Learned if we are not ready for what can happen it is a complete mess. Any questions or comments. I want to say this is great work and i am glad to see we contribute less than 2 to the emissions. It is amazing. We do very well. This is what we should show at everyone of our hearings to get more people to take transit. I also wonder the Climate Summit is here next year in San Francisco. Are we doing anything that highoit the work we are doing . It is amazing when people talk about the growth and development. People perceive that there are greater levels of pollution. They understand the New Buildings are so much better than previous for climate purposes it is a good reminder when we talk about consolidation and the overall impact this needs to be part of the language when we look at a change to help people ride buses and ride bikes and walk. We need to include that as one of the big reasons to do things quickly and safely and efficiently on that note i think what this strategy should you choose to adopt it today suggests is that the mode shift goal when tim mentioned the goal of 50 is the goal that you established when we put into place our current Strategic Plan in 2012, we are going to discuss the next plan at the retreat in january it will beg the question if 50 is good enough. In the strategy it is reaffirming the longer term goal that 80 sustainable mode share. 50 is great and we met the goal more quickly than we thought. Holding at 50 doesnt get us to where we need to go. One of the Big Questions we need to contemplate for the next plan is what is the next interim step that we need to take . I dont think we have Public Comment. Before i ask for a motion for approval i will remind us if we approve this we need to hold ourselveses to it in future actions as we continually remind ourselves we need to hold to vision zero goals we need to hold ourselves to Climate Action strategy as well. Motion to approve. That concludes the meeting for today. That was a long meeting i appreciate you sticking with us. We are adjourned. [gavel] the meeting will come to order. This is november 30, 2017 regular meeting of the commission. I am sandra lee fewer joined by vice chair cynthia pollock on my right and Hillary Ronen on my left. The clerk is alisa somera and id like to thank the staff at sfgovtv what dam clerk. Clerk please submit any documents to the clerk. Supervisor fewer item two. Clerk approve of the lafco minutes from the november 9 2017 special meeting. Supervisor fewer do you commissioners have any changes to the minutes . Seeing no changes, well 0e7 this up for Public Comment. Any members of the public who wish to comment on item 2 . No . Seeing no public speakers, Public Comment is now closed. Do you i have a motion to approve the minutes, please. Wed like commissioner commissioner ronen and seconded by commissioner pollack. These are approved. Clerk item three aggregation activities report, a status update on the cleanpowersf program. I believe we have a brief staff presentation from the San Francisco Public Utilities commission. [off mic] is this working now . Yes. We went to our commission and got authorization for moving forward with those power contracts. That authorization would allow our general manager to execute the supply contracts with certain conditions. Similarly, we are bringing an item to the board of supervisors that would allow us to move through the procurement of supply process at a pace that matches what the market requires. So that we can supply the program and begin serving a new group of customers by july 1 2018. The California Public commission has before it issues regarding the power charge and dairches justment these the fee charges Community Choice aggregation customers to cover the abovemarket costs that pg e incurred on their behalf before they left. Well see decisions there in december. Then well come back to you and to our own commission in the First Quarter of it 2018 with the results of that. We also have been active in a case on the retirement of the dee diablo nuclear facilities. Pg e is proposing in that setting to retire the plant which we support, but theyre proposing to invest 1. 3 billion over the next six years in replacement power and energy efficiency. For us, we think that means since they dont have customers to serve, given the Community Choice aggregation community is supplying customers, that means more pcia costs. Weve been arguing at the galifornia puc to stop that from happening. That will have an impact on our pcia and we expect a decision in early 2018. With that, im happy to take any questions you may have. Supervisor fewer any questions from commissioner . Just as a clarification, you said that you would begin serving new customers july 1, 2018 . Yes. That is our plan. Not 2019 . Were expecting to do two more enrollments, one july 2018 and one july 2019 and by then, everyone will be enrolled in cleanpowersf in san San Francisco. I love this. Are there any members of the public to comment on item three . Thank you. Jeff hoaltsman. I would speak to say if you happen to know any members of the board of supervisors getting the approval of the authority to the sf puc, i know that the monetary value might be higher than usual, but its in line with other cca programs that