the room. we appreciate your cooperation with these important rules and requirements in the interest of everyone's health and safety. hand sanitizer stations are available throughout the build and masks are available upon request. we welcome the public's participation during public comment period. the commission will take two minutes for public comment. members of the public may dial (415)655-0001. meeting i.d. 2497 390 5690 # # press star 3 to speak. you must limit your comments to the topic of the agenda item being discussed unless you're speaking under general public comment. we ask that public comment be made in civil and respectful manner. on behalf of the cushion, -- commission i like to extend our thanks to sfgov tv staff for their assistance during this meeting. >> president moran: thank you. before calling the first item, i like to announce that the san francisco public utilities commission stewards of the territory of the hick federally recognized mission san jose of alameda county. sfpuc recognizes that every citizen resizing in the greater bay area continues to benefit from the use and occupation tribe since and before and after the san francisco public utilities founding in 1932. it's not only important that we recognize the tribal land, we honor that ohloen people. >> clerk: thank you. your next item is item number 3, adopt renewed findings under state urgency legislation to allow hybrid in-person meeting during the covid-19 emergency and direct the commission secretary to agendize a similar resolution at a commission meeting within the next 30 days. >> president moran: any comments from the commissioners? please open public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make public comment please press star 3 to raise your hand to speak. seeing none. do we have any speakers with hands raised? callers, please note this is for item number 3. you have two minutes. >> caller: i wanted to make a general comment during general comment period. not on this particular item. >> clerk: that will be called next. public comment comment on item 3 is closed. >> president moran: any further discussion? could i have a motion and a second? >> move. >> president moran: roll call please. [roll call vote] you have three ayes. >> president moran: item passes. >> clerk: next item is 4. approval of the minutes of marc. >> president moran: any additions or corrections? seeing none. public comment please. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make two minutes of remote public comment on item 4 approval of the minutes, please press star 3 to speak. mr. there are no callers in the queue. >> clerk: public comment on item 4 is closed. >> president moran: any further discussion by the commission? motion and second. >> move to approve. >> second. >> president moran: roll call please. [roll call vote] you have three ayes. >> president moran: the minutes are approved. >> clerk: next item 5, general public comment on matters within the commission's jurisdiction and not on today's agenda. members of the public who wish to make two minutes of general comment, please press star 3 to 3 toraise your hand to speak. any members in the room want to speak? seeing none. do we have any callers? >> there are seven callers in the queue. >> caller: good afternoon commissioners. thank you for your time. i'm president an organization called california outdoors, out fitter association. i want to call and let you know that we recognize that things are changing. we look forward to working with your commission as we find ways to take care of your interest and the interest of the citizens of your city. we look forward to working with your staff as we navigate the next few years with the project that you folks want to operate. that's it. that's all i wanted to share with you. take care. >> thank you for your comment. next caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: thank you. i hope you can hear me. as i talk about sfpuc today, i did spend little bit of time in san francisco. it was fine. it was like it was before. sfpuc touches me in my ways in san francisco because you provide water and electricity. as i continue to think about the importance of electricity, how do we in san francisco spread the word about the importance of electricity and so that people can be enlightened in how to use it in a sufficient and cost effective way? not the limitless resource that comes out of the wall. how do we get the word out about sfpuc and what you do? i like to see the website little bit more streamline. i have to go through quite few clicks. i like to see something where i can click on an agenda and then click on one time and it brings up a pdf about the material. i'll talk about electricity later during cleanpowersf. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. >> in your 2020 plan, there references to the potential for 49% rationing. while technically the math works. in reality such rationing is highly unlikely to occur. please consider not using it in your public settings. i put this figure in similar vain of socioeconomic studies which you stopped reporting. like roughly 50% rationing figure, the math can be understood but something different occurred. the figure is base on the higher demand than today which is called an outside envelope of demand projections. lot of the event have to rely on 50% rationing figure to occur. we're in odd set of circumstances today despite our drop, we have 40 years of supply of water storage. it doesn't seem right for us to be mentioning 50% rationing when we're nowhere close to the water space. situation. while the 50% rationing reference was disappointing the pushing was -- please consider avoid using referencing 50% rationing. i will be submitting full comments for the record. thank you and sorry for speaking so quickly. >> caller: good afternoon. i'm director of the tuolumne river trust. last year we asked you to consider making changes to the design drought in your urban water management plan. we weren't successful. now almost half a year has passed since the final workshop. you have yet to address the design drought. president moran directed staff to produce a timeline. we haven't seen or heard anything yet. why. staff doesn't do things they don't want to do. for example, nine months ago, president moran requested an explanation difference between plan bay area and california department of finance projections. it was four times greater than those provided by the state. nothing happened on that. five months ago, the commissioner harrington requested updates on environmental metrics focusing on health of the tuolumne and nothing happened. we're still waiting. it used to be that we can request information from your staff and they'll provide it. january i submitted a request for data staff used to use calculate rationing figures. we know staff cook the the books on demand. they used 238mgd when it's been less than 200 for the past seven years. staff denied my request citing so called attorney-client privilege. i now have a hearing scheduled with the sunshine ordinance task force. is this really what it come to? i'm sorry to be so blunt. nothing else seem to work. thank you for the opportunity to comment. >> caller: thank you very much. i'm morty, i own a white water rafting business in the stanislaus forest. we run our rafting on the tuolumne river much of the summer. i wanted to say thank you very much for the last 30 years of cooperating with running the system in such a way that it benefits the white water boaters. this is the third year of the drought. in past droughts you've been able to run the power house upstream so it coincide with the daytime users of boating. i'm concerned about change of power demand of supplies coming from solar. i'm meeting with hetch hetchy staff april 21st to go over the summer projections of water from the river. i want you to know that again, i really appreciate your history of working with us. it's great for tuolumne county. also have a hetch hetchy power line easement across my property. we are partners. thank you very much for your time. i look forward to future collaborations. >> next caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: good afternoon commissioners. thank you for having public comment and the important issue of flows in the tuolumne river. i'm a former deputy secretary of the california natural resources agency and also the main person when it comes to the campground for the tuolumne run. i will ask you to ask your staff to have a look at the slow schedule releases of the american river. the smug has cooperated closely with the white water community and came up with a release schedule that works for all parties. it's a little harder in some ways in the tuolumne and easier and you control the system by yourself. you might want to mention the tribe up on the hetch hetchy area as well the ones in the bay area. they are also partners with you in the operating system. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. next caller. you have two minutes. >> caller: my name is therese. i'm the california stewardship director for american white water. american white water is a national river conservation organization founded in 1954. we have over 6750 members, 50,000 supporters and over 100 affiliates across america. our mission is to protect and restore america's white water resources and to enhance opportunities to enjoy them safely. thousands get the opportunity to enjoy iconic whitewater on the tuolumne river. i'm calling today to thank sfpuc and staff at hetch hetchy for working with the commercial out fitters to provide this beneficial use of the state's water. we look forward to the whitewater meeting coming up next week on the 21st. i'm also calling because american whitewater recognizes that changing energy are impacting your ability to provide whitewater reserves. it is our hope that we can work with sfpuc and staff at hetch hetchy water and power to find solutions to address these impacts to whitewater releases. we want to find solutions that will benefit the city of san francisco the tuolumne river and commercial out fitters that depend on this. thank you for your time. >> next caller. >> caller: i'm cindy charles. i'm also a native of s.f. and still reside in the city. i fish the tuolumne river all my life. as i told you in my previous comments, the lower tuolumne in the worst shape ever with regard to trout and salmon population. i want to ask about the commission's position concerning about the fight about the state water certification on the tuolumne river. the district has been fighting state water board to block regulations to protect water quality standards including the tuolumne river. on monday of this week, there were oral arguments before the court of appeals as the district continue to fight the certification on the tuolumne. the supreme court upheld the trump rule until a new regulation is created which will take an estimate of two years. the district used the trump rule to support their argument in fighting the water quality certification for this tuolumne. my question is, what does the sfpuc think about that? are you with the state or with trump? why is the sfpuc so subservient to the irrigation district. those of us who have been working to protect the habitat and restore the fish population are getting tired and frustrated with the delays. it's been all talk and no action for years and years. please take some meaningful actions now to save the river which gives you so much. thanks. >> there are no more callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you. public comment is closed. >> president moran: next item is communications. commissioners any questions or comments on communication? seeing none. i have one on the advance calendar, the section on outstanding commission request. third item down is a request from me which has been satisfied. that was not only for mr. richie providing the projections by various entities in the state that is considered part of our forecasting. that information satisfies my request. i will also like to make sure that was provided to the other commissions. thank you. any other comments on communications? seeing none. next item please. sorry, public comment. thank you. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make two minutes remote public comment on item 6 communications please press star3 to speak. seeing none. do we have any callers? >> there's one call in the queue. you have two minutes. >> caller: thank you, again. as i talk about the cleanpowersf item that is in communication, lot of good things in this report. certainly going to re-read it. looks like we are making good progress on this work of building out our cleanpowersf so we can get more engaged. i asked that you continue to work with all parties involved when it comes to completing these renewable energy projects. i'm very encouraged about the work that we're doing with storage. we talked a lot about storage. i think storage is a real big part of our future. we're seeing some delays in getting that battery work going. i think that certainly with your purchasing and engagement power, we can get moving along with it to get those battery more storage. i think it was in this report that i read something about municipalization. for us to take cleanpowersf to the next level, we'll involve making the sfpuc into a municipal utility district. we can control the delivery aspect of getting the electricity to the people of the city and county of san francisco. thank you for this. i hope next time we have one of these reports -- [ indiscernible ] thank you. >> there are no more callers in the queue. >> clerk: public comment on item 6 is closed. >> president moran: thank you. next item. >> clerk: item 7, report of the general manager. >> thank you. first item is drought condition update from steve richie. >> good afternoon commissioners steve richie assistant general manager for water. this is the regular drought update. this is a little bit dated now. it's about week and a half old. this is april 4th reservoir storage. it shows hetch hetchy 300,000-acre feet of storage. currently little bit more than 310,000-acre feet of storage. we had warm weather and runoff to bring water in the reservoir. storage is looking good. one of the things to note is that with the amount of snow up country, we're having to make sure we make releases from both cherry and hetch hetchy to make room for that. i think we're looking forward to the meeting with the rafters next week and talk about what the conditions will be. next slide shows other california reservoirs. i keep coming back to that upper left corner where reservoir only 38% of the capacity. orville is only 48% of the capacity. those two major reservoirs in california. the california drought monitor. the picture isn't changing a lot. everything is in severe drought or extreme drought according to this figure. although our watersheds are in the lesser category of severe drought. on the hetch hetchy precipitation level, we actually have made sure that we've got enough more water than we got last year for the entire year from the storm earlier this week and later this week, we're expecting to get about one and a half to 2 inches of precipitation at hetch hetchy and cherry with each information of precipitation is equal to 8 to 10 inches of snow. we're getting snow in the high country and cool conditions persist. snow pack is melting. as i noted we're getting runoff coming down. we still have a reasonable amount of snow up country that have to come down and melt. on the water available to the city, we started to have greater outflows and it's gotten to the point now what this diagram shows is 150,000 acres feet of water available to the city that is now come up to about 172,000-acre feet of water available to the city. we're doing relatively good. certainly compared to last year's level of 57,000-acre feet. which was a very small amount. the precipitation, again we're seeing some precipitation up country. this week, we've seen a little bit in the bay area as well. not a whole heck of a lot here locally. looking at the national precipitation forecast. you can see that this week, which is the lower box there, does show there's going to be unsettled weather and bring it up to precipitation that i just talked about little bit earlier. real new information is actually not on this slide. this is the slide showing demands and it showed demand dropping down to about 181 million gallons per day in the last week in march. that helped pretty good. what we just saw last thursday which results for the first week of april. demand jumped 198 million gallons a day. very substantial increase in demand system wide. we need to make sure we're getting the message out. this is clearly a very severe drought. secondly, we'll make progress on it dealing with outdoor demands. that seems like lot of outdoor demands. we'll, pushing on that message harder in the coming months. if we can keep demands below 200 million gallons a day throughout the summer, i think we'll be in good shape. we got to neighbor -- make sure we do that. overall drought tracker, we've been saving about 8% since july 1st of last year through end of march. for the periods from january 1st to march 31st this year, it's a little bit less. partly san francisco demands have increased which i think, i'm hopeful my own independent measure of economic activity that we're seeing demand increasing in the city. now for the last couple of slides. last monday march 28th, the governor did issue an executive order directing the state water board to adopt emergency regulations by may 25th that will impact san francisco and our customers in two areas. one requires urban water suppliers to submit a draft assessment and shortage report to the state by june 1st. this is actually not very onerous. because a final report is due july 1st. sharing a draft with them a month early is not a big deal. i think that's a need for the state to try to feel like it's got a better handle on the overall picture going forward. the second item would require urban water suppliers to implement level two shortage response actions. up to 20% shortage. we're currently at level one where we're having 10% reduction. if we were to move to level two, level two actually ranges from 11% to 20%. right now i think we're going to be challenged meeting 10% system wide. that's partly because san francisco has a residential water use of 42 gallons per person per day and wholesale customers has an average residential water use 63 gallons per person a day. these are well below the statewide average. the real progress if the state make it, we realize on southern california. we're looking forward to the draft whatever the state board puts out, potential impacts we see for retail customers. wouldn't be any difference if it's the 5% reduction level that we have identified back last november. for wholesale customers there might be minor increase of less than 1%. which frankly is little bit in the noise. we'll be evaluating allocations once the emergency regulations are adopted by the state board. we expect to comment on them as we go forward. a requirement in the executive order, basically, it was kind offal statement by the governor that we could be looking at a third year drought so the governor was encouraging water agencies to voluntarily consider activating more stringent requirements based on the shortage level of up to 30%. i think he was loud and clear that if 20% isn't good enough, maybe the state needs to go to 30%. we'll see how that plays out. we need to see if we can get to 20%. also requires the state water board to ban irrigation of non-functional turf in commercial, industrial institutional sectors during emergency. it would not require urban water suppliers to actually take action. we will be prepared to propose adoption of this prohibition. frankly it's hard for san francisco to find non-functional turf in commercial industrial institutional settings. our wholesale customers are may be more. one important thing that's not here is the use of recycled water for irrigation of non-functional turf. should that be included. the governor's executive order was silent on that matter. >> could you give me an example of non-functional turf? >> it will be like campus, office campus lawns that aren't used for picnicking or recreational purposes. they are just green space. that will be an example. we had little conversation with city hall as do the grass areas outside the city hall, are they recreational or non-functional. we want to make sure we got a clear answer on that how we'll deal with that. do we find alternative water source to irrigate those areas. i'd be happy to answer any questions. >> public comment. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make two minutes remote public comment on item 8 drought conditions update. please press star 3 to speak. seeing none, do we have any callers? >> there's one caller in the queue. >> caller: i wanted to comment on the drought conditions update. one of the slides titled water available to the city. right now, today, sfpuc is entitle to any runoff above 2400. very soon, possibly even tomorrow the cutoff increases to 4000c.f.f. until mid-june. has this recent runoff come next week instead when it did, we would have lost most of it. it would have been ended up belonging to the irrigation districts. however according to the long-term vulnerability assessment, we're likely to see runoff come earlier, which is going to benefit the sfpuc. if there's a three-week shift, whatever comes in the next three weeks would be in that range where you get anything above 2400 c.f.f. long-term vulnerability assessment shows runoff will come early. we looked at the actual runoff data that make up the design drought and found that runoff came three weeks earlier that sfpuc will pick up enough water in the last year. which is good news. we know we're right because staff hasn't challenged us. at this point, silence is consent. again, we ask remove one year from the design drought. you will still have by far the more conservative planning in it state. thank you very much. >> clerk: do we have any more callers? >> there are no more callers. >> clerk: item 7d is financial report. >> good afternoon. i'm deputy achieve financial officer. i'm here today to present the fiscal year 2021 annual comprehensive final report and popular annual financial report. sfpuc issued its fiscal year financial report on february 25th of this year. report includes a transmittal letter from our general manager highlighting the activities and audited consolidated financial statements of our three enterprises and it includes a section detailing of financial trends, metrics and local demographics and economic information. for the consolidated sfpuc financial statement, kpmg issued an opinion and noted no material misstates or control deficiencies. this report is developed by the financial reporting analysis by financial services. at the same time, we also issued our fiscal year 2021 popular annual financial report. this report is prepared by the same financial reporting analysis and the project management team in close partnership with the communications division of external affairs. the report is designed to be accessible to the general public and any parties without a background in public or finance. sfpuc's report theme was to respond, recover and reimagine. we continue to safely provide access to clean drinking water, protecting public health through the wastewater covid monitoring. we encourage everyone to read the report and share feedback. lastly, the government finance officer association has awarded sfpuc the achievement award for the popular annual financial report every year since 2010. the certificate of achievement for excellence in financial reporting for by the annual comprehensive financial report every year since 2009. these awards acknowledged organizations's excellence in requirements for these requirements and producing high quality product for public use. sfpuc is only department in the city and county of san francisco that issues a comprehensive financial report and popular annual financial report. we're honor to receive these accolades and award every year. we thank the team and communications division for their commitment to excellence. this concludes our presentation. i'm glad to answer any questions. >> commissioner maxwell: congrat ulations thank you for the good work. >> thank you, it takes a village. >> clerk: members of the public who wish to make public comment on item 7b press star three to speak. seeing none. do we have any callers? >> there are no callers wishing to be recognized. >> clerk: thank you. public comment on item 7b is closed. next item is item 7c, upper islas creek watershed update. >> before you ask to come up, you missed if there was any commission questions and discussion on that item. >> president moran: are there any further questions? >> good afternoon commissioners. great to be back in person. happy to see everybody. my name is sarah minick. i'm here with my colleague steve robinson today director of wastewater capital to give you all an update on the upper islas creek watershed plan alternative. today we're going to give you a brief update on the progress that we've made on our multi-benefit watershed planning approach to managing flooding in the alemany corridor. first, i want to ground ourselves back in the space. this map shows the flooding extent in the five-year storm. at the base of upper islas creek watershed. this is the flooding challenge we're trying to solve. you will recall that when the project team came before this body for engineering services for the pipe project, you asked us to pause and consider a multi-benefit at that time. then convened green infrastructure workshop last april where we received useful feedback from all of you and colleagues from across the nation. our high level takeaways from that -- the feedback that we got which is summarized here, let's step back and think big about the problem, plays a long game. really to change course if it does make sense to do so. this pross is really required us to think differently than we normally would. we normally take an engineering lens and that is very important. we will do that here as well. however, we're adding that city planning lens and public policy lenses, to pose the question since we are investing $289 million to solve the problem, would it possible to deliver more long-term flood resilient benefits so san franciscans can see in their daily lives in the neighborhood? just as a reminder both projects are moving forward at the same time. we have pipe project at 10% design, we have watershed approach at planning and evaluation stage. today's update is about the watershed approach. the benefits of the watershed approach are really about the incrementalism. transforming the surface of our city would allow us to deliver benefits on the surface of the landscape incrementally over time. to provide a higher quality public realm at the same time that we are delivering our core service of managing storm water. we also know that once a pipe is cited and built, the performance is set. it's a very important part of our system. what we want to do is adapt on top of that over time as climate change happens over time. then finally, we know that when we're adopting on the surface of the city, we need to engage stakeholders. these changes will influence their neighborhood and what they see on a daily basis unlike our other infrastructure which is more hidden. we've been very busy since we last got direction from you all. we've established an interdepartmental, interdisciplinary team. we completed studies, hydraulic modeling and we've begun to learn more from community members about challenges that they are facing. our spatial analysis has shown that the flood stept and the five-year storm is one tenth of 1% of the area served by our combined sewer. almost 80% of the problem that we are solving is to take water off of the right-of-way. can we solve that problem while improving the watershed in ways people see and feel. our evaluation so far showed that the answer is yes. there is more than one way to do it. we are just in the idea phase now. i like to share the approaches that we've modeled. the approach is to soak up storm water in the upper watershed and use flood resilience measures to protect sidewalks down stream. we see that if we managed about 200 acres using green infrastructure by retrofitting large parcels, we can shave off about 20% of our total goal. that's to soak it up scenario that we've modeled so far. then we've looked at five different storage opportunities and just sharing one today if we create 4 million-gallon storage facility in the middle of the watershed. we shave off another 60% from our total. we're still left with 20% down stream in very important flood area. this is where a street redesign would keep the remaining 20% of flows away from