>> chair and directors, yes, i do. so if you're ready, i'll begin with this. meeting of the citizens -- i'm sorry, i think there seems to be a lag here. >> chair borden: it's not the same as what you're seeing on tv. your audio is a little bit labored. i don't know if your internet quality is -- well. okay. >> okay. see if that helps. if it gets really bad, just let me know and i can just submit my report as a written report. >> no problem, go ahead. >> great. so at the last meeting of the citizens advisory council, we met director lai and welcomed her to the board. thank you, again, for stopping by. we always appreciate welcoming board directors at our meetings. also at our september meeting, i expressed disappointment and dissatisfaction with the rollout and subsequent rollback of rail service. and i hope that, if nothing else, the problems with rail revealed opportunities to fix and strengthen our system starting with more support at central on that. at our september meeting we heard from operators and members of t.w.u.250a who brought a number of issues to our attention, including director tumlin, as you mentioned in your report, the critical issue of operator safety. so i appreciate your sentiment that you expressed during your report. and we will be following up on that and the other issues we heard about in the coming months. we heard the presentation on the geary bus rapid transit project and some members expressed regret that the project will not be rail-ready, but we agreed the project will improve one of the most critical transit lines in the city. we passed that motion and that motion is in your agenda packet. that concludes my report. directors, it's always a pleasure to let you know what we've been discussing. >> chair borden: thank you so much for joining us. and with that, we'll open up to public comments for members of the public to comment. i don't know if any directors wanted to make any comments while the moderator opens the line. seeing none, moderator, are there speakers on the line? >> it's an opportunity -- >> you have one question remaining. >> this will be on the citizens advisory council report. >> hello. my name is herbert winer and i'm wondering right now if they can play mta is not on an austerity program. it can have a nasty blow-back because you can have an outraged public and it will impact adversely on m.t.a. if you have to make public transportation a priority and the other projects play second fiddle, because the main problem of sfmta is public transportation. if you're going to have all these other projects paid off and implemented, you're detracting from public transportation. and this is a bad thing. worst-case scenario is that basically we'll be in so much of a hole financially, some outsider, some hedge fund manager or someone very wealthy will bail sfmta out. you don't want this. thank you. >> chair borden: thank you. any additional speakers or commenters on the citizens advisory report? >> you have zero questions remaining. >> chair borden: thank you. so we'll close the public comment on the line. and move on to our next item. >> thank you, madame chair. item 9 is general public comment. this is an opportunity for members of the public to address the board on matters that are from -- it's an opportunity to address the board on matters within the jurisdiction of the m.t.a. board of directors, but not on today's agenda. as i said at the start of the meeting, if members of the public wish to make public comment on these matters, please call 1-888-808-6929, the access code is 9961164. then dial 1-0. if the moderator could open the lines. >> thank you. for the commenter who called about the 48 bus, this is the time to speak. >> you have two questions remaining. >> caller? >> hi, my name is pierre hutchinson on behalf of teamsters 665. cut corners when it comes to the workforce. lyme should not be handed permits without serious review of their compliance. in purchasing, they're buying the additional permits rather than complying to the guidelines and earning them. thank you. >> chair borden: thank you. our next speaker, please. >> you have three questions remaining. >> hi. i wanted to comment on the proposal on rhode island street. my immediate neighbors and i on the 600 block strongly oppose -- >> sir, this is an item on the consent calendar. so we're not there yet. >> okay. apologies. >> no problem, thank you. next speaker, please. >> you have two questions remaining. >> hi. yes, i wanted to call about the 48 bus on clifford. >> could you give us your name? >> yes, this is trisha. >> thank you. >> and thank you and i think we definitely need your help. clipper is a very noisy street and the noise pollution is very high. and during the block that i'm on, you basically have numerous cars speeding and it's a very -- it's not a very calm area. and we definitely oppose the 48 -- myself and my neighbors -- definitely oppose the 48 bus route on clipper. adding to our normal traffic and it's been very challenging for us to deal with every ten minutes a huge bus coming back and up down our street without any sort of approval of the -- so we definitely need your help in understanding on how we can deal with this. our street is very small. and literally, you can hear the reverberations of the line in my bedroom. so i'm just hoping that you guys will address this. and provide some sort of answers for calming clipper street. >> thank you. >> yeah, thank you. and just wanted to let you know, this has become a public nuisance. and it's been very challenging. >> chair borden: thank you very much for that. next speaker, please. >> you have three questions remaining. >> chair borden and members, thank you. my pronouns are she and her. i'm going to talk about muni today. we talk a lot about equities, but we need to advertise it. so i think we need to advertise clipper star on the front page to help people most in need save money on their muni fares. it's very important program and very helpful. besides we should in the business of selling scratch-off paper tickets. people lose them, they're gone. you kept the money and someone walked. so we need to do better. we need to go all in clipper on the mobile app. i did attend the sfmta meeting with the presentation about the rail restart and i'm concerned about the rail. and it should not be all or nothing. we should be able to turn on rail. and we have lots of examples that we can follow in taking ourselves to the next level in being able to operate a great and legendary rail system. the channel tunnel linking england and france. the tran in france. and japan. they're examples of effective, safe railways that operate at high speeds, higher voltages, higher wear and tear. you don't hardly hear of them having problems, but we also have an example in new york. which is one of the most demanding in the world. the park avenue main line which leads into grand central terminal, the world's largest railroad station in new york city. i'm sure you've all seen it. it's important to take muni to the next level and perform at our highest and best. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> you have three questions remaining. >> again, for members of the public, this is for matters not on today's agenda. >> circle back to me again. this is what i can comment on the r.p.p. or no? >> yes. >> r.p.p. for vermont and rhode island? >> no, that's on the consent calendar. >> which is the next item. general public comment is an opportunity for members to address the board on matters that are within the jurisdiction of the board and not on today's agenda. next speaker, please. >> you have three questions remaining. >> yes, hi, good afternoon. there is barry toronto. i'd like to address a few issues. there are a number of projects in the pipeline for years and all of a sudden during this pandemic period, they're coming to fruition, which i think you need to reassess whether it's appropriate. there is a project for the 7th rapid line and they moved our cap stand to ash bury and haight. we're willing to check it out, but no one notified even the mta taxi division they were doing this. so it was discovered by cab drivers. they're putting traffic lights along haight where there were stop signs in the past. we need to reassess whether the projects are necessary to spend money on when they may not be needed. i want to give a shoutout to phil for his effort on outreach to cab drivers and to put in the new temporary taxi stand next to walgreens. however, we need help with enforceme enforcement. it would be get to put p.c.o.s by there to check it out. i'm going to repeat the same message every meeting. you need signs a block before closed streets to let people know they can't go through that street. by the time you show up and turn into the street, because it's not properly closed, then you got a problem. and also be great if you provided a list to the taxi division of the closed streets so that -- so they can share the list with the drivers. a map isn't too complicated. and so it would be helpful for that. the last thing is about scooters. we see a lot of scooters on the streets that are not obeying the traffic laws and sometimes have two people on them. there are no licenses on these scooters, so how do you report them and what company they're for? this is a problem and you need to address scooter safety and how to deal with people violating traffic laws and putting themselves in danger. >> thank you, mr. toronto. >> next speaker, please. >> you have one question remaining. >> can you hear me now? >> yes, we can. >> okay, this is on item 9. i have five comments on this. one, i had a good conversation with sarah jones, the mta sustainable streets planning director and i feel that she heard my concerns. two, i want to be clear. i have two and only two ceqa appeals currently pending at the board of supervisors. i may file two more. we'll get to that in a later calendar item today. three, just because i or anyone else files a ceqa appeal should not result in making it harder for everyone, or anyone frankly, to do so. four, as i said before, there is still enough transit operators and vehicles to provide pre-virus saturday-level transit service every day in the city. we should not have to choose between service on key corridors and service elsewhere in the city. it is still fundamentally inequitible to say we're going to provide service on market and mission and geary, but not going to provide service on the 27, the 31, the 33, the 18, the 23. and all the other routes that are not getting service. we're paying people every day to either sit at home or come to work, there are operators, there are vehicles, there are resources to provide that service. and somebody made a choice not to provide that service. and that is what i oppose. thank you. >> are there any additional speakers on public comment which are items not on today's agenda? >> you have one question remaining. >> what is very upsetting to me, the bicycles riding on the sidewalk. now, they're clearly violating the law and nothing is being done about it. and i think it's a responsibility of the board to take action. i realize the bicycle coalition has a lot of political power and they have significant influence, but that doesn't give them the liberty to break the law. and the problem is that, you know, pedestrians are not safe on the sidewalks. why is no action being taken about this? this has been a longstanding problem. also bicycles go through the red lights all the time. i've seen it and nothing is being done about it. if i were driving an automobile through the red light, i would be subject to citation. nothing is being done about the bicyclists and they're violating the law in a carefree way which is actually a semi-criminal act. so you have to do something about and stop winking at them and turning your heads the other way. thank you. >> thank you, mr. winer. next speaker, please. >> you have zero questions remaining. >> thank you. with that, we'll close our public comment. move on. >> we are at the consent calendar. these items are considered to be routine unless a member of the board, member of the public wishes to have a matter severed and considered separately. given that we do not have speaker cards, i will read all consent calendar items and open public comment for all items at once. 10.1, approve various traffic modifications on funston street, rhode island and vermont street. item 10.2 approves various permitted shuttle bus zone modifications to remain in effect for the duration of the commuter shuttle program. these are along 19th avenue. item 10.3, authorizes the director to accept and spend 608,000 in fiscal year 2021 transportation development act article 3 funds for vision zero bicycle and pedestrian improvements. 10.4 supports the implementation of the riding together bay area healthy transit plan on the transit system. madame chair, directors, that is your consent calendar. if members of the public wish to address items just read, please dial 1-0 to be added to the queue. >> you have three questions remaining. >> okay. first caller, please. >> thank you, chair borden and members. for the record, she and her. i'm just going to go on record about consent items here. i'm not asking for severance. commuter shuttles are important. there is a lot of people that don't like them, but they move people to and from jobs, so it's very important to keep that program going. and i'd rather have people on buses than in cars. too many cars on the road. 10.3, definitely it's important for us to continue to invest in bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements. i am a user of two-wheeled vehicles, including those little scooters and also the electric bike. and so anything that is going to help make bicycles and pedestrians safer, helps me. we need to do that. and lastly, i have been to the various meetings concerning bay earth healthy transit. it's quite a comprehensive program. it is not perfect, but it is the beginning of helping us to build a safe and more reliable transit program. it's living document. so, i ask that you pass these items respectively. i look forward to your yes vote. appreciate it. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> you have two questions remaining. >> hi, this is about the r.p.p. on rhode island. >> no problem. >> my neighbors and i strongly oppose and i hope you received a opposition as well. this is a contentious proposal. i want to summarize that even -- even those who signed the petition a long time ago agree that now the current state, there is plenty of parking on our block with no one having problems with parking. and a site will show you that there is abundant parking. you all talked previously about how the post pandemic work has changed how we are -- how we need to manage change. and parking demand is going to change. so i hope that -- i implore you to not make policy made on outdated assumptions. i want to propose because there is so much opposition and contention around this proposal locally, that you compromise. that there is no current problems with parking and at the very least, suggest that you defer this decision for maybe six months to reassess post pandemic parking space. i think that is a sensible compromise for our local neighbors. and nothing will be lost. and our neighborhood will remain happy. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> you have one question remaining. hello? >> i'm also a resident on rhode island. and i strongly support this measure. i've lived on the hill for over 25 years in this house, and parking, you know, is a nightmare during the week. you just share the streets with commuters that are looking for free parking. and now we're surrounded from more and more permitted parking, it's going to become an issue. while i agree it's not currently an issue, a quick google search of our street during the midweek, you're going to see what it's like to park on our block during normal times. granted, we don't know when normal times are going to come, but we've been through the cycle before with the bus before. i would like to see it corrected once and for all. it's an issue actually of safety because when we end up having to double park, as we do during normal times, we're also on a very busy street and it's just become very dangerous to live on the block. those are my comments. i'm definitely in support of the permits. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. any additional callers? >> you have zero questions remaining. >> chair borden: great. with that, we'll close public comment. directors? are there any questions or comments, or do i hear a motion? >> motion to approve. >> chair borden: a second? >> second. >> chair borden: aye. >> director brinkman: aye. >> vice chair eaken: aye. >> director heminger: aye. >> director lai: aye. thank you. madame chair, five votes to approve. the consent calendar is approved. moving on to regular calendar, madame chair, just for members of the public, again, who may wish to make comment on either of the next two items who are listening by sfgovtv, please make sure you dial the phone number. 1-888-808-6929. the access code is 9961164. and then dial 1-0. we'll ask you to do that when the item is being called. all right, and madame chair, as i announced at the start of the meeting with regard to item 11, which i'll read into the record in a moment, staff has asked that this be an informational item only and the board not take action today so they are able to do further stakeholder engagement and outreach. item 11 is finding that temporarily closing one block of church street for the safety and protection of transit riders due to the large amount of transit riders needed to cross to and from the center track lanes to the j. church trains and the muni metro entrances on the west side of market and church intersection and further that the proposed temporary street closure will also substantially improve safety for pedestrians, cyclists and other people who will also use this portion of church street dhurg period as well and approving various temporary parking and traffic modifications as part of the rail transfer projects and bus terminal and route improvements. i will not read each of the traffic modifications. madame chair. >> chair borden: thank you very much. i understand that mr. sean kennedy will be presenting to us. mr. kennedy, welcome. >> great, thank you. hello, directors. good afternoon. let me share my screen here. >> chair borden: please introduce yourself as well. >> you bet. so good afternoon. my name is sean kennedy. i'm the transit planning manager here at sfmta. and we made a number of changes to the transit system on august 22nd as part of the city's covid emergency response. and you know, these changes are temporary. they will at 120 days after the emergency declaration is over, but you know, as this pandemic continues, we're not sure how long this emergency will last. how long the emergency declaration will last. so we're bringing this before you today. originally, it was going to be an action item, but as the board secretary pointed out, we're now just asking this to be an informational item. and we'll return further with action items in the future as we continue to work with stakeholders to make this project the best it can be. so i'm going to walk through the service plans vision for august 22nd. and then talk through the modifications we're making to the plan as well as outline the next steps as we move forward. and this map here is the august 22nd service map. and will be the base of the discussion today. so the service changes, in order to make the service changes, there were several curb and roadway space modifications both on the bus and rail side that needed to be made to make the service changes work. and on the bus side, it's only really only two routes. the 37 and the 48, which i will talk through at the end of the presentation. but wanted to devote most of time to talk through the rail changes as they are really the most substantive changes and also the changes that we're hearing the most about in the public. so, you know, as you recall, rail and rail operations before the pandemic, before shelter-in-place went into effect, you know, really had some operational situations that needed to be fixed. i, you know, queues of train waiting at west portal. both at west portal in the tunnel, in the subway rather, as well as on the street. church and embarcadero. we had crowded trains creeping through the tunnel. it could take 8-10 minutes fairly regularly to get from palo to embarcadero. and customers crowded on the platforms because of the reliability issues specifically in the subway. you know, this type of situation when the trains start running again, we do not want this type of situation during the covid period. we need to reduce the amount of time people spend on trains, especially in the subway. and so the idea really impetus for the rail plan was to improve subway performance. you know, as you look at the history of the subway, obviously we've had performance issues for quite some time. i think, you know, really can be boiled down to the fact that we are trying to run too many trains through the subway. this chart, you know, on the right, compares us to our peer agencies, but i also want to point out that, you know, if you look at the top line, we have 42 trains an hour scheduled to go through the subway. in actuality we're doing 34 to 40 trains an hour directly due to operational issues. stacking up in embarcadero. stacking up on the surface trying to get into the subway in general. that affected not only reliability in the subway, but also capacity issues. obviously if we plan to have the capacity of 42 trains going through the subway and we're only getting 34, that leads to crowding issues that exacerbates reliability throughout. reliability concerns. we're working to modernize which will help greatly, but in the meantime, we want to reduce the number of trains in the subway while maintaining that same amount of capacity. one of the ways is if you look at the 34 to 40 trains an hour, you know, a number of those are one-car trains, or were. so trying to get that -- the capacity up to the subway itself was always a two or three-car train is also a concern and issue we're trying to address with this subway plan. so the plan itself underlines, meaning that the l. and k become one-train lines from the zoo to balboa park and having people if they want to travel downtown, they transfer at west portal. similarly, the j line will turn on the surface at church street. and then to maintain that capacity through the subway, the vision was to add subway shuttle that would go from embarcadero to west portal using the brand new west portal crossover that was just completed. obviously, you know, we implemented that august 22nd, that rail plan. it lasted for three days before for other reasons, as previously been discussed, we had to pull it back. but we did learn some important lessons during that time and i think one of the biggest take aways is the importance of signage. the signage becomes important to make sure people can make the transfers correctly and know where to go to catch their connection. i do want to note, though, and send out a huge gratitude of thanks. i know director tumlin has already done this as has director kirchbaum, it was really impressive the amount of staff support across the agency that turned out the weekend of august 22nd to provide customer service and information. really appreciated the help from across the industry and the communications team continued to do work posting signage and getting signs in place. that said, we have a ways to go and we learned some of the holes that we're seeing. because of that, this diagram at west portal really shows why those signage are so important. in order to make the l, k line work, we needed to provide an accessible transfer location for people on the l, k, and then getting to and from the subway. and this diagram depicts two accessible ramps we installed. they're green on this diagram. the blue is the link to the trains. but the green doxes denote -- boxes denote the accessible ramp. we placed these are the help of the merchant groups, stakeholders in the area, the merchant group and the supervisors office. but you know it does require some fairly good bread crumbs going from that platform at west portal to especially through outbound on the l, a real obvious path to get to that location. that was one huge lesson learned on the west portal side. on the j-church side, we had originally proposed a two-phased approach to the j. the original idea was to have the first phase which was actually implemented on the 22nd of august, the j.