dont have to get the authority from boards like this and its the only way that the pra fram could move at business pace and make from program could move at business pace and make progress. Thank you very much. Eric brooks, our city and San Francisco green party and californians for Energy Choice i think i might have mentioned this in a previous hearing, but in january, legislation is going to come forward again in sacramento to privatize and regionalize the california electricity grid. Right now the california electricity grid is run by the cal iso which is a california nonprofit. As soon as it becomes regionalized, bircher hathaway which is a coal Energy Corporation will be the biggest gorilla in that room and will get control over that. It will bring cheap coal in and compete with Community Choice a moong other among other things. Even worse because its a we jonl regional grid, that would pument the trump had straition and Regulatory Commission in it charge of californians electricity grid. I dont know if the interim executive officer can do this, but right way in january, that bill was introduced last year and it was a twoyear bill and fought it and stopped it last year, many of us working on the state level, so the text is available and we knee lafco staff to look at it right away and be proactive about that so that as soon as that bill hits the legislature, the lafco can oppose it and encourage the mayor to oppose the bill legislative supervisor fewer any other you be Public Comment . Seeing none public action is closed. Madam clerk call the roll. But miss hill. In light of mr. Brooks comment, is the puc following the regionallation regionalization of the grid and have you taken a position on that . Barbara hail assistant general manager for power. The puc has been following that and following it more through the California Municipal Utilities Association and our publiclyowned eu timent capacity. We are utility capacity. I dont think the city took a position on the regionalization bill in the last session. But its on the table in terms of one of the issues that we expect as mr. Brooks said to see come back and it will go through the legislative position process that the city takes. Do you see that coming in the next two months . Or would it be at a timeframe that we could perhaps just direct staff to, i guess to add on to an existing you said that the regional body of ccas was the regional body of publiclyowned utilities. Thats the California Municipal Utilities Association. Were also members of the california Community Choice association. And this just to give you more information on this effort we jonlation ofregionalization of the grid is one of governor browns pursuits. He sprung some changes changes on everyone in the last legislative session to accomplish this objective of his. But for the fact that it came late and surprised folks, i think it when the governor proposes something and tells everyone its a key priority of his it usually has momentum and passes. This time it didnt i think largely because of the surprise factor. I think well see a more regular order approach to regionalization would be my expectation in the next legislative session and San Francisco will have the opportunity to take positions on bills to arrive at a position and communicate that to the legislative. Okay. I think my only request and chair fewer can weigh in on this is just, in no saks taken at this time, which i think is if no action is taken at this time, which is premature, if a change occurs that you would send just an alert, to send an fyi to the chair. Very good well do that. Thank you. Madam clerk, item four. Clerk item four, the interim Administrative Officers report. Through the chair to the members of the commission angela calvillo. The budget of lafco is currently strong for the duties youre pursuing currently. I do not have a report. Weve been working to get to the workshop and the detail around the workshop, otherwise, to be brief, i do not have a report at this time. Supervisor fewer thank you very much. Now, are there any public speakers that would like to comment on this item . Jason [inaudible] private citizen. I apologize for making this quick comment. I realize that february of next year, wore public seats come up. You might want to give instruction totion the Administrative Officer to start the process for noticing and putting out notifications if the public seat. The clerk as office has the process down. Im looking at how this commission is made up could become an issue on how to figure you can work with Legal Council because two commissioners cannot approve. In it body, you need three commissioners. There is discussion on how youre going to do that next step. I wanted to make sure you were paying attention to that. It will could provide tricky maneuvering of how you do appointments to the public seat. Supervisor fewer any other Public Comments in seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Item five. Clerk item five is discussion on lafcos Strategic Plan. I would like to express our thanks to Pamela Miller for the local Agency Formation commission that agreed to come today to assist us in our Strategic Planning discussions. Miss miller. Thank you madam chair and members of the commission. Pamela