpmc-sutter health that is basically shirking a lot of agreements that it made with the public to properly serve, especially the area where st. luke's is at in the mission. we're getting a raw deal from cpmc, and so we need to do something about that, and it would be great to have a hearing next month about cpmc about all of it, and how to figure out how we're not going to let these nonprofits, and people who make millions of dollars a year in their own salaries, not giving san francisco the support it needs, especially when it comes to
mental health beds, which continue to decline, except a couple of weeks ago there was one spot of bright news that we don't have enough. also on publishes, ownership of public resources, the public broad band internet issue is now very imminent. the mayor's office is going to move on it before mayor farrell leaves. that means we've really got to get on this. there has been a request for qualifications put out to various contractors, and their -- or that -- those request responses are in. so this won't take a lot of work on the part of your staff, but i would urge that definitely by next month, have your interim executive officer or if you've got a new executive officer by then, gather those rfq responses and documents so that we see where this is going so that we don't
get in a situation where we're stuck in a long-term franchise that's like a provide -- >> supervisor fewer: thank you, mr. brooks. thank you for your opinion. any other public speakers? seeing none, public comment is now closed. colleagues, we've heard from the public that i -- or he is in approval of our suggestion about investigating community benefits around hospitals, and also i'm hearing from the public that they would like an update on the public broad band. rope roen y >> supervisor ronen: yes, and i'd like to bring up i'm still very interested in two topics that we brought up in our retreat, which is cleanpowersf, and how we're going to build out the local program and produce more clean energy in san francisco and all the
benefits that come with us, jobs, impacts on the environment, etcetera. and then, the second item is my particular interest in a municipal bank because i know there's work through the board of supervisors that's happening around the municipal bank, but it's how potentially it could be a source of funding for affordable housing development, and sort of that ex-texpansion which i think is a unique one to explore. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. i am also very interested in those two topics. are we in agreement for the next meeting, the april 20th meeting, that we would hold a hearing -- an informational hearing on community benefits with our hospital first? and also, an update on the public broad band? good? okay. great. do i need to make a motion for
that? >> sure. >> supervisor fewer: sure. i make a motion. >> commissioner calvillo: always good practice. >> supervisor fewer: yeah. make a motion that the next meeting of this lafco body has a hearing, conducts a hearing on the community benefits packages with hospitals, and then, also an update on public broad band. great, and if we can take that without objection. thank you very much. >> clerk: you need a second. >> supervisor fewer: oh, second, yes. commissioner ronen, thank you very much. >> supervisor fewer: so i see that mr. hyams is here, and let's go back to item number four. do we need to call that again. >> clerk: just for the public. item three is a community choice aggregation activities report. >> supervisor fewer: oh, item number four, sorry. thank you. >> so sorry. my serious apologies. got a little crossed up on the timing of the meeting today.
>> supervisor ronen: so did i, if that makes you feel better. >> well, thank you. thanks for your understanding. we definitely had it on our schedule but just not at the right time. but thampgs to the phone call that i received, i was able to get over here before the end of the meeting. and you know, given that i was here just a couple weeks ago, i don't have a lot to report today? but i do anticipate that at your april 20th meeting, i'm going to have a lot more to report? i think just given that caveat, just a couple things to discuss. i think our team is continuing to focus on the enrollment and expansion. in particular, we're finalizing contracts. i anticipate that we'll be conducting our first tran actions for the next expansions next week, but we are working out some final touches to our
agreements? so again, the next meeting i will be able to give you a full update on that procurement effort? we'll also give you a full update on our enrollment plan, and we'll also show up with our outreach group to talk a little bit about how we're going to approach the community with respect to the enrollment? i -- some other work that we've been involved with is in the regulatory arena, which is always very active for cca and for cleanpowersf. actually, this week, the city filed a rehearing request with the california public utilities commission on a resolution that the cpuc adopted several weeks ago that affected the way that
cca's filed -- file their implementation plans. this was to address compliance obligation that cca's had and to sync up the cca filing process with the cca requirements. the city filed this rehearing request principally on the basis of the fact that there really wasn't a record developed at the cpuc as required to issue this resolution, and it actually did create some very significant changes to decisions that the cpuc had adopted that laid out the process for cca implementation plans? so -- so that request was filed this week. we also, through cal cca participated in the preparation of a protest to a pg&e request