-train would come past 15th avenue, pull up to the existing key stop and boarding island that is just south of market there, right in front of the pilsner inn. the passengers would, it was accessible stop, so passengers can board -- rather excuse me a light at that location. the operator would get out of the train, go to the other end of the train. the passengers would then board the train and the train would head south crossing over basically in front of the thoroughbred bakery there before heading southbound. this is basically because we do not have a current accessible boarding location at church and dubose. the northern stop here in the diagram across from safeway. so we needed a stop south of market to make sure all the passengers could use the stop. this kind of service plan created two issues with the street and so one issue was closing the northbound through lane that is on the curb there between the boarding island and pilsner inn. and we closed this lane really because we were concerned about the number of passengers and the mix of passengers. people would be waiting to get on the train as the train pulled up and then meanwhile, everybody would get off the train and people would try to get back on the train. so in the spirit of covid, we just thought promoting social distancing by trying to have all that activity happen on a relatively narrow boarding island was not the best idea. so we closed off that lane of traffic to allow space for those movements to happen. additionally, we thought that just from the very fact of the train would be making unexpected move, a move that it doesn't normally make, which is that it pulls up to the stop and then comes southbound when it's heading back out instead of crossing market street, would be very confusing to people driving on the street. and so we also made this street essentially a slow street, a local-only access street to cut off and kind of, you know, reduce the conflicts between through traffic and the train coming away that wouldn't normally be associated with a train movements. so you know, by doing those two things, we have received a lot of feedback on how specifically the businesses along that stretch are viewing these changes. the most of the feedback around four things. one, that the lane closures are too restrictive to support kind of the slow-street process here, we did employ pcos at the 15th street and the market street entrances to church street. and we got a lot of feedback that the pco presence specifically made it difficult for people, even business owners, to access their own business. there was also feedback there was not enough green zone or areas for people to make deliveries. a lot of the -- several of the businesses, especially on the southern portion of the block rely on takeout and delivery services and they felt that the yellow zones provided were not sufficient to support that service. additionally, you know, as we pulled back the rail service and had to substitute bus service in this location for the j line, you know, the buses were laying over in this block. they have no time on their schedule to lay over here, but due to the fact there is less congestion throughout the length of the j route, the buses were getting here ahead of schedule and taking time to lay over in this block, blocking businesses as well as some of the parking spaces. so we heard a lot about that idea. and i'll talk more in the next slide, but essentially, we moved the bus to the north to get out of the way. and then lastly, we've heard a lot about just the idea in general of opening back up that travel lane. and making that northbound trip possible again through church street. so to respond to some of these questions, we've done a number of things. we have removed pco presence at this location. we have installed additional green zones on church street itself to help with the pickup space and the delivery portion. and as i noted, we're also moved the bus, so the bus will no longer be laying over in the block. it's moved north to the duboce intersection by safeway. and then we're going to continue working over the next several days with both the merchants and the supervisors' office as well as the shared spaces team to look at options for addressing those kind of mobility needs of opening up the lane going northbound specifically. so that was the first phase. as i just walked through that first phase, we have basically abandoned that phase now and have moved to the second phase during the bus -- the bus -- you know, the bus will continue to pull up, serve the market street stop and then go all the way up to church street as i just described. when it turns around to go back southbound, it will come down and serve the stop, the boarding island in front of churchill and then head southbound down toward balboa park. and that will continue while this bus stop is going. when rail comes back, when surface rail returns, you'll go directly into this phase two approach. i'm not going to do the stop south of market. instead we'll come up the train. the train can serve the south of market stop, but we'll continue north to the duboce and church stop. we're going to be building a temporary accessible platform there. the train will then turn around using the crossover by the grocery store there and head south. and where it will again stop south, far side of market, at a new temporary stop that we're building there. that way, people can come in and out of the -- the subway with ease and really help improve and make that transit connection much easier. so that's the second phase of the project. and that's what we'll be moving forward with once rail returns. i did want to just highlight quickly some of the groups and organizations we've talked to both at west portal and church around this. one thing that is not on this list is door-to-door outreach. specifically to the church merchants. we've been spending the lot of time on church street and will continue to work door-to-door with those merchants as i said, as we continue to work through opening up the northbound traffic. macro feedback we've gotten, you know, the first two bullets really relate to the l, k transfer. as taraval goes under construction, we have heard loud and clear that two transfers for l riders is difficult, so we'll be working to address that through bus subs as we move forward, as well as managing traffic in the west portal area. and then on church street, itself, you know, of course, working through the accessibility issues. going to phase 2 directly instead of the phase one. the phase two on church street will allow us to provide accessibility issues because people with take the end or the subway, as well as supporting our neighborhood business partners. then lastly, i wanted to touch briefly on the two rail -- excuse me bus changes that we made. you know, we reinstituted a portion of the 37 line and when this plan was made and developed, it went into implementation, you know, we had started back up the subway system. so we knew that the upper part of market, because the f line is not running, we knew the upper part of market did not have surface transit, so we made the 37 a 40-foot bus and extended it from castro down to van ness and market. [please stand by] [please stand by] -- with this, glad to take changes or comments. >> thank you. directors, any questions before i open it up to public comment? there doesn't appear to be any, and this is reminder to, director lai does have a question, director lai? >> director lai? a piercing noise coming from your line. hello. yes, better. >> hi. ok. i think i have a headset -- sorry, roberta. ok. so, i'm so sorry, because i am still catching up, apologize if some of these are very basic questions, but hopefully still helpful to some community members. i think i understood what you are showing here in the bus line, modified bus line already rolled out, is that correct? >> correct, yes. >> ok. and in terms of the train platforms that were already constructed at westport in preparation for the august 22nd rollout, is m.t.a., is staff planning on performing additional work on those platforms before the second rollout? i think currently anticipated some time early next year? >> right. no, you know, we are anticipating working with some local artists to make it have some art put on those temporary stops, make them look a little nicer and fit in with the community. and we are working with the west portal merchants on that. but as far as construction work, no, we do not plan to be doing more work on that location. >> great. thank you. appreciate that. obviously we are taking space from formerly part of the right-of-way and although you know, we won't be able to use it for another couple months, appreciate staff thinking about working with the community to still make use of it somehow and to secure it honestly. and then i, you know, from just my own experience, i always found the intersection at market and 11th to be not exactly the safest, especially for the cyclists condition because there is a switch, and can you just talk a little bit more as i'm trying to envision what that change is for the 37, when you say you are taking additional space to make that movement happen. is the space you are taking on 11th south of market or actually on market street? >> yes, on 11th south of market, and it's just a curb space to allow room for the 37 to lay over there during the break, recovery time. >> ok, great. and then on the j, i guess modifications, i think you mentioned that p.c.o. meaning -- >> i'm sorry. >> parking control officers, that was somehow an issue or concern for the business operations. can you clarify what you meant by that? >> sure, yeah. so, we had designated that area as essentially local access only, and so the parking control officers were in place to make sure that whoever was entering that area, you know, was a local, was a local person, a local -- had a need to get in there to serve a local need. like there's a few houses in there people can park at, but also businesses, and like i said, delivery trucks, for example, and just overall just, you know, delivery services, people picking up from like red jade, for example, and delivering that to grubhub, people that have ordered grubhub, a lot of activity in there. that local access is meant to serve. unfortunately i think just the mere presence of uniformed people standing there, and the fact that they do their job really well, you know, really dissuaded some delivery services for continuing to do those pickup, and red jade felt it was impeding on their business because people were no longer using grubhub, they were not coming to pick up stuff because it was too convoluted for them and didn't know what they were to be there or not, and what p.c.o. was on duty if they were allowed in or not, and they are allowed in so removing that obstacle we are hoping helps open up that business sector there. >> all right. thank you, i'll save my comments for after. >> great. director, are there any additional comments at this time? oh, looks like director heminger has a comment. >> yes, madam chair. and sean, i wanted to ask about church street. could you put those slides back up? >> yeah. >> so this was the present state -- this is phase one and this is present state on august 22nd, and really until probably last week. since last week, we made a number of changes to how the bus operates there, and essentially now the present state is that the bus no longer stops south of market, up to church dubose, we do not have p.c.o.s, add the some green space but still have a closed off northbound traffic lane there, and mostly -- not mostly, that is because a business there has a shared space in the traffic lane and the travel lane, so we are working with those stakeholders to come up with alternative to allow us to open up. >> what part of the street is currently closed? >> between 15th there, looking northbound to market, to market, right where you see that brown -- it's basically the curb lane between, halfway up the block, halfway up the block i would say, that brown section is normally, under normal circumstances it's a through lane, a curbside through lane and that has now been closed off, so that is no longer available. >> look, i understand that you are trying to balance some interest here between the merchants and the folks using the muni system, and if i get the sequence of events, you started with a set-up that protected those folks since they were out in the right-of-way, and then the merchants belly ached about that, and so now you have backed off a little bit. my question for you is, i mean, in balancing those two interests, i would be concerned about balancing it too far in favor of the merchants and with folks out on the street there, are you nervous about the safety piece of it? >> well, good question. thank you. i mean, i would -- i would -- we have not seen anywhere near the ridership that we were anticipating when we put the train back in service, we really thought that there would be, you know, 20, 30 people waiting to get on the train and another 20, 30 people getting off the train, so that's why we really wanted that extra space to allow those, that maneuver to happen. unfortunately, you know, inception, when the train was running, and even worse now with the bus running. we are getting like 2 to 3 people per trip, you know, getting on and off, and it just from a transit perspective we just aren't seeing what we thought we would see there and the existing island would really serve that need fine. it would be able to serve that transfer activity well and allow that lane to still be open. now, looking to the future, you might say well, what about the future, won't all those people come back eventually, and hopefully yes. but by that time, when we reintroduce the rail system, we are going to move back up to dubose and church anyway, and we don't think that it will still be that same level of people trying to get on and off right there at market. so we think in the short-term and the long-term it really does not look like that space is needed and you know, as we are trying to support local businesses, if we don't have strong local businesses, it's tough to have a strong transit system. so as we kind of mix all those things together, et just seems like trying to come up with an alternative that would serve everybody's needs is a good way to go. >> so, what, you have, you had the phase one configuration for a couple of days, while we were running the trains. >> yes. >> now you have moved to phase two, and do i understand you probably have to move to a phase three once we get everybody back on the trains again? >> yeah. i mean -- so, i mean, no, i really think it would just be this phase two, but i guess we are really right now in phase 1b. because under phase two, i don't think we would keep the northbound lane closed anyway and right now it's still closed. so, we are trying to figure out how best to use that space in the northbound section there on market, on church, excuse me, and once we get that settled, then you know, i think it's just straight into phase two and the train will come back and go to church and dubose and a lot smoother hopefully in the market to 15th segment. >> you know, just one final comment and it maybe is picking up on something director said earlier, you are forcing people into the weather, and to the extent we have some time before we really confront a big bunch of trains with lots of people on them again, if there's anything we can do with, you know, shelters or awnings or some way of dealing with this place as a very important transfer in our system, so a lot of people using it, and i just would not like to see them all get drenched when the drought goes away, too. thank you, madam chair. >> thank you. >> director eakan, some questions. >> my questions have been addressed by the other directors. >> great. any additional comments before i open it up to public comment? seeing none, moderator open the line. reminder to the public, we are not taking action, further action will be conducted, and comments on the plan as we finalize it. >> you have two questions remaining. >> first caller, please. >> yes, hi. this is barry toronto. i picked up an employee from the safeway and he was going to the mission district and so i started to go forward on church street and noticed that the street was already blocked off. so you have already closed the street before having a public hearing, it says item a, you are going to approve it today but that's not what you are going to do. you have already closed the street without any signage. sean kennedy does a great job, however he fails to tell the taxi division that this stuff is going on, his own division and m.t.a. this is happening, because they didn't know about this. and, and also no signage, there should be a sign showing blocking the street on the other side of the street, saying that you can't go forward because the lane is blocked. so, of course we, as a taxi, i could use the transit only lane, but it was -- it was a little confusing at times. so, so that's a problem. two, the agenda items should have been separated, a through k should have been a separate part of the item and then l further, so on, should be, should be another separate item, they are two different projects. item number g, you should exempt taxis from the no left turn restriction. it's an important left turn to go to market to church street. >> 30 seconds. >> taxi drivers use all the time and because you can't turn left from market, i mean from church to market, to go to 14th street, we need to go down to 15th street to make the left turn to go to the mission district or to go to market street from the safeway. so, so we need to be able to be exempt from being able to go southbound church to inbound 15th street. >> thank you mr. toronto. next speaker, please. >> you have two questions remaining. >> hey, it's aidan miller. i missed the first part of the meeting. it seems the project is getting watered down. i live in the richmond district and what you have done with the 8th avenue neighborhood way and this is the same direction, you are trying to accommodate all these things but don't think about the transit riders. i hope it does not get watered down and it's disappointing. i thought it was a great project when it was first proposed. seems it's being ripped to shreds. >> thank you. >> you have one question remaining. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, chair borden and directors. justin zuker on behalf of safeway. muni light rail is not anticipated to reopen to 2021. we have outlined concerns in our letter. supportive of the city taking action to respond to the pandemic and the need to be nimble when responding, seems this project is rushed through without adequate consideration of the impacts, especially considering the muni shut down. a lot of adequate analysis of the proposed project impact, including traffic and pedestrian impacts, as well as those on local merchants and residents and the potential impact from church between dubose and market. that is a major entryway for the safeway between dubose and market off of church. with the closure of muni light rail to 2021, appears to be an opportunity for stakeholder engagement before proceeding. nice to see staff will do more outreach, given the position after the fact. eliminating or reducing vehicular traffic on church between 15th and market street has adversely affected neighborhood businesses and residents. in the current environment, businesses are hanging on by a thread and the impact may take them over the brink to close before they can give feedback. analysis of the project could be conducted before proceeding. we are pleased to hear at the outset of the meeting that a determination will occur after stakeholder engagement and outrage. we thank you for your time and consideration of it. >> thank you. >> you have 0 questions remaining. >> with that, we will close public comment and i will move back to our directors. i know that other additional questions or comments directors have, i know i think it was director eaken had more to share later, or -- >> no. directors? director lai, please. >> hi, thank you. speak to the comments around changes that are already implemented that in the context of basically the emergency order and what director level permitted to proceed versus items required to go to the board first as a procedural classification for the public? >> i think that city attorney susan olson can help. >> you said the transportation code and authorized by the vehicle code, the city traffic engineer is permitted to make certain modifications in response to an emergency condition, which exists at this point under the mayor's proclamation. and then outside of that, normally certain items, such as street closures, bicycle lanes and others go to the m.t.a. board for legislative approval. so this action did originally go through the city traffic engineer working through the department emergency coordination committee. >> all right. thank you for that reminder. having said that, i also support the comments that have already been made and staff inclination to conduct additional outreach. i think it's great that we are thinking about those reaching out to residential and commercial communities, which are equally important. i think in some of the consideration staff had, and i apologize if i miss this in the special presentations, could maybe staff address the concerns around impact on transit and whether or not these changes have a material negative impact on level of service for anticipated bus lines? >> sure. so, yeah, you know, definitely right now we do not anticipate any negative impacts from these changes. as we move forward, we will have to continue to monitor and make changes as needed as we move forward. but where we sit right now, we are not anticipating any negative impacts to transit level of service or transit reliability based on these changes. >> ok, great. relieving to hear. and i think my last comment, i did go out and look at the site today for j and church, i found it a little confusing to understand and i did observe several vehicles that were going eastbound on market trying to make the right turn movement, not realizing that the barricades were still up. so i, you know, definitely support the, i guess realization that mr. kennedy you already raised, which is signage and direction is really important and moving forward as we plan on refining these modifications to please make sure that we provide sufficient signage approaching the intersection changes instead of right at the intersection. thank you. >> thank you, director lai. any additional comments among directors at this point? just as reminder, this is, today we are not taking action, so more public outreach can be done. this is an informational item. seeing no further comments among directors, we will close this item. >> thank you, madam chair. item 12, the last item on the agenda, authorizing the director to execute contract 202020, advance train control and task order agreement for the advance train control system, amount not to exceed $30 million and initial term of seven years, option to extend the term. >> i am not addressing the item but way of introduction. one of the biggest lessons learned to the train control contract, how important it is to have a long-term contractural relationship with your vendor in order to be able to make important incremental changes and to be able to enhance the system as we go. and i'm so approachtive of my partners in our technology group that have been able to now after many, many years deliver that for the thales contract and this will allow us to do really important work to squeeze out kind of additional functionality in this current subway, and perhaps equally important it will allow for a smooth transition through train control. we don't have the luxury to shut down the subway, take out the old system, put in the new system and be off and running. have to work in an overlay function, which is complex, it requires thales to feel vested, and it requires sort of ongoing support. so i am appreciative we have reached this milestone and i'm happy to answer any questions at the end, but i would turn it over to lisa and to david to present to you the details. i just wanted you to have a chance to hear from me, big picture why i think this is such an important next step. >> great. thank you so much. i know we missed -- this is a critical issue, the train control system is kind of everything. looking forward. >> can everybody hear me? >> yes. >> ok. share the presentation. good morning, director tumlin, chair, board, i can take questions during the presentation or after. my name is david rojas. >> good ahead, david. >> my name is david rojas, technical program manager, subway train control system. may remember me from the crossover dedication, i was the project manager for the w1 crossover and here to request authorization for the director to execute a task order with thales u.s.a., train control provider. equipment and computers, installed in the muni metro subway and track vehicles and safely routes trains through the subway. system is managed through equipment, interface at the transportation management center, 1455 market, and provides data to the sign system and automatic vehicle location systems. now thales u.s.a. delivered the atcs in 1988. design life to 2028. the hardware and software was all designed by alcatal, and we need to go to thales for any upgrade to the system. and working with thales, able to support covid-related service changes, that being the malcolm hienike crossover, three car shuttle between west portal and embarcadero station. the purpose of this agreement is to allow the train service to continue to operate, essentially keeping the lights on. we want to address equipment obsolete and improve system reliability, and subway operations, i mentioned the three car shuttles, an important tool in muni's arsenal with covid. we need to support infrastructure construction, construction projects in the subway way may impact the atcs. an upcoming project to upgrade special track and infrastructure in the subway and we need to partner with thales to ensure the system can be safely and quickly returned to service as soon as the construction is over. we want to fix software bugs which impact service relied ability, and cause central control operators to increase manual intervention, something we want to avoid. and as julie mentioned, ensure continuity of service through the next generation train control upgrade, as the train life of this system expires. this agreement is a framework through which we will be procuring thales equipment and services. eliminates frequent negotiation, can delay project execution. freezing the contract terms and labor rates for seven years, plus optional two years, up to $30 million of work with thales. i want to point out that we are not actually allocating $30 million today, funding review will be performed for every task under this task order agreement and the price, scope and schedule of each task will be individually negotiated with thales. and once the task is initiated, each task will go through the normal contract approval thresholds, director, m.t.a. board, board of supervisors, i don't think it will go to the board of supervisors. similar to past agreements we have had with thales and we are going to be utilizing federal 5203 fixed funds, 20%, local match to leverage 80%, excuse me, 20% local funds to leverage and 80% match from the federal government. with your support, we are going to be able to implement service improvements. the west portal crossover integration project will be integrating the service interlock at west portal with the service interlock, to further automate the three car turn back subway shuttle. [please stand by] kirchba thal . >> some of you may be familiar with the final cutover project. once the project is complete, we're still going to have equipment in the subway equipment rooms. what this will allow us to do is move forward with the traditional control circuits and create room in the equipment rooms. we're going to activation the additional twin peak crossovers, and occasionally, we had failure of the main train control computers, which delayed subway service, and we're looking at solutions which will allow us solutions to recover much more quickly from the main train control computer so we can return to revenue service faster. i hope we can get your support, and available to answer any questions. >> thank you, mr. rojas. directors, before i open it up to public comment, are there any comments or questions at this time? seeing none, i will go ahead and open this up to public comment. moderator? >> operator: you have five questions remaining. >> okay. our first caller, please. >> hi. >> hello. >> hi? hello? >> hello. we can hear you. >> okay. okay. so this is rachel. i'm representing [inaudible] so i just want to explain the situation that we have right now. so the shelter in place keeps going back, and it takes us, like, about two months to go back to normal a little bit. since the j-line -- since the church street is closed, and our business is going back down again, and we lost about 25% to 30% of our business, and driver is not convenient to come in to pick up their orders. sometimes, they give up, customers that our store is close to. this morning, we hear bad news, that sfmta is going to close down in a week. so we really need the city to consider this whole problem, and we open the street again. yeah, it impacts our business a lot. >> thank you for those comments, and we'll put that -- that was under the last item, and we'll be doing additional outreach, and i'm sure that mr. kennedy will reach out to you. >> okay. thank you. thank you. >> so next speaker, please. >> madam chair and for members of the public, the item that's being addressed right now is the automatic train control system. >> operator: you have four questions remaining. >> next speaker, please. >> yes, good afternoon. we missed the last item. for some reason, we would like to clarify that. >> no problem. we are absolutely going to hear people out. that's our role. >> okay. great. my name is ty. i'm a property owner on the 200 block of church street, and i want to tell you a little bit about our block. of the 200 business that call church street home, only seven are open for business, of which five are immigrant or minority owned. these businesses are mostly restaurants. while they know how to make a mean potsticker or great tart, they are not politically savvy. so they returned to running their businesses, attempting to hold onto their employees during covid. they had little understanding about what was about to happen, because like covid, the street closure was unprecedented. now two week into the experiment, which no one on the block wanted, business is down 15 to 20%. food delivery drivers are prohibited from collecting their business. business is down, and vandalism is up. cars and buses park on the street all the time, making the street look derelict. businesses are forced to park on 15 street and carrie they t supplies to their stores on foot. why are we doing this? why, with only one to three people riding the j.