miller, the executive director with cal lafco. I appreciate the opportunity to return in front of you and have the discussion earlier about strategic opportunities for this particular lafco. And with your permission, id like to just summarize what it was that you discussed in terms of ideas that were thrown own out and opportunities and maybe concerns. Supervisor fewer thats the pressure of the chair. Do i have permission to use these flip charts as props . Or should i just read from them. Supervisor fewer you can use them as props. Do you need any assistance . Thank you. So your commission actually came up with four initial items to delve deeper into for future focus of this commission. Out of those four, you actually did a deeper dive in terms of conversation on opportunities and concerns on three of them. The first topic was Sea Level Rise as a result of climate change. The second was Public Private partnership opportunities. The third was Municipal Banking. The fourth that you chose to not explore any further at least for purposes of todays discussion was level of housing and Navigation Centers to solve the homelessness problem. With respect to the Sea Level Rise conversation, the opportunities that this commission identified would be that this would be a collaborative effort. Lots of public discussion regarding the existing plan. What are the effects of the neighborhood . Your commission had indicated that neighborhood flooding is a problem. So an opportunity to explore that. To perhaps look at and enhance a coordinated plan to the creation of a Sea Level Rise adaptation plan. Your commission noted that this problem is inevitable. So it will is time to plan and prepare for the disasters that will occur as a result of Sea Level Rise. It will allow you an opportunity to look at any current existing emergency plan and recommend improvement. Im improvement on those plans. Some of the concerns that your commission talked about should this particular issue be undertaken by this lafco is that there could be a need for additional funding that there are limited funds for this lafco. And so find ago finding additional Revenue Sources that are legal issues to be mindful of and certainly your Legal Council is your guidance in that area. You would need to define a clear scope of this study. This is a huge all of the topics that you discuss are huge. Defining a scope of your study is going to be important for you. That there are existing processes and ownership of those progresseses in place processes in place. Its incumbent upon this lafco to define for yourself the value and the value that you bring as a partner to this conversation. So that was the discussion around Sea Level Rise. The next topic for potential study that you discussed in more detail was the Public Private partnership scement. The opportunities you identified there was that this would be an opportunity to review benefits to the city and county by getting at what is it that how is it that private entities can put im sorry, that is risk analysis. Is the city and county getting the benefits that are appropriate in terms of the partnerships . Also a risk analysis. How can a private ebb at this entity puppet the city and county at risk in terms of this partnership . To explore benefit packages negotiated by hospitals, to take a look at the private and forprofit Transit Companies using the streets of the city. To look at financing, to look at naming rights. This is an opportunity to shine a light on the need to increase transparency in the formation of the partnerships. To gain insight into the depth and breath of the partnerships that exist today. And to for the lafco to be the citywide watchdog and mechanismer it the appropriate governance of the partnership. The concerns that you talked about as it relates to this particular issue were similar to the ones for Sea Level Rise. You have limited funding. You have need to find Revenue Sources. Be mindful of legal issues. You have to define the scope and again, there are existing processes and ownership. So being clear with yourself and being able to define the value of lafco being a partner in these conversations is going to be important as well as an additional concern that was identified, and that is these existing processes, there is a private industry aspect to that that adds a different layer of dimension for your consideration. Finally with respect to Municipal Banking, the opportunities that you identify there was an opportunity to develop and present a scope that will is complimentcliment ri and adds to existing climent ri yousee potential for Revenue Sources for this. You said it allows a several issue focus under one umbrella and in us discussing those, you identified them as cannabis affordable housing, local buildout for cca homelessness and fiberoptic broadband. Then, you talked about diversifying work and focus. You had a belief this adds high value in terms of adding to the interest of the board as well as increasing democracy. Some of the concerns, again the same as Sea Level Rise. Mindful of legal issues. The need to define your scope, the need to define your value as a partner, to be mindful of all of those existing partnerships in the conversations that may be going on. This is really a long term issue. You