Item. Is that miss miller . This item will be dropped from the agenda. Our mou goes to the end of fiscal year 1415. We have another year 1 2 on the mou. That was my fault. We dont need to hear that item. Supervisor john avalos great. If there are no other comments from the panel. Well go to Public Comment. Good afternoon commissioners, eric brooks local green party for the city. First once again thank you for the lafco for taking out the bold steps. We have had a couple moments like this in history where things got caught up and glad to see it moving forward. Some quick technical notes. I think one thing that will really and we discussed it a little bit, i completely concur with exploring all possible actions with shell and without shell and other contractors like shell or do it in house which i think the advocates are most supportive of that. One thing that i have noticed is that we have not heard from the sfpuc or from any other source that i know of exactly what is going on right no
Think the key here is that even if the sfpuc gets considerably more involved and starts doing it own work on build out and cleanpowersf and gets back in the game. I think back where we let them take the ball back. This is the moment where we need to lafco stay the drive of this. This is politics. The key with the sfpuc is that as an Enterprise Agency that is in charge of rate payers and keeping the system secure, they are mandated to be secure about this. Lafco can really push the envelope in developing an rfp that will face the compliment crisis and we need to you keep this inhouse. Supervisor john avalos thank you. Hello commissioners. Chad hose skin. We didnt hear too much about the cleanpowersf program. I was at the january 14th puc hearing and i strongly urge you to checkout the power enterprise budget information presented. A memo was available which i believe was the 1415 two year planning cycle and indicated i think in one sentence that no work would be done on cleanpowersf by
Cleanpowersf by power enterprise. The focus seems to be on new high revenue customers and not on engagement. Definitely a lot of information in those documents in terms of what the puc is thinking Going Forward and i dont think it do have dove tails what the lafco board is expecting. Inhouse scheduling is a comment that someone made earlier is something we heard the puc staff say they can do. And as mr. Freed indicated that could actually not only not add to, but maybe even alleviate some of the funding issues that the puc is having. Going to the rfp, we did as a group of advocates send a letter to the lafco staff and urged you to check that out and looking forward working on the lafco rfp Going Forward and assuming the shell contract is Going Forward seems questionable, but also maybe might not even matter that much. 2030 mega watts for four 1 2 years while substantial may not purely maintain a plan this scope in scale. Thank you very much. Supervisor john avalos is there any addition
Thank you. Hello commissioners. Chad hose skin. We didnt hear too much about the cleanpowersf program. I was at the january 14th puc hearing and i strongly urge you to checkout the power enterprise budget information presented. A memo was available which i believe was the 1415 two year planning cycle and indicated i think in one sentence that no work would be done on cleanpowersf by power enterprise. The focus seems to be on new high revenue customers and not on engagement. Definitely a lot of information in those documents in terms of what the puc is thinking Going Forward and i dont think it do have dove tails what the lafco board is expecting. Inhouse scheduling is a comment that someone made earlier is something we heard the puc staff say they can do. And as mr. Freed indicated that could actually not only not add to, but maybe even alleviate some of the funding issues that the puc is having. Going to the rfp, we did as a group of advocates send a letter to the lafco staff and urge
Breed had requested at the last meeting that we spend some time, spend some resources to take a look at that and specify a plan and provide a more cohesive plan as to what the local energy build out would be. The draft talks about, there has been a number of reports. We dont want to reinvent the wheel. So what the draft does is mention the reports that have been done and acknowledge there is a bit of a difference between some of the reports. We have a program that is throwing off approximately 6 million a year. And we have reports by a local power that is more like 100 million a year in terms of expenses. We are trying to craft a program that is manageable, affordable and reachable within the context of our goals. The a draft at this point because we needed some feedback. We want to make sure that we have the principals correct and that we are doing what you would like us to do. I would like sfpuc staff to comment and assist with this. I know that they have been directed at this point