-bus, with light rail out of commission, with companies cancelling, reducing their office footprint, with residents fleeing the city, and as high vacancy rates as the 89 quake, why would san francisco shut these streets down during the survival of covid. [inaudible] >> time. thank you so much for taking your time out to testify >> and for other people on the line about this item, the board did not take action on the item. it was deferred so there could be additional public outreach and engagement. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have three questions remaining. >> chair borden and members, alita dupree for the record. the l-line in new york city, which i rode from 14 street and 8th avenue to the bedford avenue station, and also the flushing line in its entirety from main street to the hudson yard, and there's something about when you ride on a light with cdpp, you don't want to go back to the old ways. i remember many times being on the subway in san francisco when the trains would just start, and we couldn't go into manual operation for whatever reason, and i'd just be sitting there. i really think we need to do this as part of our program of renewing the subway. that way, when we turn our subway back on, we will be able to take its performance to the next level, build us a safer and more reliable subway that follows the examples of other systems that are great and legendary. thank you. >> thank you, mr. dupree. next speaker, please. >> operator: you have two questions remaining. >> next speaker. >> good afternoon again. it's hayden miller. just want to voice my support for this project. i know when you guys put in those new crossovers, i was really excited to see them. i'm actually outside forest hills right now. i was excited to hear that they're going to go in there. i think they'll improve service, and then also, upgrading the train control system and the training so we don't have more shutdowns like this, so people don't have to use the antiquated software, so i'm in full support. thank you. >> thank you. our next speaker, or are there next speakers? >> operator: you have one question remaining. >> the next, please. >> can you hear me now? >> yes, mr. pillpot. >> yes. i, too, had comments on item 11 and was bypassed, so let me give you comments separately on item 11 and then on item 12 very briefly. so on item 11, five points. first, the agenda item description does not match the brief description in the staff report. i'm not sure where the one came from, but it doesn't match the finding of temporarily closing one block of church street, doesn't capture the 37 and the 48, etc., etc., so when that comes back, i would ask that that be checked and fixed. two, as the previous caller said, since rail service may not restart again for many months or even years, why is staff proposing this now? three, it would be useful for appropriate environmental planning and transit staff to talk to me about this. four, i have not appealed the referenced ceqa reference determinations, but i may do so by the deadline, which is this coming monday. and five, actions by the city traffic engineer are not inherently exempt from ceqa, but they may be as determined on a case by case basis, so there's no blanket exemption from ceqa for actions, even emergency actions taken by the city traffic engineer. can i move onto item 12, because i only have one point there? >> yes. yes, please. >> so on item 12, i heard the staff presentation. i think that makes sense. i wasn't sure if staff fully described the relationship between this proposed contract and agreement or the cbtc or communication based train control project, which is the bigger fix. so i think i understand that this is just a service contract for additional technical support for the existing acts system or acts prior to any construction or approval of the cbtc, and this includes taking out some of the original block-based -- fixed-block train control system. so that's what i understand, but i'm not sure if that's -- >> yes, thanks for clarifying that -- >> mr. rojas -- >> yes. can you wait until we're out much public comment mode before you answer it? >> i'm good. thanks, and we'll talk to you next time. >> so moderator, are there any additional callers on the line before i close public comment? >> operator: you have zero questions remaining. >> great. we'll close public comment, and mr. rojas, you can continue answer mr. pillpot's question. >> great. the city can repair the train control system, the same control system that's been in place since 1998. the tcup project is a different project. >> okay. with that, we'll move into directors' comments. director heminger? >> can you remind us what your schedule is on that? >> i'm going to have to refer to julie's team on that. >> i don't want to be wrong, so i'm going to have to get you that information. we successfully completed an r.f.i. about 1.5 years ago and got very, very good feedback about how to structure the contract, including this ongoing relationship with the vendor so we don't end up with a 20-year-old computer that we're investing in an ongoing way in projects and upgrades. when dan howard presented it, he said he hopes he's the last train manager for train control where we don't want to be in this kind of position where we have to do a big replacement, and i'd be happy to follow up with our r.f.p. and timeline. >> well, are we talking months or years? >> i think we're talking -- not years. >> okay. the second question relates to it, and what we have now is a proprietary system. are we going to be faced, when the bigger system comes to us, with a bigger change of proprietary systems or is there going to be some other approach that's going to be viable? >> as far as i'm aware, we are working at proprietary systems, but there are certain elements that have more interoperablity than the current design, sure. >> yeah, okay. thank you. >> chair borden -- >> oh, director eaken, yes, please. >> just noting the dollar figures associated with the contracted and hearing director tumlin say again and again, we're in a difficult situation, and we're going to have to make difficult decisions in line with our values, i just want staff to reiterate you consider this to be the highest priority use of funds at this time and if there are any tradeoffs you had to make or any other projects that aren't going to receive funding as a result of executing this contract, wondering why this is top of the list. thank you. >> i wanted to clarify what you're doing is authorizing spending. it still authorizes us to do the year-by-year incremental analysis on boundaries. i do believe there are some places this year where we need to spend on train control, but it's being balanced with all of the other tough capital choices that we're making right now. so what we're asking for is your creditor right now so that we have a vehicle to address and maintain the train control system to the best of our ability, given its age and antiquated technology, but we're certainly not looking to spend 30 z$30 million over thet year to 18 months. our spending will be in line with our current budget conditions. >> great. are there additional questions, director eaken? or director lai? we can hear you're trying to say something, yes? director lai? >> sorry about that. can you hear me now? >> yes, we can. >> having some technical issues today. i just want to ask a follow up question for clarification. my understanding is this is basically the maximum envelope of spending we may be allowing for for the next seven years plus a two-year option. from my recollection, if it's a spending amount, an amount over $1 million, it will come to the t.a.b. board, and if it's over $10 million, for some reason, it will go to the board of supervisors. >> yes. >> and then when it comes back for another item, report back on the remaining balance of 30 million that we're hypothetically permitting? >> so we can work with you on that, yes. >> okay. thank you. >> any additional questions at this time? directors, we -- do i hear a motion? >> i'll move the item. >> i'll second. >> all right. [roll call] >> madam chair, five votes in the affirmative. the motion passes; and madam chair, that does conclude the business before you today. >> adjourn our meeting for the san francisco m.t.a. board of directors and parking authority commission. >> thank you all. >> thank you. bye-bye. [♪] >> you are watching coping with covid-19. today's special guest is -- >> you are watching coping with covid-19. my guest today is the acting director of san francisco public works. he is here with us today to talk about how his department has pivoted to help the city during the pandemic and talking about some of the ongoing projects. welcome to the show. >> thank you. >> i know there are some unique challenges for our unhoused population during this crisis. namely handwashing -- handwashing and social distancing. how has public works been addressing these problems? >> you know, ever since public works got involved with the response to covid, it really began from day one. we have been working with the unhoused community and the city more broadly doing things like something to identify and design and construct a safe sleeping sights. we have been helping other areas like helping to do some of the prep for the testing centres that are all over the city now. we have also been helping to retrofit and design some of the medical facilities. we are prepared to address the surge if and when that does happen. we have also been working on the aberration side where we have been able to double the program. [indiscernible] it's just some of the things that we are regarding specifically to covid, but then on top of that, we have been doing our day-to-day work that we always do in helping to resolve some of the -- and the encampments across the city, working with the city to make sure we are doing extra cleaning at the food stations in areas where they are trying to distribute food. and it's something that we have been doing more recently which is imparting with our colleagues at the m.t.a., planning, and other departments to set up the shared spaces program. so you can bring that to san francisco. [indiscernible] you are seeing businesses being able to operate in the white -- right of way. there are some areas in the city where they are occupying the entire street. we are hoping that all of these efforts are going a long way to make the city bounce back. >> absolutely. it's great to see the city is coming up with ideas that will keep people safe and let some of our businesses partially reopen. >> absolutely. >> i understand that most workers are also categorized as essential workers, but at the moment, a lot of our buildings are still closed. how has your staff been redeployed to help out during the pandemic? >> there are 100 people assigned as emergency operations centres. they have worked on everything ranging from finance and logistics to accounting, to a communications. we have also had some of our staff been reassigned where we had people who were working within the bureau and we had them redeployed within the street cleaning groups. we are trying to solve problems as best we can. >> some city interior painters would normally be working inside city buildings and have been repurposed to work outside and remove graffiti. >> yeah, and that really -- and that is also a good example of trying to find ways that we can use those same individuals, those same skill sets but use them in a way that is safe. the one thing we have learned throughout this process with covid and shelter in place is that, you know, if you are inside, it is more at risk. so you could be an individual resident, or you as an employee or worker for the city and county of san francisco, getting you outside is important and for everyone, if you are at home, you may have to go on a walk around your neighbourhood, you know, you don't want to see graffiti and things like that. we are trying to make a conscious effort to clean those things up. >> that is great. i'm glad to hear that the pandemic hasn't halted ongoing construction. can you tell me how the new animal care and control centre is progressing and how about the ambulance deployment facility? >> they are moving along very, very well. and the care and control facility, it addresses a lot of the facilities that they have. and being able to separate the animals in a safe way and that project, along with the ambulance and deployment facility, those are all on track to be wrapping up towards the end of this year and at the latest of the beginning of next year. we had -- we just want to understand what the rules are in operating and construction. we worked closely with a health officer and other departments across the city along with the contractors to come up with rules and the way it would work and the way we have had to implement things. we are trying to limit the number of people that are going up in lifts and things like that one of the things i am proud to say is procedures are not just used here locally or regionally. they were adopted across the state. it is one thing i'm very proud of. the speed at which the city and county of san francisco are working with our partners to keep our projects going. these are a handful of examples that are now on schedule to be built on time. >> people are pretty fascinated by the floating fire workstation 35 project. how is that going? >> is that. 22.5. it is a two story building. it will be 15,000 square feet. this is a floating station. it was built in shanghai and it is currently over at pier one in treasure island. it will be there for the rest of this year. the plan is to flow it over across the bay and it will find a permanent home at the embarcadero at the beginning of next year. >> finally, i understand we are doing street improvements. how has the jefferson street scapegoat in. can you tell us about the upper transit and pedestrian improvements? >> those projects are going well it is one more example of the thought and the collaboration of the project team at public works along with the merchants that will be impacted by those projects. once we go to a soldier -- shelter in place, we could pivot and realize realize, okay. it could be time for us to speed up the schedule. because as the number of the storefronts were open. what we are able to do is speed up the schedules on the upper haight street and we were able to be able to speed up the schedule and finish early on that project and likewise for the project on the jefferson street project where we were able to make up some ground that we had lost, allowing us to do things some sidewalks and school streets. that is something we would not have been able to do without the partnership and the collaboration between the contractor, public public works, and emergency. >> thank you so much. i really appreciate you coming on the show. thank you for the time you have given us today b thank you. >> that is it for our episode. we will be back with more information shortly. you have been watching coping with covid-19. thanks for watching. we spoke with people regardless of what they are. that is when you see change. that is a lead vannin advantage. so law enforcement assistance diversion to work with individuals with nonviolent related of offenses to offer an alternative to an arrest and the county jail. >> we are seeing reduction in drug-related crimes in the pilot area. >> they have done the program for quite a while. they are successful in reducing the going to the county jail. >> this was a state grant that we applied for. the department is the main administrator. it requires we work with multiple agencies. we have a community that includes the da, rapid transit police and san francisco sheriff's department and law enforcement agencies, public defender's office and adult probation to work together to look at the population that ends up in criminal justice and how they will not end up in jail. >> having partners in the nonprofit world and the public defender are critical to the success. we are beginning to succeed because we have that cooperation. >> agencies with very little connection are brought together at the same table. >> collaboration is good for the department. it gets us all working in the same direction. these are complex issues we are dealing with. >> when you have systems as complicated as police and health and proation and jails and nonprofits it requires people to come to work together so everybody has to put their egos at the door. we have done it very, very well. >> the model of care where police, district attorney, public defenders are community-based organizations are all involved to worked towards the common goal. nobody wants to see drug users in jail. they want them to get the correct treatment they need. >> we are piloting lead in san francisco. close to civic center along market street, union plaza, powell street and in the mission, 16th and mission. >> our goal in san francisco and in seattle is to work with individuals who are cycling in and out of criminal justice and are falling through the cracks and using this as intervention to address that population and the racial disparity we see. we want to focus on the mission in tender loan district. >> it goes to the partners that hired case managers to deal directly with the clients. case managers with referrals from the police or city agencies connect with the person to determine what their needs are and how we can best meet those needs. >> i have nobody, no friends, no resources, i am flat-out on my own. i witnessed women getting beat, men getting beat. transgenders getting beat up. i saw people shot, stabbed. >> these are people that have had many visits to the county jail in san francisco or other institutions. we are trying to connect them with the resources they need in the community to break out of that cycle. >> all of the referrals are coming from the law enforcement agency. >> officers observe an offense. say you are using. it is found out you are in possession of drugs, that constituted a lead eligible defense. >> the officer would talk to the individual about participating in the program instead of being booked into the county jail. >> are you ever heard of the leads program. >> yes. >> are you part of the leads program? do you have a case worker? >> yes, i have a case manager. >> when they have a contact with a possible lead referral, they give us a call. ideally we can meet them at the scene where the ticket is being issued. >> primarily what you are talking to are people under the influence of drugs but they will all be nonviolent. if they were violent they wouldn't qualify for lead. >> you think i am going to get arrested or maybe i will go to jail for something i just did because of the substance abuse issues i am dealing with. >> they would contact with the outreach worker. >> then glide shows up, you are not going to jail. we can take you. let's meet you where you are without telling you exactly what that is going to look like, let us help you and help you help yourself. >> bring them to the community assessment and services center run by adult probation to have assessment with the department of public health staff to assess the treatment needs. it provides meals, groups, there are things happening that make it an open space they can access. they go through detailed assessment about their needs and how we can meet those needs. >> someone who would have entered the jail system or would have been arrested and book order the charge is diverted to social services. then from there instead of them going through that system, which hasn't shown itself to be an effective way to deal with people suffering from suable stance abuse issues they can be connected with case management. they can offer services based on their needs as individuals. >> one of the key things is our approach is client centered. hall reduction is based around helping the client and meeting them where they are at in terms of what steps are you ready to take? >> we are not asking individuals to do anything specific at any point in time. it is a program based on whatever it takes and wherever it takes. we are going to them and working with them where they feel most comfortable in the community. >> it opens doors and they get access they wouldn't have had otherwise. >> supports them on their goals. we are not assigning goals working to come up with a plan what success looks like to them. >> because i have been in the field a lot i can offer different choices and let them decide which one they want to go down and help them on that path. >> it is all on you. we are here to guide you. we are not trying to force you to do what you want to do or change your mind. it is you telling us how you want us to help you. >> it means a lot to the clients to know there is someone creative in the way we can assist them. >> they pick up the phone. it was a blessing to have them when i was on the streets. no matter what situation, what pay phone, cell phone, somebody else's phone by calling them they always answered. >> in office-based setting somebody at the reception desk and the clinician will not work for this population of drug users on the street. this has been helpful to see the outcome. >> we will pick you up, take you to the appointment, get you food on the way and make sure your needs are taken care of so you are not out in the cold. >> first to push me so i will not be afraid to ask for help with the lead team. >> can we get you to use less and less so you can function and have a normal life, job, place to stay, be a functioning part of the community. it is all part of the home reduction model. you are using less and you are allowed to be a viable member of the society. this is an important question where lead will go from here. looking at the data so far and seeing the successes and we can build on that and as the department based on that where the investments need to go. >> if it is for five months. >> hopefully as final we will come up with a model that may help with all of the communities in the california. >> i want to go back to school to start my ged and go to community clean. >> it can be somebody scaled out. that is the hope anyway. >> is a huge need in the city. depending on the need and the data we are getting we can definitely see an expansion. >> we all hope, obviously, the program is successful and we can implement it city wide. i think it will save the county millions of dollars in emergency services, police services, prosecuting services. more importantly, it will save lives. . >> my name is dave, and i play defense. >> my name is mustafa, and i am a midfielder, but right now, i am trying to play as a goalkeeper, because they need a goalkeeper. >> soccer u.s.a. is a nonprofessional organization. we use sports, soccer in particular to engage communities that can benefit from quality programs in order to lift people up, helping to regain a sense of control in one's life. >> the san francisco recreation and park department and street soccer u.s.a. have been partners now for nearly a decade. street soccer shares our mission in using sport as a vehicle for youth development and for reaching people of all ages. rec and park has a team. >> i'm been playing soccer all my life. soccer is my life. >> i played in the streets when i was a kid. and i loved soccer back home. i joined street soccer here. it was the best club to join. it helps me out. >> the tenderloin soccer club started in the summer of 2016. we put one of our mini soccer pitches in one of our facilities there. the kids who kpriez the club team came out to utilize that space, and it was beautiful because they used it as an opportunity to express themselves in a place where they were free to do so, and it was a safe space, in a neighborhood that really isn't the most hospitalable to youth -- hospitable to youth playing in the streets. >> one day, i saw the coach and my friends because they went there to join the team before me. so i went up to the coach and asked, and they said oh, i've got a soccer team, and i joined, and they said yeah, it was he for everybody, and i joined, and it was the best experience ever. >> a lot of our programs, the kids are in the process of achieving citizenship. it's a pretty lengthy process. >> here, i am the only one with my dad. we were in the housing program, and we are trying to find housing. my sister, she's in my country, so i realize that i have a lot of opportunities here for getting good education to help her, you know? yeah. that's the -- one of the most important things that challenge me. >> my dad was over here, making some money because there was not a lot of jobs back home. i came here, finish elementary in san francisco. after that, i used to go back to my country, go to yemen, my country, and then back here. last time i went back was a couple years ago. >> i came here six months, i know nobody. now i have the team has a family, the coaches. amazing. >> i'm hoping for lifelong friendships, and i'm super inspired by what they've been able to achieve and want to continue to grow alongside them. >> i love my family, i love my team. they're just like a family. it's really nice. >> street soccer just received a five year grant from the department of children, youth and family, and this is an important inreflection point for street soccer u.s.a. because their work in our most important communities is now known beyond just san francisco recreation and park department, and together, we're going to continue to work with our city's most vulnerable kids and teach them to love the beautiful game. >> i want to tell everybody back home, i hope you all make it over here and join teams like this like street soccer u.s.a., and live your life. get a better life. >> right away, just be patient, and then, everything will be okay. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> the san francisco playground's hitsvery dates back to 1927 when the area where the present playground and center is today was purchased by the city for $27,000. in the 1950s, the sen consider was expanded by then mayor robinson and the old gym was built. thanks to the passage of the 2008 clean and safe neighborhood parks bond, the sunset playground has undergone extensive renovation to its four acres of fields, courts, play grounds, community rooms, and historic gymnasium. >> here we are. 60 years and $14 million later, and we have got this beautiful, brand-new rec center completely accessible to the entire neighborhood. >> the new rec center houses multi-purpose rooms for all kinds of activities including basketball, line dancing, playing ping-pong and arts can crafts. >> you can use it for whatever you want to do, you can do it here. >> on friday, november 16, the dedication and ribbon cutting took place at the sunset playground and recreation center, celebrating its renovation. it was raining, but the rain clearly did not dampen the spirits of the dignitaries, community members and children in attendance. [cheering and applauding] ♪ ♪ regular meeting. i'm sandra lee fewer, chair of this body. i'm joined by gordon mar, matt haney and cynthia pollock. i would like to thank michael from sfgov for broadcasting this meeting. madam clerk, do you have any announcements? >> yes, i do madam chair, in order to protect our commissioners, city employees and the public, city hall is closed. this precaution is being taken pursuant to the local, state orders. commission meetings will attend the meeting through video conference and participate in the same extent as they were physically present. public comment will be available on each item on this agenda. channel 26 and sfgov.org are streaming the number across the screen. comments or opportunities to speak during the public comment period are available via phone call by calling 415-655-0001. again, it's 415-655-0001, meeting id(146) 797-7410. then press pound and pound again. then you will hear the meeting discussions which will be muted and in listening mode only. when your item of interest comes up, dial star 3 to be added to the speaker line. best practices are to call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly, and turn down your television or radio. alternatively, you may submit public comment in either of the following ways, e-mail myself, alisa.somera@sfgov.com. madam chair, that concludes my announcements. >> thank you very much madam clerk. can you please read item number two. >> approval of the lafco minutes from the july 31, 2020, special meeting. >> thank you very much. any comments or questions from my colleague? seeing none, let's open this up for public comment please. >> members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call, meeting id 1467977410 and then pound and pound again. if you haven't done so already, press star 3 to line up to speak. you may speak when the system indicates you have unmuted and then you may begin your comments. is there anyone on the line? >> madam chair, there are no callers in the queue. >> public comment for item number two is closed. a motion to move the lafco minutes for july 31, 2020. do i have a second. >> second. >> motion to approve the item, cynthia pollock. >> aye. >> commissioner haney. >> aye. >> commissioner mar. >> aye. >> chair fewer. >> aye. >> there are four ayes. >> thank you very much. madam clerk, can you please call item number three. >> a community choice aggregation activities report. a, bill assistance for low income customers, the equity project, power charge indifference adjustment, and the integrated resource plan. >> madam clerk, is commissioner singh with us today? >> she is with us here today but she's not a voting member as commissioner pollock is here today. >> thank you. >> good morning commissioners. i'm michael hines. can you see and hear me okay? >> yes, we can. >> great. i hope you all are doing well and staying safe these days. we got a full -- it's been a little while. it's been a couple months since we've been here from we have a full programs update for you today. i'm going to jump right in. give me one moment here as i pull my slide back up. are you able to see that? >> yes, we are. >> great, thank you. okay, so for today's update, clean powers sf update, we're going to cover a measure adopted for clean power sf low income customers. we'll be providing an update on the status of our clean power sf equity policy project. we'll provide an update on the power charge and difference adjustment or pcia and finally we'll provide you with an update on clean power sf2020 integrated resource plan. i'm going to be joined this morning by a couple of my colleagues, cassidy and jackie from our power communications team. i should say a few colleagues, and susan from our sfpuc policy and government affairs team. as you know commissioners, these are tough times we're going through. as you might expect, we seen a significant increase in the number of clean power sf electricity customers with a past due balance on their electricity bills compared to what we saw prior to covid-19. we are seeing higher rates of delinquency among customers that participate in the care and low income electricity programs. on july 28th, the sfpuc adopted a one time bill credit for clean power customers enrolled in care by september 30th. it will cover an average electricity bill for a care customer for about one month. the bill credit will provide economic relief for these customers and provide an opportunity to promote enrollment in the care and fera discount program, which will provide customers with a 20% discount on their energy bills going forward. we've been promoting this program since late august and you may have seen some of our advertiseme advertisements. i'm going to turn this over now to cassidy who will tell you about what we're doing to promote this bill credit and the discount program. i'll continue to drive the presentation here for cassidy. >> thank you mike. excuse me, hello everyone. my name is cassidy, i'm part of the powers communication team at the sfpuc. i want to go through our billing marketing campaign. the goal of this marketing campaign is to generate awareness for the bell credit program and the credit that will be available in october for our customers and also to increase the enrollment ahead of the september 30th deadline so as many people that qualify as possible can enroll and receive the discount in october. the target audience for this marketing campaign are our existing customers, low income san francisco san francisco cansens -- san franciscans, customers behind on their bills in communities that are most impacted by covid-19. as you see here on the slide, this is currently up. i'll talk more about it on the next slide please. so for this campaign, we really look at multiprong campaign to reach as many of our hard reach customers as possible. we purchase print, digital and audio advertisements. those channels were seen daily, sf bay view, and univision. we purchased 11 billboards that recently got put up. they're in spanish and english throughout the bay view neighborhood, admission, and outer mission. we also sent roughly 30,000 postcards to san franciscans to know about the program and the credit. we also purchased others. a couple of these channels are new, so we're excited to see how successful they are. we haven't used univision and google adware, but many said those channels are successful. we're excited to see the results. as part of our shared media, we're using the social media pages to promote the credit. we also created a community partner tool kit that we shared with the board of supervisors and community partners that include information about the credit and the messaging they can share with their networks and audiences. the clean power website, we created a new page that talks specifically about the credit and the qualifications you need to meet to enroll in this program, as well as how to enroll. it will contain information in the bill credit. i've also been doing some co marketing with the sfpuc larger push during this time. on the right, you can see the to add verticaltizement is the print advertisement and then the bottom is an example of the digital advertisement and that was placed on univision's website. next slide please. so what we really want to emphasize to san franciscans is that signing up takes less than five minutes. there's no proof of income required to enroll. eligibility right now is based on your income as of today. you can also qualify if you participate in programs like health and medi-cal. they will be receiving the bill credit in october, but they will provide the credit going forward. anyone can visit www.cleanpowersf.org or call our call center. with that, i'm happy to answer any questions or take those at the end. >> yes colleagues. any questions or comments at all? i had a few questions. so when you mentioned that there were a lot of families that actually were facing hardship about paying their bills, can you tell me about a number of san francisco residents that are having hardship paying their bills? >> commissioner, i don't have the figures at my fingertips right now but i'm happy to submit that to you through the executive officer after the meeting. >> sure. >> i'll approximate, it's probably on the order of 30,000 to 40,000 electric accounts, somewhere like that. >> wow, okay. do we have geographic information about that? are there certain districts hit harder than others? >> again, i don't know the answer to that off the top of my head or at this moment. we'll be happy to follow up with more specifics. when i say hardship, our measure -- i just want to be clear, our measure of hardship is basically delinquency, right? >> yeah. >> and that is, it is variable. you know, we are looking at the sort of population as a whole. one thing we haven't done yet is sort of looked at you know, individual accounts and their duration, but we do have some -- certainly some of these accounts have amounts owed that is accumulating. those of course are the ones we're most concerned about. >> yes, i think that information would be very helpful. i think to find out just how severe and how many -- to you, you may be in this thing for a while to come. so, just wondering how much relief that customers may need and the next question is, is it correct that this program gives relief for one month or did i mistakenly hear that? >> you heard it correctly that the bill credit is for one month, but what we're using -- so we're providing financial assistance equivalent to one month's average electricity bill, total electricity bill. we're applying it one month, in a single month to all of the customers that are enrolled in the care and fair program. it's a discount program. one of our objectives here in addition to providing the immediate assistance is to try to get as many customers as we can to enroll in those programs. we know that not all eligible customers in san francisco have enrolled. so, this is sort of a hook or a carrot, you could say, to entice more customers into that program, which will provide ongoing assistance to customers. >> okay, and then for those customers that are experiencing a duration of hardship and i'm wondering if you have a plan for those customers and also are you including customers that are delinquent in their bills but eventually pay it? i think that everyone's time schedule and everything is off also. if they miss a bill payment, are we finding -- are these people that you are saying are having a hardship paying, are they customers that just missed one payment but then the next time they eventually end up paying it, like in their next month's bill or is it people that have not paid their bill? >> well, it's sort of a combination of both of those. like i said, we look at the -- we're tracking the total number of accounts that are delinquent. it's delinquent at levels of 60 days, 90 days, things like that, right? so what we seen at a high level is that the number of delinquent accounts has increased significantly. to your point, you know, some of us -- probably the majority of the customers are paying their bills. sometimes they just pay them late. >> sure, okay. i think it's really great to get that data, if you have it. i think about who are those customers, which are the ones -- i think the people that really have been unemployed, unable to pay their bills completely for 30, 60, or 90 days, it's sort of -- i think that is a different level of support they may need versus somebody who, you know, after 60 days ends up paying their bill. so, i'm just trying to get a gauge of how deep and wide this problem is. >> sure, yeah, and i do want to answer one other question you asked, what other assistance is there. we are working through the california p.u.c., which is taking a statewide approach to this issue on a rearage forgiveness program. that would be rate payer funded. so one of the things i want to point out is that clean power sf is basically foregoing revenue for one month from this pool of customers. so we're not funding this by increasing rates on other customers. we're just simply foregoing revenue. this is something that the program couldn't sustain, but we know that it's relief that's needed and could be used immediately. the statewide program will also be a benefit, especially to those who are accumulating much larger ones over a period of time. >> you have more to your presentation, is that correct? >> yes, we do. >> okay, let's move on. so sorry. >> no problem, thank you for the questions. okay, i'm going to -- i'm going to hand this over now to suza e suzanne, who will speak about the equity project. >> thanks mike. high commissioners. thank you so much for having me today. i'm suzanne on the sfpuc policy and government affairs team and the sf clean power equity working group. i'm here to update you on the efforts of our working group. as we reported last fall, our staff has been working on a clean power sf equity project. lafco executive officer has been in the loop on all of our various efforts. it's been a while since we presented on this. the purpose of this project is to develop an equity policy that provides a lens across clean power sf policy, programs, and practices. so applying an equity lens will ensure factors such as race, income, gender, language, employment status, among others for example. so we have a working group of staff that has been developing the draft policy. we're also planning to do some outreach and engagement with stakeholders to get feedback on the proposed draft policy when we're ready to do so. ultimately our hope with this project is that the policy will serve as a model that could be replicated for the businesses we do and serve as a model for other communities as well, giving that choice is a relatively new program across the state. so our plan is to draft -- or to vet the draft policy with stakeholders, community leaders, and members of our priority community and we're using that term priority community to refer to those historically under served, in particular the low income communities. after community engagement, that will finalize the policy. once we have an adopted policy, that will focus on community recommendations. next slide please. so one of the most important aspects of the draft equity policy is that we're centering race in the work that we're doing here. we lead explicitly, but not exclusively with race because racial injustices exist throughout the country without exception, including electricity service. so advancing affordability, calling out cost burnden for lo income, black, indigenous, and people of color. we address barriers to participation in vulnerable communities, including disability access, culturally language translation and the digital divide. embedding community engagement as a core practice to our work and utilizing the connections we make during our engagement to continue this work and to have this work be an ongoing conversation and ability for us to make new ties within the community that we're serving. addressing environmental service and public health, especially given the historic and disproportionate impact on certain communities. addressing disparities in community preparedness, by addressing on emissions fueling the climate crisis and that under served and vulnerable communities have access to the same types of mitigating technologies that wealthier communities may already have. lastly supporting workforce development with a particular emphasis on local jobs that promote racial, gender, and lgb lgbtqia diversity. lastly, here's a brief overview of our timeline to date and our expected connection steps. apologies this says framework where it should say policy. we changed it a bit and decided to recategorize this project to focus on the policy aspect of it. so the equity working group as drafted an equity definition and mission. we have a baseline data analysis and stakeholder mapping and customer needs survey. we're promoting environmental justice training for clean power sf staff. a recent focus has been on developing the equity policy and community engagement plan. you know, we had to rethink some of our community engagement given the covid-19 emergency and the inability to work in person. we're working on fine tuning that. our goal is to begin that at the beginning of next year and have a finalized policy some time next year. that is all i have for now. i'm happy to take any questions and thank you for listening. >> any comments or questions from my colleagues? seeing nobody in the queue, i have one question. i know that you mentioned that you are looking at race also, but are we also looking at sort of people in different housing? >> yes, that's an important fact. that's something we're thinking about. i think also when it comes to energy, the difference between renters and homeowners is important to think about. while we're intentionally leading with race and centering race, there are so many other disparities and differences in how folks in san francisco receive electricity and we're hoping it can be comprehensive. >> great, thank you very much. seeing no comments or questions from my colleagues, thank you very much. now mr. hyams, let's continue. >> thank you suzanne. now i get the pleasure to shift gears here and talk about the pcia. many of you seen the pieces in the san francisco chronicle addressing the pcia and the role in the business model. the excuetive officer of lafco asked me to address this. we're going to start with the basics because it could be a complicated topic. what is the pcia? the pcia is an ongoing surcharge that customers must pay pg&e on their monthly bills to avoid shifting costs for those who do not participate in the cca program. it's the puc's implementation of state law that requires cca customers to reimburse electric corporations for the net unavoidable electricity supply cost attributable to those customers and what we mean by that is the cost of the power supply that pg&e committed on behalf of the customers before the cca program was formed, minus any benefits that the electricity supply that remain with the bundled service customers or the remaining customers that take generation supply from pg&e. and what is included in the pcia? so the pcia recovers what we call the above market costs of the power supply commitments pg&e made to serve customers prior to the formation. it's set annually based on a forecast of the market value of pg&e's resources that have been trued up the following year for the actual market value realized in the previous year. the resources are utility owned generation. these are power plants owned and operated by pg&e which include the nuclear power plant, natural gas power plants, hydro electric, and solar power plants. it also includes pg&e's long-term renewable energy contracts they entered into with third party suppliers. how has the pcia changed overtime? we had requested in previous meetings from stakeholders to show you a slide like this. so we're delivering. this slide shows what has happened to the pcia rate, that residential customers pay. it has gone up 300% since 2015. in fact, if we look at this further back in time, it's not shown on the gap, the pcia has increased 600% since 2013, just seven years. this slide shows what has happened to the rate paid by small commercial customers. it too has gone up since san francisco launched clean power sf. to understand what that means for the clean power business model, we provided these next two slides that show the electricity supply charges on an average san francisco residential customers bill. the first bar shows what the charges would look like for the average customer if it received pg&e generation supply service, about $32 per month. the second bar shows the charges that the customer pays as a clean power sf customer. the bottom segment of the bar represents the clean power sf charges for the customer's energy supply, $22.48. the top shows the charges that they collect from customers $9.28 per month. then you see the top, there is some savings that the customer receives as a result of the clean power sf service. these bars are the current rates and it shows that about 30% of pg&e's electricity supply cost is above market and need to be recovered through the pcia charge. oh boy. i'm sorry this is not coming through, but if you close your eyes, you can picture a similar chart for small commercial customers. i think the version that was attached to the agenda came through okay. i'm sorry about this. it looks like this and it's a version that we prepared for small commercial. so what's the bottom line. the bottom line is that san franciscans and the customers of other territories are paying a significant amount each year back to pg&e through the surchar surcharge. for clean power sf, we estimate that's $100 million per year, but we expect it to rise. the pcia is expected to increase about 30% in 2021, which would bring this up to $130 million per year. as we report in the past, there is an ongoing proceeding to review and revise the pcia. i provided the proceeding number there at the top of the slide. as part of this proceeding, the puc issued decision 181019 listed there in october of 2018. among other things, this decision was supposed to address concerns regarding the volatility of the pcia rate and the significant year over year changes we have been seeing. unfortunately now it is looking like the decision may have only exacerbated some of the problems by putting in place a complicated and uncertain true up process. this slide notes that there is a proposed decision issued in june 30th. i apologize for not correcting this. that decision was adopted in august. that decision adopted a framework, evaluation criteria for pcia prebasement agreements. a cca could pay for its customers pcia cost up front. if you're wondering, this would be a substantial amount of money for san francisco. while intriguing potential opportunity is something that we are looking further into, the methodology adocumented or the framework adopted did include some things that we didn't like like a risk premium that would be paid to pg&e as part of this prepayment process. lastly i'll say that the proceeding continues and parties that have been active in the proceeding have been working to develop a framework for improving the management of electrical corporation electricity supply, reducing their cost, and making their resources available for allocation and/or sale to other market participants like ccas. a proposal was developed by joint parties, which included a range of entities, including the electrical corporations and cal cca. that was submitted to the california puc, i believe this year. we are expecting a proposed decision to be issued on this topic late in 2020. that's all i have on the pcia. i can pause here for a moment or i can keep going and we can talk about it after my last sex here on the i.r.p. >> any comments or questions from my colleagues? >> yes, thanks chair fewer. i have some questions. thanks for the update michael on this pcia issue. yeah, i'm just trying to understand this a little bit better. it's obviously very complicated. i think what's clear is you said the 600% increase in pcia fees for residential custom mys and the 335% increase in small commercial customers and that's costing the customers over $100 million per year in pcia fees. did i get the numbers right? >> yes, you got that right. >> and then you also said there is an expectation that the pcia fees will increase by another 30%. >> yes, i did. >> so, i was just -- yeah, that's alarming, shocking. i just wanted to see what you -- if you have any -- if you can speak to what you think would be a more legitimate increase in -- well maybe before that, can you just explain a little bit in simple language like what is the pg&e's justification for such a large increase in pcia fees and then i have a question. >> yeah, i can do that in simple language. pg&e's justification is that the market value of the resources that they committed to is decreasing. so, the energy market value, the value of the various attributes that are part of an electricity supply has been decreasing. we know the costs are effectively locked in, right? they are not allowed to continue to add resources to the pcia commitment of clean power for customers. those resources are locked in time with the departure of the customer to our program, so new resources can't be added. so the costs are effectively fixed. there is a significant amount of cost, but what is driving up the pcia would be pg&e's claim that the value of the resources is decreasing. this question was at the heart -- has been at the heart of the debate at the california puc. some of the measures they ado adopted in their last decision resulted in valuations that were lower than what they had been before and valuations that we as part of the corral -- calcca group that were involved in the meeting disagreed with. that is one thing that's going on. that's kind of the simple explanation of the problem. >> thank you. just a follow up to that, i'm just trying to understand this again. so pg&e's rational for such large increases in the fees to cca customers, that's related to the expansion of community choice aggregation and like the significant expansion we done here in san francisco with clean power sf. >> it isn't directly correlated to the expansion. the fact that the pcia is increasing is not because ccas are increasing or it shouldn't be, i should say. really it boils down to one issue which is how the resources that pg&e has committed to are valued and you know, the mechanism is intended to avoid cost shifting to those customers that either opted not to participate in a cca program or to the communities for one reason or another decided not to launch ccas. the size of the cca shouldn't, the amount of the cca participation should not impact the rate itself. >> and one last question on this. do you have an assessment or an opinion about what would be a more reasonable and appropriate -- what would have been a more reasonable and appropriate increase in the pcia fee or do you feel like this huge increase that we've been subject to in recent years is reasonable and appropriate. if not, what do you think would be a more reasonable and appropriate amount? >> yeah, i don't think it has been reasonable. i don't have the specific amount for you today, but i do want to let you know and we shared this with the executive officer just this morning. calcca is circulating a letter from board members and electives representing customers for the california puc heart surgeurgin rethink some of the previous decisions. i do think that they should take another look at the decision they put into place a couple years ago. i think that there should be a closer examination of the true value of some of these resources. i do think it under values the resources. i also think that -- and we're hoping that in this next phase there will be some benefits that may be gained from this process, but that the ifd investor in utilities needs to be more accountable for maximizing the value of those resources in the markets that exist. unfortunately this mechanism, the pcia mechanism gives them zero incentive to do that. in fact, because there is no incentive, it really provides sort of an instrument for bludgeoning ccas. they can sit back and not try to maximize value, which then results in a higher pcia. so that right there is sort of the crux of the problem. the solution is multifaceted. it involves creating a better process for ensuring that the pg&e and the other ious maximize the value in the market. sorry commissioner, i can't hear you. >> there, i was on mute also. >> thank you for answering my questions. >> go ahead, is that commissioner pollock? >> yes. >> please. >> so i understand mr. hyams thank you so much for the presentation and answering commissioner mar's question. it's so helpful to get a refresher and to see where things are. you mentioned a letter was written, was that local electives or members of the state legislature? >> there is a form letter available for local electives to sign on to and we just received it. we provided that to the executive officer to share with the commissioners for consideration to submit. >> on the state level, has calcca or puc reached out to any of our state lecture electives to do a legislative fix instead of going through cpuc? >> yes and calcca continues to discuss this. i think the biggest issue has just been the circumstances in the state of california have required the focus of the legislature on other pressing matters like covid-19 and the fires and other more pressing emergencies. with that said, we're working on something and are hoping that there will be an opportunity to pursue that potentially in the connection session. >> okay, great, thank you. would you keep us updated on that. >> yes, absolutely. >> great, thanks. >> anymore comments or questions from my colleagues? i just have one comment which is just a comment to say that i think the whole idea of the pcia is absolutely ridiculous that this is competition for pg&e and the fact that if rate payers are saving $.35 or something using clean energy, but this pcia keeps going up, i think it's just absolutely ridiculous that we even have this pcia. it shouldn't be on rate payers that are not opting to use cca. it should be on pg&e. this is ridiculous how we had these ordinances that effect our ability to even change the environment. it's just ridiculous to keep those companies like pg&e and the monopoly and all this energy that is holding us hostage. i also want to say if it keeps increasing like this, the price of clean energy for rate payers will exceed what they would be paying if they were just a regular pg&e customer. this is super serious and disgusting how lobbyists can do this type of thing. it's just -- anyway, having said that, i think other comments or questions from my colleagues? seeing none, mr. hyams, let's go to integrated resource plan. >> thank you commissioner fewer. you will be hearing from us on this over the upcoming months. i mentioned the letter, but we do plan to engage further with this body, as well as with the board on this issue. so stay tuned. >> i'm sure my colleagues would join me in support of the letter that is being distributed state wide. thank you for to california puc. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> so now let's move on to the integrated resource plan. here is a slide with some key terms. i'm not going to read through these but they're here for you as a reference. they were included in the packet and i will refer to these terms in the upcoming slides. as a reminder, the i.r.p. is an energy planning tool used by utility and energy service providers like clean power sf to achieve goals and meeting regulatory requirements. we identify a portfolio of electricity resources that can meet our customers demands at the lowest cost while also meeting local policy goals and regulatory requirements. as we discussed at your lafco meeting in june, clean power sf2020 was due on september 1st. on august 25th, the sfpuc adopted staff recommended accelerated case portfolio as clean power sf's portfolio in the 2020i.r.p. because it balanced affordability, cleaner energy, local investment, and financial and rate stability. the adopted case portfolio achieves 100% green gas energy by 2025. it's the lowest cost portfolio we analyze and achieve as comparable amount of local investment as the other cases. to find our preferred portfolio, clean sf model to satisfy these four scenarios. the first is our base case -- was our base case, meeting the 2030 renewable energy goal. the second was the accelerated case i just described. the third is a time coincidence case that emphasizes matching energy produced by customer usage in realtime by 2030. last, a cpuc required case that meets clean power sf's share of the state's 2030 emegss targ-- emissions target. this is a required case. it was not a case that met the city's goals. we also conducted sensitivity analyses, focusing on the following questions. what would be the impact on our power supply requirements if 100 peskin of new vehicle registration in 2030 were electric vehicle? what if all vehicle trips sta start started and ending in san francisco by 2040? what if all new construction in san francisco was 100% electric? staff worked with a consultant to perform the modeling using standard techniques and software. we then evaluated each of the portfolios developed using a set of metrics tied to the clean power sf's goals. so, how about the result? this slide shows pie charts that compare the projected energy supply in 2030 for each of the three portfolios we developed to meet the city's 100% renewable energy and greenhouse gas free target. the base case is at the top of the slide. the accelerated case is on the bottom left. the time coincidence case is on the bottom right. they have very similar energy mixes. the accelerate case is a bit more solar and bit less wind energy than the base case. the time coincidence case includes more wind energy, including offshore winds and some additional hydro. this slide compares the new energy resource capacity required to be developed for each portfolio over the next ten years. as you can see the accelerated case, the yellow line adds more capacity than the other xass and the time coincidence case has more capacity by 2030. in order to generate enough renewable energy that is demanded on all hours and seasons, it requires 38% more capacity to be built by 2030. recognizing that local investments is a priority for clean power sf, our project team required all of the portfolios, including the accelerated case to include 81 megawatts of local solar. this capacity represents the highest sustainability project we reported earlier this year. this represents $186 million investment in local clean energy, capable of generating 5% of clean power annual energy needs in 2025. we use the job year metric. it's equivalent to one full time job for one year or 280 hours. the chart on this slide shows total job years estimates using the best available industry metrics for the construction and operating phases of all projects identified for development in the i.r.p. portfolios. as you can see, the portfolios are projected to generate 11 thousand to 14,000 job years by 2030. the accelerated case create it is most jobs the soonest, it will create more jobs by 2030 because it requires more capacity to build. all portfolios have the same local job accomplishments but approximately 1,400 job years create in the bay area to develop the new local projects i just described. as for our sensitivity analysis, we found that requiring all new construction to be all electric is not expected to produce a large amount of additional electricity demand in san francisco, at least in the near to medium-term. that's because the city is built out already. new construction is relatively small against existing buildings. for that reason, the sfpuc is conducting additional analyses to look at retrofitting existing buildings to go all electric. i think that will have a much more significant impact. meeting the mayor's road map goals is projected to have a significant impact on electricity demand in san francisco. it would represent a 46% increase in annual electricity sales by 2040. this would require 114 megawatts of additional renewable energy capacity in 2030 and 679 megawatts in 2040. how do the portfolios compare from a total cost standpoint? this slide shows the total net present value of the portfolio cost from 2021 to 2038. you can see the accelerated case is the lowest overall cost, 2% lower than the base case and 11% lower than the time coincidence case. you can see here on this slide how the portfolio is comparing against one another and the ten year projection of the supply cost, which is the red dotted line. you can see the time coincidence case jumps up significantly in 2030, which is the year the portfolio adds more capacity to achieve that time coincidence objective. beginning in 2030 for the rest of the planning horizon, the time coincidence case is about 20% more costly to rate payers. so based on these results, the sfpuc staff recommended, and adopted the accelerated case portfolio for the i.r.p. submission. we found that the accelerated case stay truest to the program's goal, affordable an local investment in jobs, financial stability, and those things have been the touch stone to all those to date. one thing i want to comment on is our engagement on this with stakeholders. an i.r.p. engagement plan and our goal with that was to increase stakeholder awareness of the process and provide opportunities for stakeholders to learn of the i.r.p. and give us feedback. despite delays issuing the final i.r.p. guidelines which delayed our modeling work and our report writing, they worked hard to ensure that we had a draft i.r.p. analysis that could be made available in august for public review and feedback. we launched a dedicated web page for the i.r.p. and you're seeing a screen shot of that here. this included background information, along with downloadable resources, which is the draft narrative, a two page summary, and an overview of our findings, analysis, and results. it provided details on how stakeholders could provide input through public comment and that our commission meeting and at the request of stakeholders, we hosted two open office hours before the sfpuc meeting on this to answer questions and receive feedback on the i.r.p. stakeholders that were in favor of staff recommendation expressed support for how it accelerated clean power sf to 100% renewable energy and balancing affordability and local investments. stake holders who were opposed to staff recommendation preferred the case and expressed the desire to minimize the reliance on the california iso with more local investments. overall, this feedback we received has been very valuable to us and the emphasis on resiliency and de-carbonization will inform our planning work and the development of new customer programs this fiscal year. i mentioned this before, it does not stop now. we're continuing and of course our next i.r.p., which will be due before we know it in just two years time. so thanks for sitting through that. i appreciate it. we have a lot going on as you can tell. here is a link to our website with more information on our i.r.p. with that, i'm happy to take any questions on this last topic. >> thank you very much. colleagues, any comments or questions? >> yes. >> go ahead commissioner pollock. >> thank you mr. hyams for walking us through the i.r.p. and sitting in the public seat, i also get organizational and individual input from members of the public and i just wanted to try to echo or amplify some of their comments. so one that i'm particularly struck by was from 350 bay area, and he in his letter wrote that the amount of time that stakeholders had to review it gave comments and they were due and the amount of time from the deadline date to the date of adoption was very short, just a few days. how does that represent a stakeholder engagement if there is no time for any changes to be made. >> i understand the frustration there, i have the same frustration. we have a very tight timeframe where we have all the requirements from the state regulator to conduct the analysis and prepare a draft. we literally made all those materials available as soon as we had drafts available. i mean they were rough drafts too. we put them out there and we had to continue to work on them. so yeah, i mean i would be the first to admit this was not an ideal process. we are subject to california puc regulation on this. we have to submit an i.r.p. that was compliant or face penalties, including financial penalties and fines. so we're hoping that we can influence -- and i should say to our i.r.p. report, which is available on the website. you'll see at the end of it lessons learned. we made a point of emphasizing the process issues to the puc and the challenging position we were put in terms of engaging with the public on this prior to adopting a plan. we will continue to communicate that. it was a big deal for me. it was a challenging and stressful time for us because we were sprinting. i recognize that for the public it's not sufficient to have 7 or 8 days to process something as complicated as this. >> and then also to spend time on feedback, knowing that it won't be integrated. >> well, we had to -- well, i think we did. we heard it out. we brought up these issues in the commission meeting. there was no time to account for some of the feedback we got in that short of a window, which is part of the reason why i communicated that our planning doesn't end with the filing of this plan. now this plan is our plan for purposes of statewide planning that's happening at the cpuc right now. in my view, it's dynamic, and the city can continue to refine what we put out there. i heard a lot of interest in the case and we will continue to look at that. as i mentioned in my remarks, we're going to continue to look at deeper carbon sayings, that's one of the points we received from feedback groups. we will look at resiliency. i actually think we have taken that feedback in and we're going to apply it to the planning going forward. >> that's great. my next comment had to do with the time coincidence case and i have my question written so excuse me for reading. so, with issues of wildfires and public safety power shutoffs, and it gets more important than ever that we build local energy independence and the time coincidence case meets these needs better than the accelerated case. now that you submitted the i.r.p., we have the option to switch to the time coincidence case or go beyond all three of these cases. >> yeah, first of all, i don't think it's true that the time coincidence case better supports those goals. i don't think that's accurate. i think they're comparable in those goals. i think what -- if i understand the concern correctly, it is how do we create a more local energy supply that can be available when the rest of the electric grid is offline, is taken down. >> right. >> really for anything. it could be public safety power shuto shutoffs, it could be an earthquake or a lot of different things. so you know, the time coincidence case was focused on california i.s.o. grid connected resources that would produce energy such that clean power sf would not have to use any grid power from the system in addition to the resources that it had contracted for, owned and operated. so it really is an issue of balan balancing. today clean power sf and other suppliers utilized the grid we're connected to balance the variability in our demands and in our supply. electric demand is variable. it changes every moment, as does energy supply, especially the more renewable it becomes. the cloud coming over a wind farm will reduce -- sorry, a solar farm will reduce the electricity produced by that solar farm, right? so we have fluctuations happening. we use the grid to help balance that so we have a reliable supply at all times. so we wanted to explore this question of what would a portfolio look like or start to look like if we had enough renewable energy under our control in every hour of the day, at every minute of the day. so, that's really what that was focused on. there is not -- there is no additional incity resources that would support a public safety power shutoff in the time coincidence case. that's something we will work on is adding those kinds of resources, especially in strategic locations where they are of highest value to the city. >> so, thank you for that. i just think the other thing that struck me was the discussion about the mayor's electric vehicle predictions and plan really coming online at 2030 and then that being -- or meeting increased capacities to meet those goals. if we were using the accelerated plan, then we wouldn't have an increased capacity just when all of those electric vehicles are coming online. >> yes, so i also wanted to clarify that. like i said before, you know, planning has to be dynamic. we breprepare a plan, we submit, it reflects the views at that time. a month later, it's sort of out of date. things have happened. things have happened in the market, in the regulatory world. so, we know, that's why we looked at the sensitivities. we know that demand for electricity is going to change. now, for purposes of our i.r.p., the california p.u.c. required that what we submitted matched exactly the demand forecast that the state adopted for its integrated energy policy report and no more. that is why we ran this as a sensitivi sensitivity. there is also uncertainty around how the electric vehicle mark is going to evolve too. your basic point i agree with, which is -- and we will continue to very closely monitor electric vehicle demand in the city. we will be including that in our demand forecast. as we do, we will update our supply plans to make sure that we continue to meet the city's goal of supplying that electricity with 100% renewable power. >> okay. i guess my last comment, which is not a question is that the job aspect, which has always been something that i, you know, i loved about the clean power sf plan and the local build out is how many jobs it produces, good city jobs, union jobs and understanding that putting more people to work to build capacity does cost money, but the trade off of having more jobs local is really a benefit to clean power sf and so i wanted to continue to support that. i understand why you made the decision that you have and why the commission adopted it. i just feel -- i think in just reading the report that time coincidence may meet some of san francisco's goals in terms of jobs and renewability than the accelerated plan. that was just my reading of it. thank you. >> thank you very much commissioner. any other comments or questions? seeing none, let's open this up -- oh, commissioner haney, do you have a question or comment? >> no. >> okay, that's great. let's open this up for public comment then madam clerk. >> yes, thank you madam chair. operations is checking to see if there are any members in the queue. if you have not already done so, please press star 3 to be lined up to speak. for those who have been on hold, please continue to wait until the system indicates that you have been unmuted and you may begin your comments. is there anyone on the line? >> madam chair, we have two callers. >> okay. thank you very much. >> hello commissioners, this is eric, representing california for energy choice and our city san francisco locally. i wanted to talk to you about many other things in the presentation but i can't because there is something much more serious that wasn't mentioned in the presentation and that is that a mailer has gone out, sent out by pg&e and also with the logos of sfpuc and clean power sf on it which is alarming and shocking and it shows that not only is clean power sf's rate to rate payers for 100% renewable more than pg&e's 100% renewable. even 48% renewable is more than pg&e's 100% on this mailer. this was something that was never discussed with the public in many stakeholders meetings, we never knew this was coming. we need to find out whether it's true or not and we need to understand why we were not told by sfpuc staffer that this was going to go out. the understanding is that we would never let this happen. we would never let a price be higher than pg&e, especially with our lower being more expensive than their 100%. the fact this was not in the presentation is alarming. and the staff is not telling us things they don't want us to hear. they were going to make a deal to take their nuclear energy which the lafco needs to talk about in their next meeting. this is alarming that staff is not telling us things that it knows the public won't like. we should have been discussing this a lot sooner. the i.r.p. is another example of this. we could have been discussing it for weeks -- >> thank you for your comments. next speaker please. >> hi there, thanks for the opportunity. i would to appreciate if we could make three minutes instead of two minutes to make comments about issues. i would like to thank mike for presenting the data. i'm going to speak about that instead of the i.r.p. since that's on the next item as well. pg&e is likely gaining the market with large commitments prior to cca exits, which is widely telegraphed. that allows them to ensure future revenue for themselves. has you participated in meetings there? that's like a utility working group. the current formation was put into place by a commissioner who became senior vice president of strategy and regulatory affairs of southern california edison. this is corruption plain and simple. if this was happening in texas or d.c., you would have no problem calling it out. but here it's business as usual and what many are spending their careers aiming for. calcca and their one lobbyist is not cutting it. we are not flexing our power properly. every county should individually be fully applying their power. we are massively weakening ourselves and shooting ourselves in the foot. we believe this issue and the tiny staff. we are getting rolled by these people. our official power comparison between clean power sf and pg&e injures went out to all customers, selling 100% solar is the cheapest option available and that mailers goes out. we're getting rolled and the governor is literally from here. no one bothers to attend -- >> thank you for your comment. is there anyone else on the line? >> that completes the queue. >> all right, public comment is now closed. mr. hyams, do you want to comment anything on what the public comment has said? i wanted to give you an opportunity. >> yeah, sure. so, i think the first caller brought up the joint rate mailer. i'm happy to address that. we had a long meeting today as you know. this is not an intentional admission. it did just go out. this is a mandated joint rate mailer we send every year. we talked about it before in the past. it is produced between clean power sf and pg&e. the california puc has to review and approve it. so, as the caller mentioned, pg&e has a green tariff, which is called solar choice. that product is available at either 50% or 100% renewable. the 100% renewing option is included in the joint rate mailer as a point of reference. it is not just less expensive for a large number of our rate schedules and it's cheaper than pg&e's dirty products. it's the cheapest product and that is because it's subsidized. it's subsidized by non-participating rate payers. the city participated in the proceeding that developed that product and opposed the rate desi designed and we lost on a few things. so that's the reason we're working with our colleagues on this to see what we can do about correcting it. i will say this is not how solar choice presents in the future, so that's something to keep in mind. the other thing is that it's a limited program. this is part of the reason probably why the california puc didn't put its best foot forward in setting the rate. it has a limited enrollment. it's not open to large commercial, the largest commercial accounts. so, those are some of the things we did include language on the joint rate mailer that tried to make it clear to readers of the joint rate mailer that it had limited eligibility and participation. so i hope that helps. there is a little bit of context there. i also wanted to add that it's not just representing that way on clean power sf's joint mailer but on every cca and pg&e's service territory. i recognize that it's a challenge. we don't roll those rates. we control our own rates. it is my view that is subsidized unfairly and anticompetitively. we are investigating our options for addressing that. yeah, i think that was the main issue i wanted to respond to. >> thank you very much mr mr. hyams. i understand madam clerk that we need an action taken today. is there an action required of this commission today? >> no action is required. this is informational. >> okay, thank you very much. so, we will move on then. no action needs to be taken to this. we taken public comments. let's move on to item number four please madam clerk. >> yes, item number four a presentation and discussion on lafco consultant analysis of the clean power sf integrated resource plan. >> good morning commissioners, thank you madam chair. i am going to be presenting on the i.r.p. let me just share my screen. can y'all see that? >> yes. >> perfect. so we were asked by the executive officer to perform a review of clean power sf2020 integrated resources plan. my name is jenny whitson. i will go over the summary of our review and provide our initial feedback and some of our recommendations. so, in summary we reviewed several of the i.r.p. dominants that clean power sf posted on the website. we reviewed draft documents of i.r.p.s and the final filings. the overall summary of the i.r.p. and the presentation form, as well as we reviewed the public comments that were posted in addition to ours. on behalf of the san francisco lafco on august 31st, and in addition we made public during the sfpuc meeting on michael hyams regards. i'll go back to this slide. it was very difficult for our team to review all the documents in that short timeframe, but we understand that it was a little bit out of clean power sf's control due to the late posting. we did have a call this week with clean power sf's team to discuss our comments and we received some feedback that we're in the process of reviewing. we will continue that conversation. overall, of the four portfolios that were provide in the i.r.p., we did support clean power sf's case that mr. hyams just communicated. so also a review of the i.r.p.'s written comments, we did see four reoccurring themes of comments that we wanted to highlight. one is on the portfolio and also reliabilitied and resiliency, the cost analysis and clean power sf's program they're offering. for the overall portfolio selected, he did ask us to provide some feedback in terms of the percentage of local projects that were presented in not only the portfolio, but some of the existing projects, as well as the overall portfolio with the preferred case. so we took the one posted on clean power sf's website and identifi identified. we received some initial feedback as of late yesterday that we're reviewing and we understand some of these numbers may be updated. i just wanted to highlight under the new project for this accelerated case that the overall percentage of projects that will be located in the local bay area equals about 24%. overall, it was not clear if the axil -- accelerated case would be met in five years. this is something that our team feels that there could be some unforeseen circumstances associated with these projects, such as permitting issues, transmission delays, project barriers and contract issues. so that's something that we wanted to highlight out there. it's unclear if these programs also known as the resilient san francisco document, if the project aligned with that and if project based vulnerability accessibilities were considered in this portfolio. out there, we have a strong concern, as well as the public comment for clean power sf to address the system reliability for public power, and unplanned shut down to natural disasters which mr. hyams also described. we'll be looking for additional communication strategies around those issues. and in terms of the cost analysis, we did not see a rate analysis for each portfolio on how itment manies the residential and commercial rates. the