also indicated that for this particular project, or focus that a high level of expert analysis will be needed on the longer term. And you had conversation around funding for that. There was also the concern identified for a potential high resistance from real estate capital. Those were the three major issues that you identified and discussed in a little bit more detail in terms of opportunities and concerns. And with that, ill turn it back over to thank you miss miller. Is there any comments from the commissioners . First, i wanted to thank miss miller so much for coming and helpings helping us through this process to help us an what could be potential work of the body and i want to thank my fellow commissioners for engaging in this exercise with me which is what i needed to get back engaged in this body and excited about the work ahead of us. It worked, it happened and im looking forward to working with you on all the potential, exciting future work. With that, of all the things that we discussed in weighing both the opportunities and concerns and thinking through capacity and budget, i would suggest that we continue the work that weve been doing with cca that we start a new work area and look into and p define thedefinethe work further to create a bank in San Francisco and work on and pursue a scope of work for analyzing Public Private partnerships. I think if we limit the bodys work, these are big topics. If we limit the scope of the projects of the topics and limit the scope even further with the help of some staff at that we can bring on, i think its broad enough for the body to continue to innovate and add new work in the future but narrow enough to focus and get us moving on some work projects that can really add value to the city and county of San Francisco. If i can make that particular motion but i wanted to start the discussion. Supervisor fewer lets have a discussion then open it to Public Comment then entertain a motion. Just to echo the commissions thoughts in thanking miss miller for facilitating our workshop i think we sometimes need to see it on the wall to realize where there is synergy to realize what exciting work is ahead of us. I think i want to echo commissioner ronens thoughts on Municipal Bank and expanding and continuing our work on cleanpowersf. Im excited about the Public Private partnership just exploring what the Public Private partnerships are within the city and county of San Francisco and understanding the scope of that. I think one thing i would mention and did mention it in the workshop is that for the cca and public bank options those would be things that i dont think that we have to make a motion or action on because this body has voted on those before. We would need to for the Public Private sips of partnershipsprivatepartnerships, i would like to know if we could begin work on all three. We would use the money from the m. O. U. For cleanpowersf to begin a study similar to the next report and that could be something we could direct staff to begin an rpf when staff is on board. It seems like we could begin some of the special reports as soon as we have staff to scope everything out for us. Supervisor fewer thank you. I also wanted to echo the appreciation to miss miller for getting us organized. I think we had a lot of discussion and we were just kind of floating ideas over. It took really some of your expertise to come in and put it on paper, and to organize it so we could see a pathway for lafco to work on these things. Thanks so much. And thank you to the California Association of local Agency Formation commissions to give us this resource to help us to do this. Thank you so much. I would like to now call on members of the public that would like to comment on item number five. Thank you chair fewer and commissioners. Jed holtsman. I support your involvement in cca. I think thats important to get San Francisco to where we need to be visavis greenhouse gases. The Partnership Issue could bring in revenue. I think were all expecting that we might find i shouldnt make assumptions, as a member of the public, i think well find that these Public Private partnerships dont bring the full weight of benefits to the city. I think one dollar per renting a curb space comes to mind. This is great. This could bring money into the city which we want. A general opportunity that i wanted to point out, i know that youre concerned about duplicative cork which you should be, but we have an odd situation where one body with a fairly limited amount of staff does work of a city council and board of supervisors in some cases. I would argue that you have more to do than most legislators. I this there is a way to shoald that are work. Because having been to many of your Committee Meetings after the fifth or sixth hour, the level of engagement might start to dip. I think this is actually an opportunity for a lot of synergy and supplementation. Thank you very much. Supervisor fewer thank you. Good afternoon, i think it is now, commissioners, eric brooks San Francisco green party and local Grassroots Organization in our city. I want to give a thumbsup to what commissioner ronen has put forward. I think what youve got crystallized now is the issue of public bank, the issue of Public Private partnerships and your