property, sidewalks and neighborhood streets while delivering a better public realm. the protect zone, which is where residents and businesses are most vulnerable to flooding is very important. because not only is it burdened by flooding but this is also where the environmental justice burden is highest in our watershed area. our specific outreach reveals this is a very diverse multigenerational neighborhood living in diverse and denses housing next to where the flooding occur. if we want to deliver multiple benefits we need to learn from residents what what see as opportunities. in the protect zone, we sent over 300 letters and we've conducted in-person door-to-door surveys and coordinated with community-based organizations to learn from residents. we provided materials and received feedback in chinese, vietnamese, english and spanish. we found that noise, air quality, flooding, pedestrian bike safety and access are top concerns from what we've heard so far. we need more to get a better sample size. these are issues that can drive a multi-benefit design solution. with all of that in mind, we're looking at the corridor as it exists today. then coming up with a configuration that achieve the goal of managing storm water while improving the public realm. we've envisioned a neighborhood street that's protected against flooding and separated from loud and fast moving it nature by a nature-based solution. even though this is a new idea in the utility space, it's a very old idea in transportation. here are some iconic boulevards in san francisco. the innovation here is to make this a storm water boulevard and that can deliver multiple services to san franciscans. this approach will require us to explore new way of doing business. we would have to integrate flood resilience into the public realm with city partners. we invited team meets to vet, evaluate and contribute to ideas. we'd be directing water safely through our city in ways that can contribute to flood resilient neighborhoods. now i will pass it over to my partner steve. >> thank you. steve robinson director of wastewater capital improvement program. we want to conclude with a reminder with the alternative parallel approach up. heard about the watershed approach that sarah mentioned. the pipe traditional tunnel solution is being designed. it's at 10% stage. sarah mentioned we had the workshop in april and in july we had authorized contract to proceed. few factoids about the project, you can see the timeline here. i'm currently on schedule to work through final engineering report in december of this year. next steps really for the whole effort integrated with sarah's work. with that, i think sarah and i are happy to take any questions. >> president moran: thank you, steve. commissioner maxwell? >> commissioner maxwell: thank you for your work. really appreciate the parallel track you're on. could you give me ton of idea. i know the lower alemany, can you give me streets? i go that route but i'm not sure where? >> middle of the alemany corridor where the most flooding occurs where base folsom of alemany. for context, st. mary's park is on the west and alemany farmers market is on the east there before you get to the freeway and then the industrial space is on the other side which are more in the bayview are also part of the area of concern that we're looking at. >> commissioner maxwell: i look at -- i saw the pictures. i wasn't sure -- i guess the room that you have in some of those areas to do -- i guess you wouldn't do it in every area. there are some areas that are more conducive to that. are those the lower or upper? >> terms of amount of space. for the green infrastructure in the upper watershed we're working with m.t.a. to do an analysis with their capital planning so we're working in the right-of-way together. in lower alemany that will be the most disruptive complex and time consuming. we have city right-of-way and caltrans. we do have space. those sections are two scale that you saw. we didn't remove any traffic lanes. we did look at other configurations that would reduce traffic lanes. this one seems more practicallable. there's space but it involves reconfiguring that entire public realm. >> commissioner maxwell: pretty dense in there. that housing around that area would really benefit. >> yes, the public housing and the apartments an condos, we did get some good response from the survey responses that you saw from from those residents in that most impacted stretch there. >> commissioner maxwell: we're not dealing with the farmers market? >> correct. at this moment, we have outreach to them. we are looking at configurations that leave the upper part of the farmers market but may encroach on the bottom third to let the storm water pass through. >> commissioner maxwell: thank you. >> commissioner paulson: thanks for that presentation. it was as a system, it was pretty impressive to see this all bundled up the way you presented it. three corridors through the flow and whatever else. very impressive to see this. i had one question. i want to reference commissioner maxwell. i also live within realm of that neighborhood and experienced so much of what it means from it farmers market to the housing. i had one question. that is you mentioned one facet, one tool was to reach out to the residents to get input about if my house will blow away and what about bicycling. what method did you use to reach out to folks and what the target is? i know this has been -- i'm saying this because this is pretty impressive to see this all laid out in this system. what were the tools that you used for outreach? that's always important for any infrastructure. [ please stand by ] food pantry days and make sure we coordinated with the events to make sure we heard from those folks. that's where we are so far, but we would like to do additional workshops to get deeper into the information. >> that sounds good, but you had staff with clip boards knocking on selected doors and with p.u.c. vests on or whatever the heck it was. >> yes. >> okay, thanks. >> >> president moran: thank you. any more questions or comments. thank you very much. let's open up for public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of remote public comment on item c, press star 3 to raise your hand to speak. do we have members of the public present who wish to address this item? seeing none, do we have any callers? >> there are no callers in the queue. >> thank you. public comment on item 7c is closed. >> president moran: thank you. mr. general manager. >> that concludes my report. >> president moran: thank you. next item. >> next item is item 8, new commission business. >> president moran: seeing none, next item, please. >> next item is the consent calendar. >> president moran: commissioners, any items you would like removed from the calendar, the consent calendar? do we have any members of the public present wishing to address the item? seeing none, mr. moderator, any callers? >> there are no callers. >> thank you. public comment on item 9 is closed. >> motion to approve. >> president moran: motion, seconded to approve? roll call, please. >> president moran: aye. >> commissioner maxwell: aye. >> commissioner paulson: aye. >> you have three ayes. >> president moran: and the consent item is adopted. next item. >> next item is item 10, approve amendment number 1 to contract number cs249, increasing the contract by $7.7 million and increasing the contract duration by three years for not not to exceed contract amount of $28.7 million and a total contract duration of 13 years. >> hello, can you please pull up the slides, sfgovtv. hello, good afternoon, commissioners, i'm the project manager for s.f. p.u.c. for the mountain tunnel project. today i'll be presenting with the city s.f. p.u.c. engineer, the project engineer. and today i am here to request approval for amendment number 1, for professional services, contract, cs249. amendment one will add $7.78 million and increase the time duration of the contract by three years for a total not to exceed contract amount of $28.78 million. and a total contract duration of 13 years. to provide specialized engineering services for the mountain tunnel improvements project. this amendment number one will continue to provide the necessary funding for engineering support during construction to complete the construction phase and for project closeout from the mountain tunnel improvement project. i think at this time it would be beneficial if i gave a quick overview of the project so everybody can understand the scope of the work. this is large dollar amount. this is an overview of the hetch hetchy regional water system and showing the location of the mountain tunnel project with the large red arrow. the water system conveys water to 2.8 million residents and businesses over four counties and generates around 1.6 billion kilowatt hours of clean hydroelectric power annually. the mountain tunnel is a critical component of the system. the mountain tunnel is over 90 years old and is being rehabilitated. this slide is showing most of the project scope of work. there is a few pieces that we haven't shown in here, but this gives the major guts of the work going on. starting at the priest reservoir just above the moccasin reservoir, it's a regulating reservoir and moccasin pin stocks come down from that into moccasin reservoir. at the priest site we are presently constructing a new flow facility. it is 150-foot deep shaft. it's a very large wide deep shaft. the shaft being constructed presently and we have approached the 100-foot depth on that large shaft. two bypass tunnels will be constructed and tied into the existing tunnel during one of the