i.r.p. template requires each entity to provide how the portfolio will effect rate payers. that's something we saw as a cost per megawatt hour and we will see how that translated down to the rate payers. also, if the cost is confirmed, all assumptions and the rebates or subsidies were included, aside from tax credits, which was clarified this week in our conversations with clean power sf, we did hear that all the projects in the portfolio are power purchase agreements, so those entities will likely take advantage of the subsidies. again, it wasn't clear on that in the i.r.p. and then in terms of the clean power sf program, the program information was very limited in the i.r.p. there was a general overview of each program included, but there wasn't really a timeline provided for this program, or any specific details we were hoping to see. additionally we see any details on programs specifically for disadvantaged communities and hard to reach populations. so overall, we highly recommend for clean power sf consultants, our future providers to perform extensive feasibility studies, including vulnerability assessments, cost benefit analyses for each project and not only demonstrating the rate savings that support the financial stability of the program, but also to include resill yet sit for all the concerns we heard today. we also recommend that the information on the program be expanded and future i.r.p.s, as well as possibly on the website for any program and development and timeline for those. so to summarize, our peer review was done in a very short timeline so we do hope that in future i.r.p.s and stakeholder engagement timelines that we see a draft of what the timeline looks like and an increase in that time, potentially this could start a few months in advance, talking about different parts of the i.r.p., and maybe not reviewing the full draft i.r.p., but we see programs, how p.c.i.a. rates and charges impact that portfolio and things like that could be talked about in advance. we did discuss the challenges of clean power sf filing an amendment for their i.r.p. as we originally requested sfpuc consider. they reemphasized that their planning process is ongoing and refiling an amendment would create challenges around the 2020i.r.p. they would like to avoid. so our team and mr. g o.eoebel explain. >> thank you very much. any comments or questions? >> i do have a quick question and this might be a question for mr. hyams. what would be the challenges around filing an amendment? like what challenges does that present for you? >> would you like to answer that question? >> yeah, i'm here. i'll take that, thanks. so, filing an attention will effect the -- i'm not exactly sure how it would look in terms of a procedure with the cpuc's schedule. so, what they're doing next is aggregating all of the i.r.p.s submitted by individual l.s.c.s to look at the statewide goals and reliability. as a result of the aggregation, it will then determine if procurement is needed for system-wide reliability. submitting an addendum would change what we would have potentially changed, i assume we'll do it because we're changing our plan. what we submitted and could have, you know, a major impact on that assessment, that statewide assessment. so i think that in order to -- i think my comments to the consultant and mr. goebel is that we could incorporate things into our next i.r.p. and our procurement strategies and approach. it's in a parallel fashion. i actually think that would be a much better investment of limited resources we have as a city and staff rather than submitting an amended plan. >> commissioner pollock, any other questions? >> no, thank you for that. >> okay. yes, go ahead. >> thank you chair fewer. i just wanted to make a quick comment that i appreciate the time that the lafco and the consultant put into reviewing the plan and the comments they provided us. we have met and we will continue to meet. there were a number of questions they asked of us, a number of which are sort of detailed, but we will be working together and i look forward to doing that, to addressing their questions and to help better inform you as a body on our activities. >> thank you very much. commissioner mar, do you have any comments or questions? >> yes, thanks chair fewer. >> thank you. >> i am again just trying to understand these complex issues and more specifically kind of understand the difference between the accelerated case, which is the recommended one, both by the clean power sf and puc and also the consultant also reinforced that versus the time coincidence case, which is the other one. it seems like the main difference, or one of the main differences is the source of the renewable energy in the time coincidence case would be more local than the accelerated case. it's more increasing the amount of renewable energy that we get from outside of the bay area. did i get that right? >> yeah, if i could respond to that. the time coincidence case that we analyze in the accelerated case has the exact same amount of local resources in them. the only twiefrns difference between the two is the type of energy resources that are included and the amount. the time coincidence case -- what we used is a model. think of it as a piece of software, a complex medical process to sort of optimize across a number of different objectives. one of the -- and you add constraints to the model to have it look at certain conditions or certain goals that you want to achieve. what we did with the time coincidence case is we said starting in 2030, no more california i.s.o. system purchases. so the model didn't allow us to balance our portfolio in any given hour using the general grid. we could only use the resources that we are contributing to the grid. so those are utility scaled resources and some smaller resources also connected within the bay area, within san francisco, but those resources as a whole were in the model where the only resources we could use was to supply our customers. because of the variability of the renewable energy resource and san francisco's electricity demand over the day and over seasons, it required us to build more capacity than we needed. that's basically the outcome of that case. it also leaned towards other technologies that were less cost effective, like offshore wind. now again, i want to say something i said before, which is this is a snapshot in time. we know that the market and the technology evolve and the costs come down. offshore wind is an expensive resource relative to solar and battery storage. one of the things that is good about it is that it produces during the evening hours. it's blowing offshore during those time periods. that case says you should procure offshore wind because you have an hour in the middle to the night that your solar and batteries can't cover. so i wanted to give a little bit of more of a flavor they compare. the important thing to know here is the cases were comparable as far as local investments. >> that's very helpful. maybe a follow up question, so i understand you know, and in both of your presentations why the accelerated case, you know, was recommended. it's significant from the cost analysis, it's lower. it gets us to 100% renewable, if we can achieve it in five years versus ten years or longer. are there some advantages of the cost -- i can't remember the name of the other case. like what would be the advantages of it? >> well yeah. i think the advantage is more time coincidence means that the resources that we're contributing to the california grid better match our demand and overall better serves the hourly deman we have. this also speaks to why we have a grid in the first place. what's the point of the grid? the grid is there to create efficiencie efficiencies because we're not an island. we're a peninsula, but we're connected to the rest of the grid, right? as a result, we can benefit from the diversity of a much, much larger pool of customers and resources. the time coincidence case is what if we did live on an island? we would have to increase our electricity rates. that's sort of what we found, that we have to build more to cover all of the possible hours of the day. now, i want to say because we adopted the accelerated case, the accelerated case does not perform that badly in this regard. we think that this is something we'll continue to look at and see how we can find a middle ground between the time coincidence and the accelerated case. that's something we want to look fwu further into. >> thank you. >> thank you commissioner. any other congressmens -- comments or questions from commissioners? commissioner pollock. >> i don't have a question. i appreciate that i'm given this time but i am wondering if we can continue the conversation at our next meeting and mr. hyams may respond to the questions that were raised in ms. whitson's presentation and to hear some prepared responses to those questions. that would be great. >> sure. yes thank you commissioner pollock. actually, i was going to ask mr. hyams that if you didn't include this formally that our consultant had, if you didn't officially do it but for this lafco and internal uses of san francisco as far as our concluded in our plan is that could you possibly look into those recommendations and provide us with those things like the timeline as was recommended by our consultant. i still think those recommendations are worthy of actually being answered and also being addressed. i am -- you know, it is concerning i think that our consultant mentioned it was such a short timeline and they realized that clean power was out of your hands. i think because of the short timeline and you weren't able to incorporate some of these recommendations in, i think that it is a good move for lafco moving forward to have our own san francisco lafco integrated plan and recommendations inse inserted to our own internal uses plan. that is piggybacking on what commissioner pollock's request was. i guess in more of a formal way and not as informal, that we would also adopt that as part of an amendment internally to our integrated plan. mr. hyams, what do you think? >> i just want to make sure i understand the question. you're asking -- i will say what i think i understand is a request for sort of a formal response to the questions. >> yes. >> we are planning to do that. we have been working on written responses. so what we intend to do is provide a written response to the executive officer in the form of a memo that can be made available to the commission. >> okay. i think that's fine. i think that with the next meeting in november give you ample time to do that? >> yes. >> okay. so let's agenda that for our november meeting so we can have further discussion on it. then at that time after we see the responses, i think we have a discussion on whether we want to formally adopt those recommendations also or what you're going to be presenting to us. i think it deserve as good look and discussion also. mr. goebel, i see your hand is up. >> our next meeting is in october and not november. it's mid-october. >> okay, would october be enough time mr. hyams? >> i think we'll be able to prepare a written response to the questions by the meeting in mid-october. >> okay, that's great. if you have a time constraint, why don't you be in contact with our office and mr. goebel and then we can accommodate you for the november meeting if you're unable to do it by october. any comments or questions from my colleagues around that? seeing none, let's open it up for public comment. >> madam chair, operations checking if there are any callers in the queue. operations please let us know if there are any callers that are ready. if you haven't done so already, press star 3 to be added to the line. for those on hold, please continue to wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. are there any callers waiting? >> yes, i have two callers in the queue. >> thank you. >> thank you again chair fewer and commissioners. i'm from the 350 bay area. so i really appreciate their work on this. we understand that the i.r.p. is a planning exercise. so not trying to hold them to this per se, but really focusing on it because i think it's useful for the ideas and values and visions of the program and how people are thinking. you know, ultimately what will be determined what gets built where and when will be influenced by the clean power sf community, the people of the city, the board of supervisors as their representatives, et cetera. i know that the time coincidence and the experiments. what if we lived on an island. we focused on that for a few reasons that could be taken separately and i think banner highlighted. look at the fact that we live on a fault line, at the end of a peninsula. we would love to see more focus on local workforce development and impacted disadvantaged communities we've been talking about, and an eye towards electrification of buildings, which the analysis indicates will require 46% more electricity by 2040. that's a lot more electricity. when you hear them say this other case requires results and not overproducing, that's cut off at 2030. if you look at 2040, we're going to meet 46% more electricity, then we want to build in the fact that we don't want it too early. we want to build in the fact that we're going to have this massive demand increase. i know they will do that as they look at future i.r.p.s. i think we really need to start looking at the value of resilience today. we do have a really big difference -- >> thank you for your comment. can we have the next speaker? >> hello commissioners, eric brooks, california for clean energy choice. i remain concerned about what we're hearing from sfguc staff, first on the timeline. sfpuc knows what it looks like and knows the basic requirements of them. that means we could have -- they could have had a draft in front of us weeks ago, if not months ago that we could be discussing for a long time. that answer before doesn't jive. to the case themselves, the reason we supported the time coincidence case, it's not because it was a lot better, but the point is that it's head in the right direction. it's also concerning to hear that from staff that when we include resources and overbill and have a wind farm connected to our system regionally and have a lot more resources available as capacity, rather than delivering right off the bat. that is not good for resiliency. that is clearly better for resiliency and it concerns me that we're hearing that. the most important thing about all of this, and we talked about this with banner in a stakeholder meeting this week is that the time coincidence case is not good enough and what we need is a sydney, australia style revenue bond finance plan for the entire city and county of san francisco to get renewable energy from local and regional resources from if that was financed, we wouldn't have to worry about that because the economy as a scale would make up for that and it would cost less. we need the full plan. i would say and we talked about this in the meeting, in the future what we like you to do is go far beyond what is choosing what staff is presenting to you and actually speaking for a greater case. >> thank you for your comments. >> thank you very much. public comment is now closed. madam clerk, i don't think we have an action item on this one, but we did give direction to staff or to mr. hyams quite frankly. we can move on to our next item which is item number five. >> item number five is a presentation and discussion on an e-bike program for delivery workers. >> thank you very much. mr. goebel, i our lafco research associate is here, is that right? >> yes, thank you madam chair and great to see you virtually commissioners. i'm very excited to perform a presentation by jackson nutt-beers. we show encouraging interest between delivery workers switching from driving to doing food delivery on an e bike. this survey result got a lot of interest when i was doing presentati presentations and so to follow up i asked jackson to explore best practices that e-bikes what are lot of people are thinking is interesting. i'm going to turn it over to jackson for his presentation. >> yes, you have the floor. >> thank you executive officer goebel and chair fewer. i think brent will help me with the slide show, if you don't mind. so before i begin, i would like to introduce myself. good morning commissioners, my name is jackson nutt-beers from the university of san francisco. today i will be talking to you about what an electrical bicycle rebate program would look for workers in san francisco. i will provide background information on the survey of on demand ride hailing and food delivery workers by lafco and then examples of the rebate programs that exist and lastly i will provide my recommendations based on the research that i conducted over the summer. just one moment. the next slide please. in 2019, the survey based on demand workers and the emerging mobility sector in san francisco. the goal was to provide the city with insight into this exponentially growing workforce and to determine whether the labor policies of companies such as uber, lyft, and door dash were aligned with the principles. they inquired of ride hailing and food delivery drivers in san francisco at the beginning of the year. however, this survey was cut short due to the global covid-19 pandemic. the next slide please. after data collected, some of the staggering statistics is that half of the respondents didn't have health insurance and were reliant on medi-cal and couldn't afford emergencies without borrowing. half of food deliverers worked over 40 hours a week and three-fourths of the drivers identify as a person of color. the reason behind was an inquiry regarding bicycle delivery in san francisco. next slide please. of those interviewed, 18% said bicycling was their primary mode of transportation and mr. saying they would switch to an electrical bicycle if offered an incentive. 31% of delivery drivers said they would consider switching if they were offered an incentive. ambitious climate goals and efforts to provide safety for bike care -- yocouriers. because of the majority of the food workers identifying as people of color, san francisco has an opportunity to provide an exquitability solutions to real issues that san franciscans face. when asked what a rebate program could look like in san francisco, i conducted my research through an equitable lens. i talked to program administrators, department heads, and bike manufacturers to understand how their programs work and how we could do something similar in our city. this research led me to several different electric bicycle programs across the country and around the world. next slide please. the first program i want to cover is the rebate program from a not-for-profit company in boulder, colorado. they offer a $200 rebate towards the purchase of an electric bicycle. it was implemented to meet their own environmental goals, which is 70% renewable energy by 2030 and marketed as a way to get people out of their vehicles and on of to the streets. it come from a 2% we care surcharge on every members' bills, designed to slow the growth of co2 emissions. the manager at holy cross energy says since the beginning of the pandemic, they seen a huge increase in interest in their rebate electrical bicycle program. next slide please. the second program i want to talk about is in burlington, vermont where rental organizations known as locomotion imagimanages their o electrical bicycle program. they offer a $200 rebate to eligible participants. by offering a point of sale rebate, they're reducing the up front cost for families that are not interested to purchasing an electric bicycle or can't afford one. this came as a way for the state of vermont to achieve their environmental goals. next slide please. electric bicycle rebate programs exist in other countries as well, offering 50% off the price of 2,550 usd for electric cargo bites and accessories that the bicycle may require. the transportation agency implemented their electric bicycle program back in february to achieve progressive environmental goals and to mitigate traffic congestion in p p paris. it offered long-term bicycle representativals that -- rentals that can be subsidized by their employers up to 50%. the last program i want to talk about the is from southern california. operated by san gabriel valley, the organization offered a rebate up to $700 towards the purchase of an electric bicycle. the program was funded through a $70,000 grant collected from the tolls on the i-10 freeway. when i was interviewing the education director at active saint gabriel valley, he informed me the original program offered a $350 rebate. after there wasn't much interest from the community, they increased it to $700 which resulted in a massive increase in interest from low income communities in the area. this is one of the few examples of an electric bicycle program that was geared towards surveying under served communities and shows that these programs can gain a lot of traction if they're accessible to all communities. next slide please. with each of these programs in mind, i recommend the city of san francisco should establish a p pilot program. it will offer flexibility for workers in san francisco. this would allow san francisco to collect data from food delivery workers to better understand who the workers are and what resources they might need. ideally this rebate would completely cover the cost of the electric bicycle for workers in san francisco and be offered in partnership with local bicycle shops throughout the city. it is required to qualify for an electric bicycle rebate. while conducting my research for this project, i came to the conclusion that many of these programs were not actually geared towards assisting food delivery drivers or had equity at its focus. by implementing a worker pilot program, san francisco had the opportunity to become one of the first cities in the country to meet the needs of food delivery workers in san francisco. next slide please. additionally, the city should establish a citywide rebate program accessible to all san franciscos. this could be administered through the department of environment. it would mitigate traffic congestion and increase mobility to low income communities. a bicycle safety course should be required to certify that participates understand the rule os -- of the road and bicycle safety. additional research through these focus groups and outreach to the community to include their perspectives will be required to understand the needs of san franciscans. with that, i conclude my presentation. thank you again chair fewer, commissioner pollock, commissioner haney, and commissioner mar, and mr. goebel, and ryan and leah who were instrumental in crafting this report. thank you. >> thank you, colleagues any comme comments or questions? >> thank you madam chair. thank you so much jackson for all of your hard work on this over the summer. i also want to thank brian at the san francisco bicycle coalition for suggesting that the survey team asks the e-bike question in the survey. we had a decision discussion one day and he said it would be good to have this data. the department of environment has taken an interest in developing a pilot e-bike rebate program. to talk a little bit about that i am pleased to introduce suzanne. she is the clean cities coalition coordinator at the department of environment. suzanne. >> great, thank you brian and commissioners for the opportunity to speak with you. my name is suzanne. can you hear me? >> yes, we can. >> great. i'm from the department of the environment and along with m.t.a. and p.u.c., we're tasked with achieving the commitment to zero emissions transportation by 2040. that won't happen until we expand those modes. there is not a lot of data out there and what we found is that 30% to 50% of electric bike trips replace car trips. we were super excited and impressed with this study because it provides transportation insight from the contractor's point of view. we think the study is important and we want to share with with our colleagues grappling with the same issues. as brian mentioned and i don't want to be too specific yet. we are in consultation with m.t.a. to develop a rebate pilot program focused on food delivery workers. that would provide e-bikes to the participants for low or no cost, collect transportation data and data about the workers and working conditions. scope and typing, they depend on the funding and the partnerships we can attract early in the process. i don't want to say too much. stay tuned and follow up with me with specific questions or updates about our planning and thank you for the opportunity to speak with you and supporting this study. >> thank you very much susane s. zan. -- suzanne. >> thank you for the study and the recommendation jackson. this is exciting and i'm hugely in support of this. i have a question which is partially answered by the last presenter fr presenter. so, is the pilot we're exploring providing the bike completely or would it be some sort of other kind of point of sale rebate? one of the things i was wondering about from this survey is you know, if there was a difference in how people felt about this, if the bike was provided to them or if they got some sort of discount, which maybe didn't cover the entire bike, or if it was a shared bike model that paid for them to be able to use some of the shared bikes we may have out there. i'm a little confused about how and who the bike is being provided to. >> suzanne, do you have an answer to that? >> i don't at the moment. we've been working on this three our forweeks so it depends on the partnerships we can develop. i think we envision it as putting the bike in that worker's hand in exchange for some data collection. so we really don't know what that means. i'm not sure that we would go through the bike share programs that are existing. >> okay. i would just say also suzanne, if you find that you are able to get a very good price on electric bicycles if you buy them in bulk, i think that could be also a consideration. i see commissioner there in the queue. sorry commissioner haney. >> one follow up on that and maybe this is for jackson as well. did we think at all about our shared bike program? so what about just making those free for delivery workers or working with some of those providers or subsidizing it that way? was there a difference in people's interest or your analysis of using a shared bike program versus providing a rebate or purchasing of bikes directly? >> i can speak to that commissioner haney. so, i think that is something that i know i've been talking about with suzanne is using shared bikes. i can tell you that having done the work myself, there were some challenges along with that. i was part of a pilot program with jump bikes when i was doing delivery work and sometimes the battery would die on me in the middle of a delivery. then it would be difficult finding another bike. so if there is enough coverage and depending on where a person has to go for a delivery, if something happens with that bike, if the battery runs out, it could be a challenge like finding another bike. the other consideration that we're taking is this fluidity of the work and we want to be able to collect data on the workers, but folks are often looking for a better opportunity. we started a pilot with a group of workers and one of them dropped out. i think that's also a consideration into whether or not we want to give workers bikes or we want to have them use it for a time. this is all something that we're trying to figure out and you know, before anything is finalized, we want to do some focus groups with