existing program clean cleanpowersf and all the other programs that weve discussed like public broadband that would be funded by a public bank. This is like what is the Public Private relationship. How do we get public funding to make it more public and building stuff. This is to me, that is what lafco is all about, that kind of vision. So thumbs up. Supervisor fewer thank you. Any more speakers from the public . Seeing none, ill close Public Comment now. [gavel] i want to thank the public for coming out and participating in our workshop and also reminding us how important this body is. Your commitment to it body too, i think helps us to boost our commitment to lafco and the exist tense of lafco. I want3me to thank you very much for that. Commissioners, it look likes we have some options. I would like to ask commissioner pollack, i know pollock, you mentioned doing Public Outreach or some collecting some thoughts from the public. I am wondering if we made a decision today, would that give you the opportunity to go out to the public . Or would you prefer to actually continue this item into our january meeting to give you time to do Public Outreach around this . I appreciate that concern because i know that we had a workshop that some members of the public were in the room and were able to see things fleshed out. But in the interest of transparency, i think it would be beneficial in december that we have a public workshop, and then we could finalize any decision in january. So perhaps we could continue this item that we would schedule, we ask staff or or we could ask staff to schedule a Public Meeting and i could perhaps bring in a facilitator to work with us to look at the items weve discussed and explore them even further so that when we begin work next year, that staff so we have an idea of how we might direct staff in scoping the projects out. Supervisor fewer are you making a motion to continue this item until our meeting . January to allow for a time to public transparency . I would. Then also included in that, i would like to direct staff, if it pleases the chair, to schedule the meeting for december for a public workshop. Commissioner ronen, do you have any comments on that . Supervisor ronen this would be just you . Not a special meeting of lafco but an opportunity for me in my capacity on a public seat that i would engage members of the public so we could have a broader input that we would bring back to this body. And i would present to this body when we vote on future agenda items in january. Supervisor ronen that would be fantastic. Supervisor fewer that is wonderful for you to do that. I believe there is a motion on the floor to continue this item until our meeting in january. I think you made the motion. I did. Second. This is moved by commissioner pollock and seconded by commissioner ronen. Without objections, the commission sorry that we will reschedule this item to be heard in january. Thank you very much. To the chair, just a word about the meeting in january. Does this body have an inclination as to when in january they would like the january meeting to occur . Or is that something i would work with the chair on . Call of the chair. Thank you. Then on the date certain meeting i can work with the chair on what that date would be. Okay. Thank you. Supervisor fewer so without objection, the commission authorizes the meeting to be at the kawflt chair i mean this item to be continued at the call next meeting which is is at the call of the chair. Thank you very much. Madam clerk. Would you please call item six. Clerk discussion of possible options for on e obtaining executive officer services for the commission and possible direction of staff. I believe we have a brief presentation from Teresa Strickler and our attorney is that correct . Through the chair to the commissioners, angela calvillo. I am the interim officer Administrative Officer and clerk of the board. At our last meeting, you heard it from Teresa Stricker our Legal Council that brought to you an option in your packet today. There was a memo associated to provide you options. In addition to that, since the last meeting we have looked at an alternative to those options which comprise a request for qualifications which would bring to you options of individuals once we said what the mqs or minimum qualifications would be. Once they qualified and metropolitan the mqs, then a group of individuals or agency could come before you and you could determine which to choose. You wouldnt be subjected to a timeframe that an rfp is subject to per student pursuant rules. Points could be granted if there were a subcontractor involved. So the option is we essentially prepare the scope of services and contract duties similar to what you have already in the rpf. We can provide that document to either the chair if the panel wanted to provide the chair the authority to make the decision on the mqs and contract duties, you have them buff. You have them before you and we could look with teresas Legal Council. It could get out on the street in a matter of two weeks. So it is an opportunity that you could utilize today and it could get you thinking about a group of individuals who might meet the qualifications for the chair or the commissioners to choose from after the