Determining whether or not this was going to be something that was workable in marin and whether it was something that the customers in marin were interested in. When we launched in may of 2010, we needed 2. 2 million to get off the ground. Today our finances are looking really good. Weve got a budget of 100 million budget and were in net position of 8 million. We are providing service to approximately 125,000 customers in our service area which includes the county of marin but the city of richmond. The city much richmond expressed interest in joining Marin Clean Energy a couple of years ago and we started service to richmond customers last summer, so about exactly one year ago. Were assuming 77 of the customers in our area, so in marin and richmond and the other portion of those customers have decided to opt out and stay with say that again. Were serving 77 of the people in our area. And the other 77 percent opted out and remain with pch services. We have reduced by 131 million towns.
We started up, we spent about a million and a half on our initial feasibility studies determining whether or not this was going to be something that was workable in marin and whether it was something that the customers in marin were interested in. When we launched in may of 2010, we needed 2. 2 million to get off the ground. Today our finances are looking really good. Weve got a budget of 100 million budget and were in net position of 8 million. We are providing service to approximately 125,000 customers in our service area which includes the county of marin but the city of richmond. The city much richmond expressed interest in joining Marin Clean Energy a couple of years ago and we started service to richmond customers last summer, so about exactly one year ago. Were assuming 77 of the customers in our area, so in marin and richmond and the other portion of those customers have decided to opt out and stay with say that again. Were serving 77 of the people in our area. And the other 77
Expenditures and interested partis can see where the projects are and where their status is. With that, i leave with or you with the resolution before you and if you have any questions, i would be happy to answer. Thank you very much, mr. Brill do members of the board have questions or comments . No. Do we have any members of the public . No, no members of the public. Point of order, just come forward if you want to speak. That is all. You think a Ballot Initiative will put a bond on the measure is going to fix this situation . Its not going to fix the situation. Stop paying other city departments work orders. Stop coming to the public, stop trying to squeeze money stop trying to squeeze water out of a turnip from the employees. What you need to do is sit down, all of you, think about how you are spending your money . Wasteless projects like this one is a waste im a voter of san francisco. And im definitely voting no against this. What needs to happen is mta reform. Now a vote for init
Since azerbaijans independence, in 1991, u. S. Aid has spent 55 million on programs to make the country more democratic. The country remains more undemocratic and is becoming more and more authoritarian. The u. S. Government presses on with multimilliondollars programs in azerbaijan. In 2012 us aid issues a 1. 5 million call, i want you to listen to this. That would enable key Society Organizations to better respond to the president s vision and calls for more meaningful and state Civil Society partnership fulfilling the governments commitments to various International Human rights instruments, end quote. The idea of u. S. Taxpayer dollars going to implement the supposed democratic vision of azerbaijans authoritarian president reinforces the notion that foreign aid is a scam. Ill give you an example from kazakhstan. This is a typical program. Youll see this in every part of the world. Im a eurasia specialist. My examples from the region, usaid worked with the 1. 5 million to increase t
Opportunity to give me a line rehearsed to please u. S. Donors. Its evidence that i collected indirectly and that came up in conversations about central and Eastern European democracy promotion. Again, my conclusions are not to dispute problems with u. S. Democracy promotion or its unintended negative consequences. But just to highlight that it can and has mattered and that its an investment whose payoffs go up and down in the short and long term as we saw in the first panel. But its an important investment. In conclusion, allow me to return to the merits and limitations of the central and Eastern Europeans as democracy promoters. Again, to discover those i talked to their recipients in their neighborhood. Those recipients highlighted three important merits. The first one is the firsthand experience with democratizatio fl that they have. A lot of the individuals were the organizing source of the domestic breakthroughs. They have this unique experience with this as well as moral authori