to change its collection policies for cca's, and their request was actually for expansive than that. it addresses other services -- providers that pg&e is in a collection role for? so that the changes -- well, i should just say, you know, to be clear, pg&e is cleanpowersf's billing agent, and that's established under statute. it's established, also under the tariff the cpuc has adopted. when a cca returns a customer to the incident vestor or utility or pg&e for lack of payment, the utility, if it's -- if the utility continues to serve the customer, hasn't disconnected the customer, they're obligated currently to collect on behalf of the cca until those funds are collected or the customer disconnects, at which time, the debt obligation is transferred
back to the cca for its own collection. so the puc has established a collection policy for such cases. so what pg&e is requesting is to truncate that period of time that they were in a collection role even if they continued serving the customer. so that's a pretty significant change. it goes beyond -- we think it's another procedural problem. this has to be addressed through a proceeding where a record is developed. pg&e is proposing this through an advice letter process, which is a more administratively rapid way to implement these changes. those are -- those are two sort of big regulatory things that happened recently. something that's been ongoing but wanted to give you an update is the california puc also opened a proceeding on the power charge indifference adjustment on reforming it, and
the city has been, you know in lock step with cca -- cal cca, excuse me, and our cca colleagues in requesting that the cpuc take another look at how this is done. so we're actually working on testimony for that case, and testimony is due in early april, in the pcia proceeding. what that means in terms of a resolution is probably a decision from the cpuc would be expected in the fall on this issue? so there's still some time to go. testimony is filed in writing, and then, there typically are hearings after a rebuttal process, and then briefing -- legal briefing, and then, a decision will be issued, so it's about a six-month timeline. this is the major regulatory events that i wanted to inform
you about, and i think with that, i'm happy to answer any questions, recognizing that we'll -- we'll have a lot more to report next time. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. >> yeah. >> supervisor fewer: commissioner pollock. >> commissioner pollock: thank you so much, mr. hyams for hustling over year. the regulatory body is so important because you get to see what's sometimes hidden in just that backdrop. i have a question that's unrelated to your update? which is the proposition a on sfpuc's bond structure and whether -- requesting bond. are any of those bonds earmarked for cleanpowersf with the hetch hetchy power rolled into the way that cleanpowersf is funded, i guess, in terms of
buildout? >> no, they're not. best of my understanding with respect to the bond measure, it's exclusive to hetch hetchy power. and one -- one point of clarification that's important to know is that financially, the puc has established cleanpowersf has a separate entity? so you know, the power enterprise has its own bond rating, so that bond authority would be under the general umbrella of the power enterprise? of course it is part of our long-term plan. i know you referred to cleanpowersf 2.0 earlier to abbott obtain a rating on its own. part of our, i guess i could say medium term financial plan and goal? we do think it takes some amount of time with a track record, a performance track
record in order to do that? we know that marin clean energy, mce now, has been working on that for some time, and of course they've been in operation for i think seven years. so -- and really, the best thing we can do to get -- you know, to get that going it so complete enrollment and have a couple solid years of performance to show to support a rating. >> commissioner pollock: great. thank you. i understood the -- the way that the bond measure was created, and sort of required because of the contractual and regulatory pieces of the contract that you had, it was a federal contract that ended in 2015? so i understood why, but i wanted to see how it fit together, if there was sort of asub dwsh-but
asub -- or if it is a road map. >> it's sort of asub map, and there is existing authority that the city has to issue revenue bonds for things like renewable energy, so it's a separate authority that's being requested of the voters. >> commissioner pollock: thank you. >> yeah. >> commissioner pollock: i know this is not even sort of tide on the agenda in terms of update, but it's helpful. >> yeah. >> supervisor fewer: okay. commissioner ronen, any comments? >> supervisor ronen: no. >> supervisor fewer: okay. thank you very much. okay. let's take public comment on this item. >> good afternoon once again, commissioners. eric brooks, san francisco clean energy advocates and californians for energy choice. so on the item that was just brought up, that could have infrastructure -- it could help build infrastructure that would
impact cleanpowersf, so it's not totally separate. also, it could help with the potential for us to get a public power like from newark to san francisco which would totally change our relationship with pg&e, so i think it would help in that process. i want to flag again pretty urgently for you ab-813 in sacramento. this is chris holden's bill that would make california's electricity grid change from a local nonprofit to part of a regional privatized grid run by berkshire-hathaway. this is the same one i mentioned last month. the reason i'm bringing it up now is we have heard from the grapevine and we have seen that the new language for the bill is out now and that it's going to move quickly, potentially, so if you as a body are going to recommend to the board of supervisors to oppose that ballot measure, you would need