outages. mechanical and electrical equipment will be placed in the bottom of the shaft to give flow. also, little bit upstream from the new flow control, a 1074-foot long access tunnel is being constructed. this tunnel we're presently in 300-foot depth on the excavation and that added tunnel will be tied in during the same outage as we tie in the tunnel of the shaft. the red and green, we're going to be rehabilitating the inside of the tunnel, repairing the tunnel lining defects and doing contact grouting between the lining and the existing rock to fill in all the voids so we get a solid surface. when that tunnel is full of water, so we can sustain all the pressures of tunnel. that will take place for seven miles. there were interim projects that repaired the larger defects. we're going to go in and repair all the remaining defects. we'll be putting in a mile-long tunnel invert to make a smooth transition between the unline tunnel and the line tunnel. the tunnel was 18 miles long. 11 miles is lined and 7.9 miles is unlined in solid granite rock. but a lot of those rock pieces have come off over time and there is existing rock debris inside the tunnel. so from 5-6 will be a massive rock debris cleaning out the tunnel. at south fork to improve the water quality and provide better hydraulic flow under the tuolumne river, it's a 8-foot diameter shaft, doing a syphon extension that will tie into the existing mountain tunnel. that's all underground mining work and a very difficult location down at the bottom of the south fork road. in addition to all of that work, all the inside work and all the work tying into the tunnel, we have approximately five miles of roadway work. and this roadway work is for the access roads that are being used for the ongoing construction and that will be used for the -- all the maintenance for the next hundred years of this tunnel's operation. and this roadway work includes rock stabilization, rock removal in rock fall protection. road widenings, getting them to a wider width for the construction traffic. turnout areas to facilitate the construction passing with their large vehicles. retaining walls, better drainage and resurfaresurfacing. this is just a quick overview of the contract. the construction schedule. it's a six-year construction schedule with all inside tunnel work and tie-in work, the bypass tunnels and the south fork syphon and the new addity, that will be taking place during the outages. we recently completed outage number one and we're moving to prepare for outage number 2. the water is turned off in the tunnel and we have full access for 600 days to 1 -- 60 days to 100 days. this is the overview of the tunnel budget. the first three phases are completed. the planning, environmental and design and we're left with two phases, construction management and construction. for construction management we're about 15% spent of the budget and construction, we're about 17% spent of the budget. timelines were at 19%. so it gives you an idea of where we are now in the project. and overall, we are 25% spent of the entire mountain tunnel budget. at this time i'd like to turn it over to joe just to describe the reasons why we're asking for this modification. >> hello, good afternoon. i'm the project engineer for the mountain tunnel improvement. i'm going to speak on a few points why this contract modification is required. so on october 27, 2017, the commission awarded contract number cs249 for the planning and design services for mountain tunnel improvement. the scope of work and budget were for planning and design of a new bypass tunnel, however, during the analysis planning phase completed in october 2017, the selected alternative was a turn am rehabilitation as described by mr. anderson. that came with the cost savings of $370 million. subsequently the scope of services required for engineering support during construction has increased due to the much more complex location-specific work scope for tunnel rehabilitation project, including adit road improvements, relocation and a flow control facility. so in summary, the budget increase and schedule extension requested is to support this additional work and extended contract duration. the next steps we're seeking commission approval for the contract amendment to increase budget and extend the schedule and then we seek subsequent approval by the board of supervisors. so this concludes our presentation and mr. anderson and i would be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> president moran: thank you. >> commissioner maxwell: you mentioned that at the end of this -- not the tunnel -- i think it was 100 feet down, there is going to be mechanical equipment down there? >> right now -- i'm sorry, are you finished? we're in drill and blast right now for all the remaining excavation for the shaft and for the bypass tunnels. we're in pretty hard rock. the top 50 feet or so was mechanical excavation. it was somewhat softer rock. >> commissioner maxwell: so, i thought you meant there was going to be at the bottom of the shaft mechanical equipment. >> yes. at the bottom of the shaft will be all the control valves, large diameter control valves, that they'll be able to control the flow. it's not controlled right now. they can fill up the tunnel and keep it full of water if that's what they desire and then release the water out in a controlled manner into priest reservoir. >> the valves won't be submerged in water? >> no, no, no. no, the valves will be at the bottom of the shaft. there is waterproof -- >> commissioner maxwell: good. i was wondering. how are they going to get in and repair this if they need to? i hear you talk about access. >> that's a great question. this is a large diameter shaft and the reason they sized it to this diameter so they have access in the future to get equipment on. it will have steel beams on top and a roof over the shaft and they'll be able to put a crane up there and lift equipment out if needed. >> commissioner maxwell: all right. and this equipment is supposed to last initially how long? >> well, the design life is 100 years. you know, the equipment will probably need replacement in a sooner time frame than that. probably in a 30-year interval for the mechanical equipment, but the design that we're going to achieve from the tunnel rehabilitation is 100 years. >> commissioner maxwell: so i'm sure there is technical and it can be monitored from anywhere, right? >> yeah. >> commissioner maxwell: because of the -- well, this is so exciting. and i'm going to say this. i want to be as a second shutdown. i really do. i want to see that. that's an amazing -- it really is. i'm so excited that we're doing it and you decided to rehab. i know it's a big job, but it's an amazing job. you must have learned an awful lot. i mean, it's just really something. >> and i'd like to tell you, we would have liked everyone there for the first shutdown and we did a virtual tour with sfgovtv and we're presently putting together four videos and you'll see the although lot of the work -- a lot of the work that is taking place. we'd like to present that. >> commissioner maxwell: that would be fine, i want to do the video, but i want to see it. this is historical to me. this is really special. so i just appreciate the work. i know it's difficult and we see when they were building hetch hetchy and we're all marvelling, well, this is something like the same thing. so, again, thank everybody for their work and i hate to use the word exciting because i know it sounds different, but it is, it really is. >> it's a legacy project and joe and i are thrilled to work on it for the city and county. >> commissioner maxwell: thank you. >> president moran: there is nothing like being there to really get the sense of it, that there is no video that can give you the sense of scale and the forces that are involved that you get from actually being there on site. so i think that's very valuable option to provide the commissioners. and it's a challenge. you talk about it being a challenging location. it is. so being able to do that in a way that is safe and appropriate, it's not just a tourist attraction, it's a work site, so we need to take care of those issues, but if there is way to do it appropriately, i think there is real value in doing that. thank you. any other questions? -- on this item? thank you, both. public comment, please. >> thank you. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of remote public comment specifically on item 10, press star 3 to raise your hand to speak. would any members of the public present wish to address this item is this -- this item? seeing none, mr. moderator, any callers. >> there are no callers in the queue. >> thank you, public comment on item 10 is closed. >> thank you. any additional questions? seeing none, could i have a motion and a second? moved and seconded. roll call. >> president moran: aye. >> commissioner maxwell: aye. >> commissioner paulson: aye. >> you have three ayes. >> and the item passes. next item. >> item 11, approve an increase of $500,000 to the contract account contingency and increase of 300 calendar days to the contract duration contingency for contract number wd2797 and authorize the general manager to approve future modifications to the contract for the amount of $18.1 million and a total contract duration of up to 1334 consecutive calendar days. >> good afternoon, commissioners. project manager, infrastructure division. can i have the slide deck, please? the item before you is requesting your approval to increase the contract cost and duration contingencies for contract wd2797, san francisco westside recycled water pump station and reservoir. today's presentation will provide a brief overview of the west side recycle project and its objectives, the status of the various construction contracts and discuss the issues impacting contract wd2797 and i'll conclude with a summary of our request. the p.u.c. water improvement program passed in 2008 had several goals of the upgrade of the water infrastructure system. including improving seismic and delivery reliability, maintaining high water quality and enhancing sustainability. it also had a water supply goal for sfpuc to meet water needs in drought and non-drought conditions. one of the strategies to meet this goal was to diversify the city's water supply by increasing the use of new water resources, including recycled water for non-potable uses, ground water and increasing its conservation efforts. the west side recycled water project is a key component in meeting this commitment. funding for the project is through a combination of water enterprise funds and the capital plan and the project has state revolving fund loan and grant. the west side project will produce 1.6 million gallons per day of recycled water from the affluent of its oceanside plant to be used on the west side of the city. it includes golden gate park and the pan handing and the lincoln park golf course. we're working to add additional customers including the san francisco zoo, sunset boulevard and lower great highway median and the presidio golf course is also a potential customer. the west side recycled water project is constructed through four construction contracts. contract wd2798 constructed almost eight miles of pipeline connecting the treatment plant with the oceanside plant to the new reservoir in golden gate park and to the end customers. this contract was completed in 2018. contract wd2776 is constructing the new recycled water facility at our oceanside plant. this is in the final phase of its construction. completion is anticipated in late summer of 20223. contract wd5284 is modifying the irrigation system so they are compliant with recycled water regulation. this is also nearing completion and is expected to be completed in summer of 2022. finally, contract wd2798 is constructing the pump station in golden gate park and its completion is delayed until early 2023. the facility in golden gate park includes the construction of an 840,000 gallon buried reservoir and above ground pump station that will deliver recycled water to the lincoln park golf course in the future to the presidio golf course. this contract was initiated in july of 2018. the contract has experienced delays and continues to experience construction delays related to reduced productivity and material delivery delay associated with the pandemic and its impact on the supply chains. in the fall of 2022, in the late stages of construction, the project was notified by pg&e that it could not provide power per our design further hampering the project schedule. the agenda item before you today is requesting the approval of an additional $500,000 in construction costs and 300 calendar days in contingency. the installation of interim power supply to serve minor house loads such as lighting, security and critical instruments while we work on our power service issues with pg&e and it will address ongoing delays related to material delivery procurement. if we are required to change the power service for the facility, there will be a future formal contract to construct that work. that concludes my presentation. >> president moran: okay, thank you. any questions? -- or comments on this item? >> commissioner maxwell: [indiscernible] -- -- the facility -- we have the facility -- the wastewater facility on, you know, out near the zoo. so there is no -- there is no synergy there, there is no way that that can happen. >> no, the facility in question is the pump station in golden gate park. they're separated by three or four miles. >> commissioner maxwell: hmm. >> so it required a new power service. >> commissioner maxwell: okay, thank you. >> president moran: one question. how functional is the system as a whole without the pump station being functional? >> so without the pump station, we won't be able to serve lincoln park golf course. but the treatment plant will be up and running and we'll be able to serve golden gate park which is the bulk of the 1.6 million gallons per day is golden gate park. >> president moran: thank you. >> commissioner paulson: i know it wasn't directly addressed, but this is just a comment, not a question that i'm seeing some code in there for the fact that part of the cost of this as well as possible future costs is complication with access to power by way of pg&e and i'm just making a note that's what i heard in the presentation. >> if i might, mr. president, we've alluded to the -- this is a very high priority issue and we have initiated negotiations and conversations with pg&e because this is a little bit, um, let's just say the position they're taking now is contrary to the position they had taken before. and this is part of our ongoing conversation with them and discussion related to some other things and delays that we've seen on other projects and we've let them know that this is a very, very high priority for us. so we have our full attention on that. >> thank you. >> president moran: not seeing any other comments, let's open up for public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of remote public comment specifically on item 11 please press star 3 to raise your hand to speak. any members of the public present who wish to address this item? seeing none, do we have any callers? >> there are no callers in the queue. >> thank you, public comment on item 11 is closed. >> president moran: okay. any other comments? a motion and a second, please. motion seconded, roll call. >> president moran: aye. >> commissioner maxwell: aye. >> commissioner paulson: aye. >> we have three ayes. >> president moran: the item passes. thank you. next item. >> item 12, i prove the project participation and share agreement, the buyer liability pass-through agreement and the coordinated operations agreement and authorize the general manager to execute the agreements with a total cost not to exceed $60 million for a term of 20 years and authorize a general manager to seek approval from the board of supervisors to execute the agreement. the agenda item published referenced $45 million and it should be $60 million, but the resolution does correctly reflect $60 million. >> president moran: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm the deputy manager for power responsible for the cleanpowersf program. it's a pleasure to be here before you today in person. my first time since the pandemic started. we have before you for your approval three agreements that would allow cleanpowersf to participate in the goal line project. as the commission secretary just mentioned, there is a typo in the agenda item summary referring to not to exceed cost of $45 million. i wanted to reiterate that the value should be $60 million as stated in the resolution. i do have some slides. as we've discussed at previous commission meetings, last summer, the california public utilities commission ordered cleanpowersf and other power providers under its jurisdiction to procure long duration storage resources to support statewide electric reliability. cleanpowersf participated in a request for offer for long duration storage as a member of california community power. cleanpowersf's participation in the first long duration energy storage project, the tumbleweed project was approved by this commission on february 22nd. the board of supervisors on march 22 and the mayor on march 31. on february 25, california community power approved its second long duration community storage project goal line. california community power member agencies are now seeking approval from their governing bodies to participate in this project. with the approval of the goal line project cleanpowersf will be able to comply with the cpuc procurement order. there is background information on california community power. the new agency that we have joined and we presented here before the commission and the board of supervisors approved cleanpowersf membership last year and cleanpowersf became a member in april of 2021. california community power conducts its business according to brown act meeting requirements. these are the current 10 members of california community power. membership includes all of the bay area, community choice, aggregation programs, plus programs surveying the north and central coasts of california and the sacramento valley near the city of davis. and here's an overview of the goal line project. the developer on ward energy will finance, construct, own and operate the project. goal line will be a 50 megawatt lithium ion battery capable of storing 400 megawatt hours and discharging that energy over an eight-hour period. it will be located near escondido, california. this will meet the cpuc requirements to procure statewide reliability. the specific location demonstrated high energy market value in california community power's evaluation process. the goal line project is committed to building its project in full compliance with the wage requirements and using a project labor agreement for the construction of the facility. on ward energy is guaranteeing a commercial operation date for the plant of june 1, 2025 with a purchase term of 15 years from the start of the project's operations. as i noted earlier, the project cost is not to exceed $60 million over the term of the agreement. again, with payments not commencing until the project reaches its operations. combined, the