holidays immediately beginning in january. So available for any questions. Are there any questions . I do have a question. When you mentioned the minimum qualifications, youre talking about whats in the draft rpf which could be an rfq on pages 4 and 5 . Yes commissioner. Thank you. Supervisor fewer okay. Commissioner ronen . Any comments or questions . Supervisor ronen no. Supervisor fewer lets open this up for Public Comment. Im jed again. My only comment is im not sure of the timeframe for these options. We have a strong interest in making sure that cca matters are being monitored by lafco staff in the manner that they have been for a number of reasons. One is Public Education in terms of happenings. Liaison role between the public and the puc. I would say that having gone to a lot of sfpuc meetings the Commission Gets some good analysis on the presentation from their staff from the lafco staffer. As you heard from mr. Brooks, there is aggressive legislation that is coming up every session at this point. And we didnt even mention in addition to regionalization, there was specific ccakilling legislation that the cca folks are working on. But it would be great to have the city and county in this capacity of lafco monitoring as they previously did. If there is some way to both issue your kind of longterm actual plan for an executive staffer as well as some kind of short term stuff getting in someone right away and fill in3me the gap time to make sure were not missing something in january when bills are getting introduced. I think that would be advantageous. Supervisor fewer thank you very much. Good afternoon again. Eric brooks San Francisco green party. Our city californians for Energy Choice clean energy advocates. I wear a lot of hats. I would second what mr. Holtsman said which is that we need somebody soon hopefully in january. I hope that would be a permanent executive officer. Based on where this lafco seems to be headed, what you need is a generalist not a specialist. And i think that the cal lafco adviser said something to that effect in the workshop. You need someone like former executive officer fried who has the ability to encapsulate all the issues as a coordinator, then hire out to specialists for a specific contract needs for things like cca 2. 0, Community Choice 2. 0 and that kind of thing. I want to reiterate i think not toanl do you need a generalist we need not only do you need a generalist. We need that generalist soon. And one more, because it looks like this is not going from what ive heard this is not going to be a union position. That is unfortunate. We need to figure out a way that this bid process is not a lowest common denominator bid that ends up having us hire someone for low pay that is not appropriate and we should try to do a prevailing wage for this type of work, for this job and maybe more to cover benefits. Supervisor fewer thank you very much. You be Public Comment is now closed. Commissioner pollock do you have a comment . I have a question for miss calvillo. Given we have a short and long list of things wed like to correct direct staff to do, what does the timeframe look like to issue an rfq as proposed in the packet . What would be the timing being like if we were to have the chair work with you and then send it out versus poring over details here . Through the air. Angela calvillo interim officer. I believe we could have the finalized rfq once the Legal Council had an opportunity to review for published out on the streets essentially next week. Number one. Then it would be up to the chair, the length of time shes interested in having that rfq out for individuals to see. We could do kirch different types of noticing. There are lots of opportunities for us to determine and work with york offices on where the noticing should go. If its out there for two or three weeks or shorter or longer, its your choice. Once we get yes, chair. Supervisor fewer that is a much quicker process than an rfp, is that correct . Thats correct yes. Once we get the qualified individuals back its a matter of time of, you know, making just reviewing those individuals who have met the mqs and your determination of the length of time that is necessary to share with your commissioners. We could make a presentation at the next Lafco Commission or we could em panel the chair to make that decision and bring that individual here to the next meeting for destruction if shes empowered to make that decision herself. It will could be as long or short in the manner that i have described it could be. And just so i understand, if we take this option, then it would be as this person would be an independent contractor, that we would specify the length of time. Then if we chose for the the longer Term Solution to this issue, to issue the full rfp this person could ply for that, but it would be under the independent contract rubric or option that we have in these options. That is correct. Commissioner ronen. I believe there is a twoyear component. Going out for a longer term rfp is a good idea. So i think do you have any comment . So if i understand correctly, we could direct the chair to work with you in terms of figuring out the language for the rfq and also to put the rfq out, and then to work with you in a designated hiring