to take it up, i would think, by next meeting at the absolutely latest. this thing -- if they try to move this thing, they'll probably try to sneak it through very quickly, so we'll need you to agendaize that next month, if you can, and reach out to -- the best person to reach out to to learn more about it is former cpuc commissioner low commissioner loretta lynch who knows all about this problem and knows all about the bill and can explain to you in more detail about why this is so bad and bad for renewables across the board. it would basically bring cheap fossil fuel -- >> supervisor fewer: thank you, mr. brooks. next speaker, please. >> 350 bay area. i was to first, i guess, second everything that mr. brooks said and really encourage you
to reach out to loretta lynch. i had the chance to speak with her on a conference call. the idea that energy could be led by somebody like that is unfathomable to me. but i want to appreciate all of the work that sfpuc did to try to fill the breach at the california public utilities commission which is really a huge cesspool. communities that don't have lawyers have very little traction at tthere. the pca hearing has been going on for years, so really just want to appreciate that. want to support the discussion of cca 2.0 or even 3.0 at this point going forward, and want to just briefly mention as new
cca programs come on-line, they have different program design options. east bay's program is going to be launching this year, and they have actually -- so their default program, which is let's clean the nars, and people are not happy about that, but it's 6% below pg&e rate, and they have this cool option called community investment, where you take the cheapy product, the default product, but you forego your discount, and that money goes into a community development fund, so that basically from year one, they're going to already be accruing money to do local build, because the advocates that helped setup the east bay program were seriously laser focused on local building, got a lot of buy in from their board because of workforce development, alameda county, so exciting things happening elsewhere that maybe we have parrot one day. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much.
seeing no other public comment being public comment is now closed. madam clerk, can you please call -- oh, is there any other business before us today? >> clerk: we need to take public comment -- general public comment. item number nine, general public comment. >> supervisor fewer: all right. we are opening it up for general public comment now. seeing none, but a friendly wave in the audience, thank you very much, public comment is now closed. madam clerk, is there any other business before us today? >> clerk: that concludes our business for today. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much. the meeting is adjourned.
>> you know i've always wanted to do this job that drives my parents crazy we want to help people i wasn't i did not think twice about that. >> i currently work as cadet inform the san francisco sheriff's department i've been surprised 0 work within criminal justice system field i had an opportunity to grow within that career path. >> as i got into the department and through the years of problems and everything else
that means a lot i can represent women and in order to make that change how people view us as a very important part of the vice president you have topanga you have to the first foot chase through the fight are you cable of getting that person whether large or small into captivity that is the test at times. >> as an agent worked undercover and prevent external and internal loss to the company it was basically like detective work but through the company from that experience and the people that i worked around law enforcement that gave me an action when i came to be a cadet i saw i was exploded to more people and the security he was able to build on that.
>> unfortunately, we have a lot of women retire to recruiting right now is critical for us we gotten too low faster the percentage of women in the department and us connecting with the community trying to get people to realize this job is definitely for them our community relations group is out attempt all the time. >> in other words, to grow in the fields he capitalized any education and got my bachelors degree so i can current work at city hall i provide security for the front of the building and people are entering entering but within any security or control within the building and checking personal bags is having a awareness of the surrounded. >> there is so month people the brunet of breaking into this
career that was every for easier for me had an on the with an before he cleared the path for laugh us. >> my people he actually looking at lucid up to poem like he joe and kim and merit made they're on the streets working redondo hard their cable of doing this job and textbook took the time to bring us along. >> women have going after their goals and departments line the san francisco sheriff's department provide a lot of training tools and inspiring you to go into the department. >> they gave me any work ethics she spider me to do whatever he wanted to do and work hard at the intersection. >> if you're going to make change you have to be part of
change and becoming law enforcement i wanted to show women could do this job it is hard not easy. >> finds something our compassion about and follow roll models and the gets the necessary skeletals to get to that goal with education and sprirmz whatever gets you there. >> if this is what you want to do dream big and actually do what you desire to do and you can go vertebrae far it is a fast job i wouldn't do anything else. >> ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪
2018. i will remind members of the public that the commission does not tolerate any disruption or outbursts of any kind. please silence your mobile devices that may sound off during these proceedings and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, state your name for the record. take roll at this time. [roll call taken] >> we expect melgar and moore absent today. item 1, 13.1872, at 768 harrison street, discretionary review. at the time of publishing the agenda, it was proposed to be continued to april 19th. that discretionary review has since been withdrawn.