focuses -- focus sh folks that express interest in e-bikes. >> and they have funds in particular revenue sources that could be devoted to this as well. i hope it's something that we could get going soon. thank you, appreciate it. >> commissioner singh. >> yeah, i just wanted to say i'm really, really excited about this. thank you so much jackson and brian for this presentation. it's really fascinating. i'm particularly interested in the saint gabriel program was fascinating to me because it reminded me of racial disparities and equity disparities, particularly the issues we had in san francisco regarding bicycle share programs, private bike share programs, venture capital funded ones and the association with bikes and gentrification, although it's really important low cost sustainable piece of public infrastructure we desperately need. i had a couple questions. i don't know who's the best to answer both of these. this might be too soon to ask but i love to hear any thoughts on what effective funding sources may be for car, traffic, infrastructure that may be able to fund such a program here. you know again, i was thinking of the fact that the san gabriel program was funded from tolls. i think that's a direct progressive tax to take something away from car infrastructure and put it into bikes and public transit. that's the first question if anyone thought through that or have suggestions on sf or particular recommendations that may work in san francisco. then the second piece, i think commissioner haney touched on this a second too, are we working actively with other city agencies? have other city agencies or commissions expressed interest on partnering with us on this? >> who do you think is appropriate to answer that? is that you jackson? >> i can speak to the first line about the active san gabriel valley. i know they received their funding through the tolls on the freew freeway. unfortunately that program is now defunct because it was a one time payment. so what these programs are looking for something more consistent that doesn't just happen in one without, even though they weren't able to provide the rebate that i was able to find unfortunately, the program is no longer working. >> got it. >> and commissioner singh, i can say that we've been having early talks with the department of environment and the m.t.a. and the sfpuc has been involved in those meetings as well. we are looking kind of -- right now we're looking at a specific grant that i can't talk too much about. we're also looking at other funding to potentially complement that and so it's a little early to talk about that but i'll be happy to brief you offline as well. >> yeah, that's great. thank you. >> thank you commissioner. i see commissioner pollock and then commissioner mar in the queue. commissioner pollock. >> thank you so much. i was just wondering if there is a discussion on subsidizing insurance for the bike rider, the owners and users of these bikes because given that in the city, it seems that additional insurance would be required. >> i have to say that's something that has not been on the take y-- table yet. i do appreciate that suggestion and we will incorporate that in. >> thank you, commissioner mar. >> i appreciate these updates, or the presentation and all the good discussion about these exciting ideas. i'm really excited about it myself like everyone. i just had a couple additional questions, just to clarify. so it sounds like there are discussions and planning happening with the department of environment and the m.t.a. around creating a worker rebate program for food delivery workers to use e-bikes. is there also similar planning happening on a citywide -- i mean the broader citywide rebate program that is recommended in the report and then my second question is there for both of these recommendations, do we have a rough estimate of how many rebates or how many -- like yeah. the scope of the program, like how many folks would potentially benefit from it? >> commissioner mar, thank you for those questions. the first question about the broader program. i think that's the ultimate goal and this program with food delivery workers would serve as the pilot for how the city could operate a rebate program and then it could be expanded to commuters or families and then much broader after that. so i think the idea with this pilot is we would get about potentially 20 or more workers to participate in the pilot and then we would gather data, all kinds of data and then i think the pilot would be -- i'm not sure how long it would be, potentially up to a year, a little as three months. so those are details that we're trying to hash out. i think the ultimate goal is to to push the city towards a citywide rebate program with a pilot as the first step or one of the first steps. then the -- i think i answered the question in terms of what the pilot was going to involve, right? >> yeah. thank you for that. thank you for all your work on this. >> thank you commissioner mar. with that i want to echo my colleagues that i think this is really exciting. i want to thank jackson for bringing all of this information to us. i also had the concern of bike staff, considering this is their livelihood, that these bicycles are much more expensive than a regular bicycle and i'm concerned about their ability to keep them in our city when we know that we have -- what i heard from people who actually do that bike share is that the wonderful thing about it is that they don't have to worry about their bicycles being stolen because they had multiple bicycles stolen in the city. anyway, with that i would like to open it up for public comment now. >> yes madam chair, operations is checking to see if there are any callers in the queue. please let us know if there are any callers that are ready. if you haven't already done so press star 3 to be added to the queue. for those on hold, please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted. are there any callers waiting? >> madam chair, there are no callers in the queue. >> thank you very much. public comment is closed on item number 5. we want to thank our lafco research associate for all of his work and thank you so much for bringing this to us. i hope you will follow it and perhaps continue working on this. thank you very much. madam clerk, can you please call item number six. >> and there was no action taken on number five. >> thank you madam clerk. >> item number six, presentation and discussion on cooperatives as an alternative to gig economy platforms. >> welcome mr. powell and mr. goebel. >> thank you madam chair. brian goebel. in the lafco report addressing the issues identified in our survey, we recommended that the city explore establishing a ride hailing and delivery co-op as an alternative to the big platform based companies. we know that san franciscans value these sfervices and the labor models are not sustainable. the troubling finding in our lafco survey demonstrated these front line workers are tremendously vulnerable. to follow up on this recommendation, i brought on research associate ryan powell and asked him to look into cooperatives and i think the idea here was to figure out how the city can facilitate homegrown solutions and worker owned cooperatives as an alternative to big companies. i'm going to turn it over to ryan for his presentation. >> thank you mr. goebel. >> thank you. let me share my screen. good afternoon commissioners. my name is ryan powell. i was brought on as a research associate after spending the spring researching the topic of permitting and that could effect the services. now cooperatives can provide relief to the essential workforce. as i conducted this project, i have truly come to believe that we can have a positive impact on the economy workforce. during the covid-19 pandemic, it has become necessary that we do all that we can to help our delivery app drivers, who are essential front line workers. i was asked to research how cooperatives work and what conditions they operate best under. while doing this research, i was guided by the scope of what the santa cruz study focused on and those elements were labor, equity, and job benefits. i acted under the supervision of mr. goebel. i researched the history of cooperatives to piece together a broad picture of what principles to adhere to. i conducted interviews with couriers, scholars, and innovators within the sector. while ukt can -- conducting these interviews, i looked at how san francisco can benefit from a worker owned cooperative. we can start by mentioning that cooperatives have been around since the industrial revolution and has been a means to counteract oppression. usually out of necessity to meet the needs of the workforce. cooperatives are alive and well in the united states. one in three americans are a part of a cooperative and per year, they account for $652 billion in annual sales and $3 trillion in assets. the principles of cooperatives are a version of the principles, adopted in 1937. there it is follows. voluntary membership, democratic member control, concern for community, economic participate, autonomy and independence, education, and cooperation among other cooperatives. by design, cooperatives have many different forms. they are unique with what they seek to accomplish. when it's consistent, that cooperatives are user owned businesses that are controlled by and operate for the benefit of their members. when i talked to melissa hoover, she gave me an insight to cooperative structures which could be paraphrased as when we think of a typical company, a cooperative is horizontal and focuses on equality amongst members and places an emphasis on participate -- participation. the number of cooperatives in the united states is staggering and the amount of industries in which they exist in is comparable in that size. when i talked to mr. cruz from ruckers university, he mentioned how worker ownership in many industries. to name a few, there are delivery cooperatives like candlestick collective here in san francisco. taxi cabs are also popular co-ops in our country. my conversation with the deputy director of research talked about the cross section of labor unions in cooperatives. grocery markets on fulsome street is a popular type of cooperative. one model that jumped out while conducting this market is a platform cooperative which is popping up around the world. this type of cooperative emphasizes using the internet and there's been a few successful companies abroad that made quite the impact. mr. goebel and i talked to someone about that cooperative. under my findings, i found that cooperatives in the industrial revolution, dangerous work, under payment, and irregularities in schedule. similar to the industrial revolution, we're in the midst of a large scale shift in labor. this means that the right to fair pay, access to benefits, or even access to the restroom after working 30 to 40 hours a week is not guaranteed. the third finding is if we provide the principles, we potentially mitigate these qualities throughout the economy. finally, under the findings, after conducting these interviews with various organ e organizers in the labor sector, consultants for cooperatives and labor studies, i concluded the city has a chance to make a difference by promoting worker ownership within the sector. so now the recommendation. i recommend that the city establish a pilot cooperative. the city of san francisco should establish a plan to deliver a pilot delivery cooperative and this will be run, operated and financed by its members and be given special treatment to mitigate the challenges. the three stages i set out are as followed. identify key stakeholders within the delivery workforce which will be willing to identify others who want to form a cooperative. this aspect was highlighted during my interview from upsidedown consulting. she stressed how important it was that this cooperative is made up of workers and the city ought to do all they can to make participation of workers within the sector a top priority. second is this subsidized workforce training. this could include administrative assistance like payroll, assistance in the platform f that would be used or helping with consulting costs. the idea is to help with the overhead associated with small businesses and it can play a crucial role to have access to these types of business services. finally it would be to utilize local government agencies and offices to ensure fiscal liability. the professor stated that examples of these types of measures could range from tax relief, ensuring a protected market, cutting through red tape on permitting, allocating public land, and establish relationships with the restaurants. in conclusion, it's a tradition in our country that's been around for hundreds of years and by and large it's a market success. after conducting this research and talking to so many that have been involved with unions and cooperatives, i have been left with a sense of anticipation and excitement to see the cities take a stand for the delivery workforce and usher in a chance for fair pay and worker ownership. if you would like to see my full report, it's included on the agenda items and could be red online. i would like to offer a thanks to jackson and leah, and brian goebel for all their help in making this come to fruition. now i'm open to take any questions you may have. >> thank you mr. powell. colleagues, any comments or questions? yes, commissioner singh. >> first of all again, thank you so much. i am super excited about the very, very excited about this. i share your enthusiasm, particularly for cooperatives and labor issues. we are right in the middle of a very heated battle over labor rights and the attempt to appeal them, so i think this is an especially critical issue right now. i wanted to ask your thoughts and this is general. i may be getting ahead of myself but how would you envision -- at least in terms of the mechanism in which this cooperative delivery service, if this will compete with the gig economy, all of this is website based. so in terms of handling the development of those things, would that be something -- and maybe there are examples in the past. i know we developed an app too, and we run into challenges, but it also works well. would that be something that you would envision that the city would have to develop and manage in terms of the technical infrastructure to make that happen? >> sure, thank you for the question. i also get ahead of myself when looking at the potential of a cooperative and what that actually means. i would say that it's so important for the city to enter the ring for this cooperative and to be there to facilitate as a developer of the app. i would say that it's crucial to have their input first and fore most, the members of this cooperative. in terms of resources that make a functioning app, it exists elsewhere in europe. i talked to an organization called cycle co-op in france and they were able to develop their own app that is used in other countries. it's more of an open platform based solution, but having said that, the resources that would be at hand would be someone like trevor, the professor i talked to. his organization is specifically designed to help with these kinds of issues that cooperatives might come across. that is technology based or application based issues they need to overcome. i'm not sure if that answers the question, but there are a plethora of resources we can access to ensure it's a good cost and meeting the needs of that cooperative. >> that's great, that answers my question, particularly thinking about one of the things i think about a lot, which is how much knowledge and labor we have with skills like these that are not going to -- that are currently not being directed towards efforts that would really help our most vulnerable people. >> yeah. and just another thing to mention, the candlestick courier, they have an app they developed themselves. there are resources we can utilize to ensure we can develop the best app in the case that we fall through with this recommendation. >> and should we move forward with this, i think we should, and i don't think it's going to be a massive budgetary issue at all to establish a cooperative. i do think that we should think as we're moving through this and talking about how the city can support in promoting a cooperative that exist, if possible or cooperatives that we helped establish in building a real base for that to make it competitive. thank you. >> thank you for your questions. >> thank you, commissioner haney. >> thank you chair fewer. i'm excited about this and hopeful that we can find a way to move forward. i also think -- and you spoke a little bit about this, the potential with bringing together restaurants and this sort of business side of it is also very extensive. kosits . >> we celebrate resiliency in our city and county of san francisco. we're so excited to welcome you here to the people's palace with so many of our local leaders here tonight, and most importantly, all of you that are the empowerment network that makes our city sing. from the beach to the bay, our neighborhood are filled with good neighbors making our city strong. and tonight's ceremony, tonight's ceremony is thanks to the tireless efforts of the neighborhood empowerment network, along with the mayor's office of neighborhood services. i have to say those departments are full of dedicated employees who go in to work every day to work with residents from all walks of life. if you need an assisted listening device, please contact any of our staff. if they could raise their hands right now. we are so grateful, as well, we have our a.s.l. interpretation and live closed captioning available tonight. i want to recognize our departments, rec and park, public works, the community challenge grant program, the office that i have the honor of leading, the office of economic and workforce development, s.f. safe, and, of course, the alert and nert programs. yes, a little round of applause, please, for them. [applause] >> for all their help in honoring our winners and making tonight's celebration a huge, huge success. and finally, i want to highlight the role of the office of the city administrator who are promoting this event. but most importantly, there has been someone in our neighborhoods, fighting our our streets, fighting for our city nationwide who makes sure that all of your concerns are addressed. she's been wrangling all of us together so that we can realize what the city and county of san francisco continues to be. a city of possibility, a city of extraordinary members. it's my pleasure to welcome us into the launch of the 12th annual neighborhood empowerment network awards, mayor london breed. [applause] . >> the hon. london breed: thank you, joaquin, and yes, you can have the raise you asked me for. thank you all so much for being here. this event is always one of my favorites, and it is because it brings communities all over san francisco in to city hall to recognize the work that you all do every single day in your communities. what you do, whether it's to start a community organization or to plant trees -- i see the folks at nert who do extraordinary work every single da day -- you do the work to make sure we have incredible relationships with our neighbors, and to make sure we're doing all we can to give back. that is why today is so important. it is about recognizing the work you do that touch the lives of people every single day, but to also remind us that we live in a place that is earthquake certifica earthquake territory, where things can happen at a moment's notice. and we know when that occurs, we are going to need to depend on one another, and we are going to need to support one another. that is why i promote being resilient in that perspective, but also having to bond through the merchants associations, the neighborhood associations, to just gardening with your neighbor can do so much to make our communities better. so i'm really honored to be here today to celebrate each and every one of you, whether it's an employee from rec and park, whether it's, sadly, people from carlos to homie, who i had the pleasure of working with when i served the african american adult complex, whether it's delores, who's getting the lifetime achievement award. when i served on the redevelopment agency commission, and when we were at those meetings, the commissioners, for the most part, always showed up. but the other person who was there, protecting the bayview-hunters point community was delores, and she so rightfully deserves the community achievement award. so many incredible achievements, so many incredible things, and tonight is about hearing those stories and really taking a moment to express appreciation, but, also, what more we can do to invest in our city, and what more we can do when we roll up our sleeves to support and help one another. and yes, there will be food after, and a reception, so that you can say hello and congratulations to all of the honorees. but it is so great to see you all at city hall as we celebrate the very best of what san francisco has to offer in our communities all over the city. thank you all so much for being here tonight, and have a wonderful evening. [applause] >> thank you so much, mayor breed, about your inspiring remarks about our neighborhoods and communities. now it's my pleasure to introduce someone who works day in and day out to make sure our city is successful, our city administrator, naomi kelly. [applause] >> good evening, everyone. i can't tell you how excited i am to be here again. this is one of my favorite events to honor people who do the work to make our city beautiful along with our city government. i can't thank you enough because we are all in this together to make our city great. it would be remiss if i didn't say i've been having a hard week, and the department of public works is still here, still thriving, and we are going to be working with everyone in san francisco, all 1600 employees. there are wonderful men and women who work in that department who are working hard to make this city safe and clean and beautiful and safe and resilient and everything that you work on. i want to bring up the acting director of public works. [applause] >> aleric, i've known him for approximately 15 years. he started with the city around that time, working at the human rights commission and he went onto the public utilities commission, where he not just oversaw water and all those types of things, he purchased power. then he went to the city where he oversaw not just purchasing, but our mill works. he was in the peace corps. he's an attorney, and he started his career working on local hire issues not with the city but as a -- i can't remember -- private entity, where he was working on hud section 3 hiring programs, so i would like to introduce you all to aleric degrafinried. >> thank you. it's my pleasure to be here, and i just want you to know that i'll be here to support you in each and every neighborhood, in each of the districts, in each of the schools. so while i'm here, doing everything i can do to make the city better. thank you. [applause] >> thank you so much, aleric. it will be a great pleasure, working with you in our streets and our communities. so now, in celebration of our communities, we want to welcome to the stage our come back neighborhood and community challenge grant winners. the come back neighborhood award is given to the neighborhood that has really turn things around for its residence through collective problem solving and leadership, and this year's winner is bayview hill-candlestick point. the bayview neighborhood association has -- their negotiations with lennar and five point have led to cleaner air and reduced traffic congestion in the neighborhood. and joining us today is their board of directors. all right. fantastic. i wanted to ask you just one question. what is the biggest positive change you have seen in the bayview hill-candlestick point neighborhood that you've seen in the last year? what is the biggest positive thing that has happened for you this year. >> we can breathe the air a lot better. [applause] >> we can take deep breaths now because we do have the pollution that we used to have, we don't have the congestion from all the cars from candlestick park, and we definitely are trying to make sure that we don't breathe anything else nasty that's coming from the shipyards. [applause] >> yes, please, a round of applause. [applause] >> now, the community challenge grant has been supporting many community design and implemented projects in san francisco for years, and they played a vital role in hoping build more liveable, more sustainable, and more vibrant neighborhoods. it turned a building in the center of fillmore into a vibrant mural representing history. so the award is being given tonight to tomorrow walker. come on over, josh. don't be shy. [applause] >> and i just wanted to ask you, which part of the mural is most important to you and the community and why. >> the most important part of this mural, to me, was community telling the history of this mural. this mural was created with community workshops, focus groups, and we could not have done this without the community, and also the group who drew london breed's part of this mural. it was a collaborative, and that's why it was so successful. >> fantastic. thank you so much. [applause] >> all right. oh, one photo, please. >> the spirit of the fillmore mural. >> mayor breed, can we do one more photo over here? >> fantastic. thank you, mayor breed. [applause] >> and thank you supervisor shamann walton for joining us tonight. thank you. i want to recognize a few more of our elected officials that are here tonight. i see supervisor catherine stefani here tonight, supervisor hillary ronen, president of the board of supervisors, norman yee. head of the department of health, grant colfax. our city librarian, members of the police department command staff are here tonight. if you can raise your hand. i know some of you, not all of you, are in uniform tonight. supervisor gordon mar. good to see you tonight. thank you for joining us. [applause] >> and of course, there are countless commissioners here tonight. i want to thank you for coming tonight to celebrate with us. a and now, if i could, i'd like to invite president yee up to the stage for a few remarks. [♪] . >> president yee: thank you, joaquin. i'm norman yee, the president of the board of supervisors. you know, this celebration will not be complete unless the board of supervisors comes up here and really gives this group a big welcome. hello there! and by the way, happy lunar new year. [speaking chinese language] >> president yee: i want to say this is a real important celebration. i've been to every one of them. this is now my eighth one. why is it so important here? because we know in our districts that without the volunteers, the neighborhood groups, the business people, and everybody who cleans up the street in partnership with the city, that we continue to make our city great. is that right? yeah. and i want to say that we will continue this effort because without the people in the community, this city is not a city. it's empty. but with the people in the community, we are really blessed that we all live in san francisco, the best city in the world! thank you very much. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you so much, president yee, representing the board of supervisors. we're going to do a little bit of stage crafting right now as it moves to the right. so now, we welcome to the stage, winners of extraordinary neighborhood block party, the extraordinary neighborhood block party and best merchant association-community benefit district. now block parties are more than just parties. they're an opportunity for people to come together, become family, to celebrate what makes living in san francisco great. we welcome this community building activity with the extraordinary neighborhood block party award. for the past seven years, the residents of connecticut street between 20 and 22, also known as the connecticut street dead enders have been riding stuffed animal scooters, highlighting local musicians, and generally make living in the neighborhood a cakewalk. so miss lisa ryers, would you come up. i want to ask you about the importance of this for your community. so i've heard a lot about these block parties that the connecticut street dead enders have been hosting, and i'm still waiting for my invitation. i wanted to know what makes this event special to you and what makes the work special to you? >> well, obviously, it's the people that make our block parties work, make our block parties so special. we have people who were born in their homes, they moved in there in 1953, and they're now in their 90s, 80s, 70s, 60s, 50s, 40s, 30s, 20s, and the children and babies, and they make living in the neighborhood so wonderful. >> so merchant associations bring businesses and residents together. whenever i visit the taraval corridor, i'm amazed how many businesses there are. [inaudible] >> -- local talent fairs, street fairs, and a delicious and local array of restaurants and shops. i'd like to welcome up to the stage albert chops. it's good to see you, albert. >> good to see you, too. >> i'd like to hear from you about what impact the people of parkside sunset has had on you, your life, and the people of san francisco and your business? >> well, you know, i am so glad. i want to say a wow that we're here. we have started out as a small group, and now, it's grown to the size that it has, and it is the community. it has come together. taraval was a sleepy neighborhood before, but now, it's really coming into its own. i'm just so proud of my officers, my neighborhood that's really come up to bat and take care of moving our neighborhood and our merchant association forward. i also want to say that we couldn't be there without oewd, and we couldn't be there without our supervisors supporting us, and our mayor supporting us. thank you so much. [applause] >> thank you, albert. if you could hold right here, the photographer is ready to get you right now. [♪] >> all right. thank you so much. thank you so much. i would say come on this way. thank you so much. let's have a round of applause as they make their exit, everybody. [applause] >> our next awards elevate those who have responded and volunteered as first responders. the san francisco police department auxiliary law enforcement response team, a.k.a. a.l. e.e.r.t., or the f department's neighborhood response team, or n.e.r.t., have played a signature roific in our neighborhoods. whether leading teams in drills or supporting local events alongside the san francisco police department, henry exemplifies what it means to be a community leader, so congratulations, henry. [applause] >> so henry, may i just ask you a question? >> sure. >> what made you believe it was so important to dedicate your life to service in this way? >> well, service is the highest form of human endeavor, and the training that i've received, and the skills are going to serve me well and the members of my community. but i would be remiss if i didn't take this opportunity to recognize and thank the work of sergeant mark hernandez, who has shepherded and led this program with such excellence and grace and has been such a mentor to my time personally. he's leaving the program soon, and i wanted to make that known. >> fantastic, henry. congratulations, and thank you so much. [applause] so, of course, we never know when an emergency will occur. that's why it's important to prepare as soon as possible beforehand. so known for his ability to coach and train n.e.r.t. volunteers, pete mccaffrey is this year's winner of the leadership award. unfortunately, peter is no longer with us, but his spirit of community service and dedication to training the next generation of n.e.r.t. volunteers live on. tonight, his wife, patricia, and their son, daniel, are here to receive the award on his behalf. [applause] >> come on up, please. >> all right. first of all, thank you, mayor breed, and the san francisco fire department, and thank you, all of you who nominated my husband for this honor. [applause] >> you all know, the ones that know him, he would be very humble. i want you to know that he knew about this award before he passed away. we were sitting in our office back to back, and he told me he had been nominated for this award, and he said why me? he just didn't kind of believe it, wondering why. and i remember, i told him, well, it's because -- and i, you know, i kind of reminded him. and i think he was very pleased, and he was humble, and we're very proud of him, and we thank you very much. [applause] >> hi. a few years back, i asked my dad what the past pete would want for the future pete in his life, and he said to do good. this award verifies how -- such a great person he was, and we're so proud of him. so thank you. thank you, everyone. [applause] >> if i could just ask, just for a quick moment of silence so we could hold this space for a moment. we get to recognize people and families who come together who know the value of true, deep commitment and service to a civic identity, to a city. [♪] >> thank you. commander fong, i'd like to invite you up to say a few words to talk about service at a different level in terms of those who have committed so much of their lives in san francisco. >> thank you. first, i'd like to thank henry for his award, his contribution and leadership and dedication to this program, who helped make the n.e.r.t. program what it is today. retired sergeant mark hernandez, after 35 years of service to the san francisco police department, took over the a.l.e.r.t. program and built it into what it is today, 172 volunteers dedicated to serving the police department and neighborhoods at community events. mark hernandez is retiring this year after 40 years of dedicated service to the city and county of san francisco. i'd just like to thank mark hernandez for his continued service and wish him all the best in his retirement. [applause] >> thank y [♪] >> thank you so much, commander. our next group of winners includes the most inspiring public works volunteer, youth neighborhood leadership, and outstanding neighborhood watch group. the most inspiring public works volunteer award includes san francisco volunteers who have consistently worked to improve our neighborhoods as they build a cleaner, greener, and safer community. vicky rideout was selected because of her extraordinary work in creating a beautiful and vibrant street park in bernal heights. so congratulations, vickie. [applause] >> so we know that you were especially dedicated to the thompson gardens stairway project and helped their volunteers toward beautifying the area. so what drew you to this area and inspired you to make a drew? >> well, if i'm honest, i was disgusted by how the property had become. it was a stinky mess, full of trash and weeds. we had to walk-through it every day to get to the library, to get to the elementary school. so when we handed out fliers, these people came out, and we learned one really important lesson, i think, from this, which we'd love to share with the policy makers here tonight, which is there's this category in the city called unaccepted properties that are public leoned b ly owned but not maintained according to the city. i think neighborhoods might take a look at them and consider caring for these properties with the personnel and resources to do so. >> fantastic. congratulations. [applause] >> now, the youth neighborhood leadership award is presented to a young san franciscan who has put in invaluable work to strengthen our community. that's right. let's hear it. [applause] >> yeah! tonight, we award tyneta jones who speaks to young woman across the united states with the young women's freedom center. so what everyone wants to know is, what powerful project are you working on now and what are you most excited about? >> well, the project i'm working on now is shutting down juvenile hall, y.g.c. out here, so just connect -- y.j.c. out here, so connecting with other young women around the world, and also showing a good role model for my nieces and also younger girls. [applause] >> thank you so much for your leadership. [applause] >> now we all know that neighborhood watch groups are a grassroots issue in communities -- and i want to thank supervisor raphael mandelman for doing this. the san francisco neighborhood watch was formed in response to violence in the castro but has become so much more. c. ccop works with the stop the violence program and works with the castro community benefits district and the castro neighborhood community. how have you seen the streets in the castro change since you began castro community on patrol in 2006? >> when we began, we were responding to some very violent activity, very violent robbery. once we hit the streets in 2006, that dissipated. so we're spending more time on teaching the public how to take care of their safety and being more self-aware, so we've seen a reduction in crime, but we also want to make sure that we maintain that. >> fantastic. thank you, and thank you all for your service. [applause] >> we'll just do a couple of -- yeah, three photos right here. >> yeah, fantastic. thank you all. thank you all. some more fantastic applause, everybody. [applause] >> thank you, supervisor. so next, we welcome to the stage winners of the outstanding park volunteer group and most empowering city employ employee awards. [applause] >> the outstanding volunteer group award represents volunteer groups that are instrumental to the success of the city in providing clean, safe, and fun parks to the public. the friends of lafayette park, or folp, boast hundreds of members who have been working to better the city park for the last 15 years. the members efforts to transform the park into a community gathering place with children's areas, picnic areas, off-leash dog park, and a shaded area is more than enough to recognize them with this award. we can have some applause here, folks. [applause] >> so tell us what this award means to you and to the community. >> it means everything. i think as a neighborhood group, you don't do this for rewards, you do it to better your environment. this group here with me, we've spent a lot of time bettering our environment, and we're humbled by this award. i think it really speaks to the membership, it speaks to the people that are part of our group, and we'd like to thank our supervisor -- our past supervisor, mayor farrell, as well, but supervisor stefani, and the parks alliance, who we couldn't have done it without. we want to just say thanks. >> thank you so much, and congratulations. [applause] >> we've got one more, we've got one more. the most empowering city employee award highlights a member of the city family who has consistently gone above and beyond as they work to build cleaner, greener, and stronger communities. this year, the community judges panel is excited to recognize dylan j. hayes from the recreation and parks department for empowering residents in the natural resources program. dylan was a clear choice because of the countless testimonials that we received, as we are hearing tonight, of dylan's work ethic, his compassion of creating green spaces for all san franciscans. of more than 32,000 employees, tonight, it is our pleasure to award dylan the most empowering city employee award. [applause] >> so we are still looking forward to having you as a member of the city employee family, dylan. what do you think is the most exciting park of your job? >> well, i'd have to say it's connecting people to nature. when we do have a restoration together, not only do we heal the earth, but we heal ourselves. we create something greater than ourselves, and to me, that means the world. as a lifelong san franciscan and city employee or public servant, i've worked with some people for 20 years. and i couldn't be more thankful for all of the community. thank you to all of the friends groups here tonight, and the thousands of volunteers, especially the schoolteachers, as well. citywide, all of the people that i've worked with. we try to turn it around for people at our parks and try to get them connected. i also have to thank my rec and park colleagues, but not just the friends groups, but my rec and park colleagues, and especially the natural resource division. they work tirelessly to protect 1200 acres. i don't know how we balance biodiversity, but by golly, we do it. we couldn't do it especially without all the friends groups and the thousands of volunteers that show up. and i have my little fourth generation san franciscan here, and she has a little something that she'd like to say, too. you ready? oh, i've got to hold that, too? great. >> well, speaking of san franciscans here at the new -- n.e.n. awards, empowering one another, i truly believe us san franciscans should have our own day. there is a day for just about everything, surprisingly, however, there is no official dedicated day to our city. we propose san francisco day, a day that would allow us to show our pride by getting out to local events with our neighbors to serve and celebrate what we love about san francisco. we're hoping there may be a few people or supervisors around here who can make it happen. [applause] >> no pressure, supervisor stefani, no pressure. >> so thank you, empowering people, and happy san francisco day. [♪] >> thank you. >> a round of applause, please. a round of applause. congratulations. congratulations. >> congratulations, everyone. >> throughout history, san francisco has welcomes innumerable leaders over the years. we honor those who are no longer with us, but those whose efforts continue to impact us on a daily basis, whether we recognize it or not. carlos gutierrez was born and raised in the mission. carlos turned his life around while earning his bachelor's, and creating homies. tonight, we honor carlos gutierrez with the neighborhood empowerment hall of fame award. [applause] >> receiving the award tonight on behalf of him are his children, cassandra and elias, and we are so happy to have you with us here tonight. >> so i was in class earlier, and i knew i was about to speak, so i wrote a little poem. i didn't title it, but it's not that long. here goes. late nights, a lot of late nights. some of the simplest joys a kid has is coming home from school and enjoying that little sliver of time before your parents come home. for me, that sliver was always a chunk. late nights. my dad never was a normal father. there was a lot of late nights. nights i stayed up, nights that my dad came home late. i remember our brown rectangular dining room table that took up a considerable amount of our one-bedroom apartment. what i remember most of that table was not having family dinners on it. you know, i held a lot against him. how could someone come home so tired? why the hell was he coming home, giving me crap about not doing the damn dishes? they're not my mess, you know? you know, at the time, i was going to high school every day and feeling alone. i was doing all this hard work, and this dude comes home, and he impedes on my alone time, my sanctuary, and starts barking orders. he goes to a job, a community organization, and that's not hard. you're sitting at a desk all day, doing nothing, while i'm slaving away at this homework. i told him his work was easy, and he'd always reply, i provide for you, and i do all of this, and i always thought he was full of it. you know, waiting to grow up, i had to -- like, looking back on it, you know, i really should have been more careful for what i wished for, but i never knew how much my dad did, the people he knew, the ones he helped. i travelled to berkeley and, you know, i met people who knew him even there. i -- you know, i'm a student at u.s.f., down the street, and some guy stopped me and i had a sweater with his picture on it and said he knew my dad. at his funeral, i knew family and close friends, but there was a couple hundred people coming up to me, saying my dad was there for them at certain times. i look back, holding these things against him, oh, you don't do work. i study hard. it was almost like he lived a second life, going to work and doing all these great things, and i held it against him, not coming home for dinner or going to parent events like other parents. if there's one thing i could say, usually, when someone dies, they're remembered for a time, and they're usually just forgotten, but this award and this ceremony, thank you all for remembering him, and, you know, remembering him when i felt like i was the only one that did. [applause] >> move this down a little bit. good evening. i do want to thank you and honoring my father, carlos. his presence is still and always will be deeply missed. it's going to be two years in july. it's kind of crazy to think about because one minute, you're here, and the next, you're gone. but beyond the achievement of this physical award is the lasting effects of his actions towards the betterment and communications of humanity. he did it every single day working with incarcerated youth or just people on the street that he knew growing up, and he wanted them to be cleaner from drugs or off the street from violence, you know, breaking cycles. he did everything he could to not really be a statistic, even though he was at the beginning, being 16, having me. of course he may have started off the bad, little difficult, he did well as a parent. although he primarily worked in san francisco, he demonstrated and localized the importance of being of assistance towards everything. but one of the things he really emphasized was that until deeds are put into actions, your words are useless. what are you doing to contribute? it's more than just saying i work for homie, more than i'd like to help volunteer. it's do you do it? and so although his passing is still, for myself and those who knew him, it's still painful. but i think out of the grief, knowing that he's gone -- i still think he's ascended to somewhere else -- it's about continuing his legacy and for everyone else who strives to make this crazy world better. and that's what i'm trying to do not just for my brother, but he engrained that. he was really diligent and proud that he was doing something. he didn't care about the recognition. he didn't want to make sure you knew he was doing something. he was kind of funny that way. i guess the last thing i'd say is, god, i miss him a lot, but i use his life, his short 38 years of life to remind myself that you can do a lot in a short amount of time, and you live day-to-day, trying to make the world better through actions, through -- you know, compassion and understanding, patience. not just politically, but through the kindness of -- 'cause you want to. so thanks, pops. hope that we win the super bowl this sunday. he was a big niners fan, so carlos vicente! thank you. [applause] [♪] >> it's extraordinary to have the voices of the next generation here with us tonight and speaking of legacy, integrity, and the future, and knowing that your father would be very proud to here your voices standing in front of a room, a network of community leaders who believe in who you will bring to us, for that future that you will bring to your children and for generations to come, so thank you for being with us tonight. [applause] >> our neighborhoods are teeming with resident leaders who have been making differences in the lives around them for decades. this year, we have delores vinson, recipient of the neighborhood lifetime achievement award. born in georgia, she learned to care for the people of her family. to this day, she offers a roof to those who can't find housing, food to those who can't afford a meal, and guidance to numerous boards and associations, and san francisco will reach out to her for help. so congratulations. [applause] >> hello, everybody. this is very humbling. i'm just a fourth generation of doing what i do. my great grandmother did it, my grandmother did it, my father did it, and i'm doing it. [applause] >> and i really do believe -- [applause] >> i'm going to do a little preaching. but i do believe that our creator created us, and in that creation, he gave us a responsibility to shepherd his creation. we are to make sure the environment is safe. we have to make sure that the homeless have housing. we are to make sure that the seniors is taken care of. we're supposed to make sure that young people who lose their parents is nurtured and taken care of. and when we pray, he uses us to answer those prayers. we're his voice, we're his ears, we're his eyes, we're his hands, we're his feet. and i suspect each one of you in here today deserves this award, so i'm going to receive it in your behalf because i'm pretty sure that you've done some of the things that have been requested of you to do. when you wake up in the morning, you ask him to give you the list that you're supposed to accomplish for that day. trust me, i will do that. sometimes you think you've missed the bus, and you get a little bit upset, but you'll meet somebody on the next bus, that you have information that they'll need. that's god's way of doing things. so thank those who felt that i deserve this, and i wish mayor breed was in here because she's one of my daughters -- i don't think she knows that. i watched her, very young woman on the commission. she did a lot for bayview-hunters point. she would make suggestions, the boards followed it and made it happen. so we deeply appreciate it. and where's my supervisor? we appreciate him, also. we appreciate all of those, that we don't do it all by ourselves. it takes a community to make anything happen, and i really do appreciate, there are a lot of people -- i would ask them all to standup, but that would be crazy. i'm going to ask them to raise their hand. these are people -- raise your hand, those of you that are here for me. raise your hands. [applause] >> these are people that have really did work in our neighborhood, and they do deserve this award. [applause] >> congratulations, miss vinson. thank you for your words of wisdom tonight. that was a beautiful way to close out tonight's ceremony. before we close and move on into the celebration room where the real party gets started and everybody gets to talk with each other in celebration and communion, i wanted to make sure we recognize a gentleman behind the scenes who wasn't up here tonight with me tonight, mr. daniel homsey. i wanted to shoutout and invite everyone up here, daniel and everyone with the mayor's office of community services to come on up, to come on up like you do every single day and every single night when you're working in communities. and here to tell us a little bit about mons and community and the work we do collectively in our neighborhoods is emma. >> hello. thank you, everybody. i'm so excited to be here tonight to represent all of the volunteers and all of the mons staff, mayor's office of neighborhood services. we work every day here in city hall to exemplify the values that you represent in your communities. raise your hand if you're in mons. [applause] we have a liaison for every single neighborhood, for every single street, and for every single person in this city. do you want to come and find us? you know right where we are in city hall. i want to thank the volunteers who practiced and practiced and practiced to make tonight a success, and i want to thank all of the sponsors and vendors who helped us tonight, including sfgovtv, tate's catering, pure ecstasy, a band you're about to see at the reception, j.d. harris photography, abbie rentals, and of course our beloved community challenge grant -- and the mayor's office of disability. [applause] >> thank you all for coming, and thank you all for the work you do every single day in our neighborhoods, and please join us for a reception in the north light court for some food and some drink and some neighbors. >> tonight's -- tonight's about voices, and if someone didn't feel who got an award, that they didn't have enough time -- come on up. come on up. >> -- to respond. this is a community of neighborhood empowerment. >> thank you all for coming out. i just wanted to say on behalf of the bayview neighborhood association, and on behalf of in particular the shop and dine on the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do shopping and dining within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services within neighborhood. we help san francisco remain unique, successful and vibrant. where will you shop and dine in the 49? san francisco owes the charm to the unique character of the neighborhood comer hall district. each corridor has its own personality. our neighborhoods are the engine of the city. >> you are putting money and support back to the community you live in and you are helping small businesses grow. >> it is more environmentally friendly. >> shopping local is very important. i have had relationships with my local growers for 30 years. by shopping here and supporting us locally, you are also supporting the growers of the flowers, they are fresh and they have a price point that is not imported. it is really good for everybody. >> shopping locally is crucial. without that support, small business can't survive, and if we lose small business, that diversity goes away, and, you know, it would be a shame to see that become a thing of the past. >> it is important to dine and shop locally. it allows us to maintain traditions. it makes the neighborhood. >> i think san francisco should shop local as much as they can. the retail marketplace is changes. we are trying to have people on the floor who can talk to you and help you with products you are interested in buying, and help you with exploration to try things you have never had before. >> the fish business, you think it is a piece of fish and fisherman. there are a lot of people working in the fish business, between wholesalers and fishermen and bait and tackle. at the retail end, we about a lot of people and it is good for everybody. >> shopping and dining locally is so important to the community because it brings a tighter fabric to the community and allows the business owners to thrive in the community. we see more small businesses going away. we need to shop locally to keep the small business alive in san francisco. >> shop and dine in the 49 is a cool initiative. you can see the banners in the streets around town. it is great. anything that can showcase and legitimize small businesses is a wonderful thing.

Related Keywords

Lafayette Park , California , United States , New York , Georgia , Japan , Shanghai , China , Burlington , Vermont , Rhode Island , Yemen , Bayview , Togo , Bay View , Toronto , Ontario , Canada , Westport , Newfoundland , Saint Gabriel , Basse Normandie , France , London , City Of , United Kingdom , San Francisco , Togo To , Togo General , Berkeley , San Gabriel Valley , Sydney , New South Wales , Australia , Colorado , Spain , Americans , Spanish , Chinese , American , Dan Howard , Carlos Gutierrez , Michael Hines , Pete Mccaffrey , Gordon Mar , Aidan Miller , Ryan Powell , Brian Goebel , Sean Kennedy , David Rojas , Melissa Hoover , Naomi Kelly , Vicky Rideout , Norman Yee , Sandra Lee , Zan Suzanne , Herbert Winer , Jenny Whitson , Hillary Ronen , Hayden Miller , Sarah Jones ,