staff to hire that person. For the contract not to exceed two years. But i would say maybe that we should think about until end of fiscal year that we have funding for. Would you need to know from this body today the minimum qualifications . Or could we have the chair work with you on that as well . This commission for the chair can work with us. And so chair fewer could understand the budget and not to exceed rate would be part that have decision that we could ask her to do. Supervisor fewer we could dishaws today and agree on an amount not to exceed. I would feel comfortable not agreeing today. Because then it gives you the flexibility to work with our Administrative Officer so we dont choose you know, that it would be consistent with the work that were looking at and we wouldnt go over or under. It sounds as though there is a decision being made today whether or not wed like an rpf versus an rfq. Does the attorney have any information she wants to add to that . The rfq process would be a quicker process. It allows you to implement faster and move forward faster. I see no downside to that. You would need to, as im understanding, i have not looked at the rfq qualifications, but as i understand from miss calvillo, there would be a twoyear limitation, but that gives you plenty of time to do something more permanent and you may want to do that anyway. I would say in terms of how quickly we can get it out, a little bit of that will depend on the schedule of the chair if you are del delegating. But window could do a legal review and be ready to go if the chair is willing to get it out next week. In terms of how long you want it out there, you have holidays coming forward. There is oftentimes a strategy with making deadline before the holidays and if that fills too quickly, not making the second or third of january because it falls off the radar. If youre going to get through the holidays i might recommend going to the friday before the new years holiday so people can have time to finish it up. That may add an extra week but it may give you a broader selection of candidates. In terms of moving forward, it will be the pleasure of the chair how much authority plebber of the commission to find out how much authority to delegate to the chair whether its to screen down and bring forward to the commission perhaps one or two candidates, even three candidates or whether you want your chair to dot selection for to do selection. If you want to pick the finalist and have a hand in that, we can do it that way. I think that i want to be conscious of time, we must adjourn this meeting by 1 30. So i would like to ask that we have a motion i think what im hearing consensus on is tha wed go for an rfq instead of an rfp because its faster. I think we would need to make a motion on that decision. So i think id like to make a motion that we would accept and go with an rfq instead of an rfp for the selection of our executive officer. I would have a friendly amendment that that rfq does come empowering the chair to work with council and Administrative Officer to scope and hire the person identified for the rfq. Thank you. Do we have a second . Okay. I think so this is moved by so i have to do we have to approve the amendment . Or can we have that as one motion . Clerk the motion hadnt been made yet, so she was adding to it. Supervisor fewer is commissioner pollock making that motion or myself . Clerk should be one or the other. Im happy to make the motion to have an rfq and empower the chair to work with the Legal Council and executive officer to create a process and hire an individual for the position. Supervisor fewer thank you. Moved by commissioner ronen seconded by commissioner pollock without objection. The commission authorizes the chair to this motion passes. Madam clerk please call item 7. Clerk Public Comment. Supervisor fewer are there any members of the public that would like to speak . Seeing none Public Comment is closed. Id like to thank everyone and wish you all happy mol days. Clerk we have item 8. Item 8 is future agenda items. Supervisor fewer any future items that commissioners would like to slend calendar to discuss . No. Public comment. Seeing none. Public comment is now ended. That concludes our business. Now happen holidays and a happy new year to everyone. We have to adjourn. Okay. [gavel]. Hi, im ryan a prlth letting project manager with the sfpuc working at the sfpuc is a fastpaced environment the puc is American People eye person so breath and depth allows us to work on allows me to move across my career path. Fill the roadway. Our unique projects is the heritage puc Water Treatment longterm improvement plant its one of the largest projects ive managed and supervised to be successful as a project manager you have to be hard working and selfmotivated and being adaptable is important because the construction it is very fabulous that get me up in the morning youre going to be project solving and seeing the project go to me thats fun, i like coming to good afternoon everybody. And welcome to the december 7th, 2017 special meeting of the Public Safety and neighborhood committee. Im Hillary Ronen the chair of the committee and to my right is superior sheehy and to my left
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.