tumbleweed project and the goal line project will allow them to comply with the order. together, they'll provide cleanpowersf with 17.1 megawatts of net qualifying capacity or about 1.6 megawatts more of what was ordered of cleanpowersf. net qualifying capacity is the amount of power an electric resource can provide to the grid when it is most constrained. that can be counted towards meeting the cpuc adequacy requirements. staff believe that the additional 1.6 megawatts of capacity gives cleanpowersf an appropriate buffer to protect against regulatory changes that might reduce the net qualifying capacity of these projects and put cleanpowersf's compliance at risk. the agreement structure is the same as approved in february. there are three documents we're seeking your approval to execute. those agreements are noted on the slides here with the numbers 1, 2, and 3. number 1 is the coordinated operations agreement. number 2 is the project participation share agreement. and number 3 is the buyer liability pass through agreement. to receive approval and execute their required agreements. if approved by this commission, staff will seek board of supervisors' and mayoral approval later this month and early in may. and with that, i'm happy to take any questions you may have about this item. >> president moran: thank you very much. >> commissioner maxwell: thank you. i believe also you mentioned -- well, in the workforce requirements that was collective bargaining agreements and community workforce agreement. >> that's correct. that is the language that is within the contract, those terms. >> commissioner maxwell: which i think is extremely important you mention community because that's the local and that means they're participating in that and that's very good and helpful. so i think it's important to mention that as well as all the other ones because that means you all are working with community. >> understood, thank you. >> commissioner maxwell: also, have you learned anything -- were there any lessons learned from the first storage project? >> well, the -- the first storage project hasn't yet begun construction -- >> commissioner maxwell: okay. >> and actually this one will be done before that one, so sequentially, really, the reason why this project is coming to you now is really a result of the pace of negotiations. so we're about four weeks after -- a little bit more than four weeks, maybe eight weeks after we brought to you the last project. and to be clear, too, these projects were bid into the same solicitation. >> commissioner maxwell: i see. and i'm sure there are other ccas around the country. yes, no? >> there are some. electric regulations are highly driven by states. so it's not a model that exists in every state or even most states, but it does exist in a number of them. massachusetts being one example. >> commissioner maxwell: have you all had an opportunity to engage and talk with them about -- since this is our first entrance into this, have you had an opportunity to talk to them about some dos and don'ts, or just experiences? >> yeah, that's a great question. yeah, when we started work to launch cleanpowersf, we absolutely did. the interesting thing about this moment in time is that we're actually probably leaders in the country now in developing -- in pursuing and procuring projects like this. now we absolutely will share our experience and information with other states and also learn as they gain their experiences, but the state of california is really on the leading edge as far as greening our grid and making investments like this, which are really intended to reduce our dependence on fossil fuel. >> commissioner maxwell: thank you. it's good to hear. thank you. >> president moran: any other questions? thank you. let's open up for public comment. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of remote public comment specifically on item 12, please press star 3 to raise your hand to speak. do we have any members of the public present who wish to address this item? seeing none, do we have any callers? >> there are two callers in the queue. first caller, i've opened your line. you have two minutes. >> thank you. [indiscernible] i've been talking about -- i can't call myself an expert on this kind of storage, but i've been using batteries for decades and this is just a bigger version of what i'm using here at home. i think this is the beginning, hopefully it's just the beginning, because the possibilities of storage are great. and i hope that once you get both of these completed sooner rather than later [indiscernible] finding this -- forget that role. as i said many times, california, there is the infamous curve of which power demand spikes greatly in the afternoons and only for a short time. so storage can allow us to capture the renewable energy that is often being curtailed only to have a run more fossil fuel generators to meet the curve. this will help to level the day. i think you should sign this and more of this so you can have a cleaner, greener and more affordable san francisco. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next caller, your line is open, you have two minutes. >> thank you. this does look like a promising project and while i was listening to it, i was thinking back to the commenter during public communication were talking about the rafting flows and the challenge that oftentimes were generating hydropower for sale are not necessarily with the rafting flows. this seems like a great opportunity for san francisco to look into its own project where energy could be hydropower energy could be released at the time, so that's basically in the morning and that energy stored and sold at a time when it's more valuable. i think it's a really good potential win-win here. i used to guide the tuolumne and people come up and spend the night, eat out and enjoy the amenities and it's very important. so that stretch of the tuolumne is wild and scenic in large part because of its recreational valley. and without the flow, it loses that value. so perhaps that something p.u.c. could think about is adopting this technology locally to the hetch hetchy system. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. there are no more callers in the queue. >> thank you, public comment on item 12 is closed. >> president moran: thank you. commissioners, any additional comments or questions? seeing none, motion and a second, please. motion seconded. roll call. >> president moran: aye. >> commissioner maxwell: aye. >> commissioner paulson: aye. >> you have three ayes. >> president moran: thank you. item 12 passes. next item. >> item 13, adopt findings declaring a surplus to the san francisco public utilities commission's utility needs approximately 10,000 square feet of real property designated as portions of assessor number 10, 104-28-066 in the city of sunnyvale, santa clara. >> i have a couple of things to add to the description in the title. one is that we're selling it to santa clara water district and therefore we're exempt from the surplus lands act. we're selling it for $33,000. i'd be glad to answer any questions. >> president moran: thank you. commissioners, any questions? seeing none, thank you, mr. carlin. public comment, please. >> members of the public who wish to make two minutes of remote public comment on item 13, press star 3 to raise your hand to speak. do we have any members of the public who wish to address item 13? seeing none, do we have any callers? >> there are no callers in the queue. >> thank you, public comment on item 13 is closed. >> president moran: thank you. additional comments or questions? motion and a second? moved and seconded. roll call. >> president moran: aye. >> commissioner maxwell: aye. >> commissioner paulson: aye. you have three ayes. >> president moran: and item 13 passes. next item. >> mr. president, i'm going to call items 14 and 15 together. 14 is authorize the issuance of up to $950 million of the 2022 series abcd taxable water revenue bonds and item 15 authorize the issuance of up to $475 million of the 2022 series ab tax exempt wastewater refunding bonds. >> president moran: thank you. >> good afternoon, president. commissioners. deputy c.f.o. these two items before you today request your approval of a bond refinancing for each of our water and wastewater enterprises. commissioners, we regularly look at opportunities for refunding our bonds, especially when lower rates present themselves. and we've done this several times over the past few years. most recently in 2020 with the water enterprise. if i could have the slides, please. i'll spend a few moments talking about the transactions before you. i'll spend a little time with the water transaction and the wastewater transactions will follow that. i'll go over the plan of finance which provides a little bit of detail around the sale transaction itself. and then some disclosure q&a which is fairly standard with these types of transactions. so for the water refunding, we have several bond series we are considering for refund, upwards of $950 million of bonds are open for refund opportunities across four different series of bonds. commissioners, we issue water bonds based on the asset category and the location, that's why you see the four different series here. so we have a water system improvement bonds, our regional water bonds, our hetchy water and then our local water bonds. the bonds will be issued taxable as this is an advance refunding which basically means it's being done before the standard 10 years of time has passed. and so that's what's called an advance refunding. i'll talk a little bit about a regular refunding and wastewater enterprise in a moment. we want to take advantage and do advance refundings when interest rates are very low. our aim, of course, is to maximize the savings. when we do these refinancing we're aiming for refunding target of $23 million with this refunding transaction. however, interest rates have bumped up as you heard in the news, but the bottom line we'll aim to achieve 3% savings for the ratepayers and all of this is outlined in our debt management policies. also, commissioners, we include changes to our indenture within these transactions and the indenture just to remind you is a document that governs the issuance and repayment of our bonds for each enterprise. so, we are proposing some relatively minor changes in definitions, streamlining how debt service is calculated and our goal is to make these details consistent across our three enterprises, water, wastewater and power. so the changes we are proposing will become effective once 51% of the outstanding bonds have the provisions associated with it. so what that means is over the next few years, we will include those same provisions in future refunding bonds and in future new money bonds and once we have 51% of the outstanding bonds with these provisions attached to it, then they will become effective. on the wastewater side, we have upwards of $475 million of refunding bonds that we're targeting for refunding. we have four subseries as well. two of them are tax exempt refundings which basically means the bonds are ten -- have been outstanding ten years or more and so we're going to do those on a tax-exempt basis and those maturities that are within the next ten years of time, those will be done on a taxable basis, like what i just described with the water refunding. so we have our sewer system improvement program, ssip, and then our non-ssip which is other portions of the wastewater enterprise debt that we'll be teeing up for refinancing. we are aiming for $32 million in debt service savings and, again, this transaction complies with our debt management policies. in terms of the plan of finance, the sales dates that we're aiming for will be from mid april, so in a couple of weeks or so, through may for both of these transactions. we -- however, as i noted earlier, interest rates have bumped up over the past month or so. we will only take advantage of the refunding transactions if the interest rates translate into a minimum savings level of 3% or more, of course. so 3% is our floor. right now, if we were to do this transaction today for water, we wouldn't be able to move forward with the transaction because rates have moved so much so quickly. so what we will do is seek your authorization today for both our water and our wastewater transaction. we will move forward with the wastewater transaction, because we have significant savings that we can realize there. however, our water transaction, we will hold and we will wait until potential interest rates to fall back so that we achieve the minimum 3% savings goal. let me see. the underwriters were selected competitively from our controllers' pool of preselected vendors. and we performed a competitive selection through an r.f.p. process to choose the underwriters as noted here. morgan stanley and citibank. and the last couple of slides here, commissioners, again, just to walk you through some disclosure question, answer. this is in line with the training that we had with all of you last year as it relates to debt transactions. so, again, size of the transaction, up to not to exceed $950 million for water, $475 million for wastewater and we're aiming to bring ratepayer savings for our customers. we have several series as i've described to you, up to four series for our water enterprise. up to four series for our wastewater enterprise. and the bonds will be sold and negotiated as i described earlier with the underwriters. we will -- we've already budgeted for these bonds just to reiterate. we have not incorporated any of the potential savings into our budgets or financial plans as is standard procedure. this will provide savings in next year's budget if we're able to realize the savings that i described. but everything -- all of the debt service for the repayment of the bonds has been incorporated into our budget. the interest rates that we're aiming for are noted here. and we don't believe that the issuance of the debt will provide any negative rating action. in fact, will provide a positive story as it relates to savings. i'm happy to answer any questions. >> president moran: thank you. commissioners, any questions of mr. pearl? seeing none, let's open up for public comment and that will be on both items, 14 and 15. >> correct. members of the public who wish to make two minutes of remote public comment on items 14 and 15 combined, please press star 3 to raise your hand to speak. do we have any members of the public who wish to provide public comment on items 14 and 15? seeing none, do we have any callers? >> there are no callers in the queue. >> thank you. public comment for items 14 and 15 are closed. >> thank you. additional comments. >> commissioner maxwell: i would just like to thank you for both reports. i found myself really kind of getting into them. they were easy to read and i really appreciated all the information and it was succinct and in a good form, because thank you for that. it could have been very difficult, so thank you. >> president moran: commissioners, we'll proceed with separate votes on each item. on item 14 a motion and a second. motion and seconded. roll call. >> president moran: aye. >> commissioner maxwell: aye. >> commissioner paulson: aye. >> you have three ayes. >> president moran: item 14 passes. on item 15, a motion and a second? motion and seconded. roll call, please. >> president moran: aye. >> commissioner maxwell: aye. >> commissioner paulson: aye. >> you have three ayes. >> president moran: and item 15 passes. next item. >> next item is public comment on matters to be addressed during closed session. the following items will be heard, 18, conference with legal counsel, pursuant to california government code section 54956.9b 2 and san francisco administrative code section 67.10d2, settlement of unlitigated claim, usda forest service versus city and don't of san francisco, unlitigated claim against the city and county of san francisco with city to pay the usda forest service, $203,056 for full and final release from the forest service. and 19, conference with legal counsel, and san francisco administrative code section 67.10d2, unlitigated claim and existing litigation, san francisco bay regional water quality control board versus city and county of san francisco and versus environmental protection agency. those who wish to make public comment on 18 and 19, please raise your hand to speak. do we have any members of the public who wish to make public comment? >> there are no callers wishing to be recognized. >> thank you, public comment on items -- closed session items is closed. >> president moran: thank you. commissioners, may i have a motion on whether to assert the attorney client privilege. >> moved and seconded. >> president moran: aye. >> commissioner maxwell: aye. >> commissioner paulson: aye. >> you have three ayes. >> president moran: item 17 passes. we'll now go into closed session. once in closed session, we'll take a five-minute break. >> please stand by. >> president moran: thank you. the commission is back in open session. during closed session, the commission acted on item 18 to recommend settlement to the board of supervisors. there was no other action taken. can i have a motion regarding whether to disclose the discussions that took place during closed session? >> move not to disclose. >> second. >> moved and seconded not to disclose. roll call. >> president moran: aye. >> commissioner maxwell: aye. >> commissioner paulson: aye. >> you have three ayes. >> president moran: thank you. there being no other business before the commission, this meeting is adjourned. the tenderloin is home to families, immigrants, seniors, merchants, workers and the housed and unhoused who all deserve a thriving neighborhood to call home. the tenderloin initiative was launched to improve safety, reduce crime, connect people to services and increase investments in the neighborhood. as city and community-based partners, we work daily to make these changes a reality. we invite you to the tenderloin history, inclusivity make this neighborhood special. >> we're all citizens of san francisco and we deserve food, water, shelter, all of those things that any system would. >> what i find the most fulfilling about being in the tenderloin is that it's really basically a big family here and i love working and living here. >> [speaking foreign language] >> my hopes and dreams for the tenderloin are what any other community organizer would want for their community, safe, clean streets for everyone and good operating conditions for small businesses. >> everything in the tenderloin is very good. the food is very good. if you go to any restaurant in san francisco, you will feel like oh, wow, the food is great. the people are nice. >> it is a place where it embraces all walks of life and different cultures. so this is the soul of the tenderloin. it's really welcoming. the. >> the tenderloin is so full of color and so full of people. so with all of us being together and making it feel very safe is challenging, but we are working on it and we are getting there. >> regular meeting program upon 13th. 20 twoot time is 9:01. this meeting held in person at the location listed above. that is room 400 at city hall. authorizationed by california gentleman code 54953, e and the mayor 45th