Commissioners. First to start with, kind of second to last item, ab 1110. I want commissioners to be fully aware that scott the very powerful lobbyist and representative of the utility workers unions including ibew on the 13th of this month was sidebyside with the bill author in committee promoting the bill. So its clear that not only was ibew involved with the local ballot measure, but also with this bill. That is not to say however that we cannot work with the a ssembly member, californians for energy choice, which im also a cocoordinator, the Coalition Last year that successfully fought off ab 2145, scotts previous attack on Community Choice on behalf of pg e, basically. We have engaged with Assembly Member ting and spoken with him. He seem like he is going to work with us. I think the 2year bill is looking like probably the right option, because i discovered by talking to analysts that the behind the meter issue is a little complex, in that if we made it so behind the meter solar, et cetera, was access accessible to allow pg e and their territoris to suddenly count all of those resources. And actually make it easier for them to compete against us. So we have to be very careful how we do that and that means 2year bill should definitely be in your ask. Other specific asks that we have been asking from the Assembly Member, he seems open to them, but it would be help if they were reinforced that new Community Choice programs like ourselves to adjust at the beginning of launch to any games that pg e plays with rates and things like that, or shortages of hetch hetchy power. We need the flexibility for our first few years a Community Choice organization. And i think director fried is familiar with the other points that need to be asked for and could probably bounce those off of you. Finally there is a problem with the rate case at the cpuc that could be a big issue. Those rates are going to come into effect in in a couple of years and will dramatically reduce the rates for toptier users. They will see before we roll them in and sign them up for us, that pg e lowers their rate and pg e will say that to them. This might be an incentive to them, to think i better stick with pg e, especially since their incentive to do renewables and efficiency will be so much lower, because their bills will be so much lower. Thank you. Any other member of the public who would like to comment . Seeing none, well close Public Comment. And this is for information item. Although we did express actions that we would like to take. Lets go on to our next item item no. 4. Item no. 4, amendment to the Legal Services agreement with miller owen until the merger are Renne Sloan Holtzman Sakai is completed. We approved the extension of a contract for our Legal Services with renne sloan Legal Service because at the time we had thought that miller and owen who have merged with them. Unfortunately due to some other complications outside that have nothing to do with lafco the merger has not occurred yet. During the period of last meeting and today, chair avalos instructed me to sign an extension on the theory that we wanted to keep ms. Miller and her service and it wasnt the new law necessarily we were looking for, but to retain ms. Miller and her fine work she has done over the years for us. This is more a report to you that were doing that and you could take an action that simply affirmed that the chair was correct in the actions to retain mismiller and we should continue down the path what has already been started by the chair and staff of this commission. That is all. Okay. So yes, i had written a letter to the clerk of the board, that would extend the current contract until the new merger is finalized. And i think it just made sense that we could actually ensure that ms. Miller was able to provide her support for the work of lafco in the interim period. So i think its pretty consistent with what our goals are. So before we actually if you folks want to comment, or members want to comment . Well do Public Comment first and then make a decision upon whether we want to actually make any action item . So why dont we open this item up for Public Comment. Any member of the public who wants to comment . Seeing none, well close Public Comment. Colleagues . Commissioner crews. Thank you. I think certainly we want to agree that chair avalos was acting in the spirit and intent that we would like to retain ms. Millers services. I think that perhaps i should make a motion that we are in agreement and we would like to extend that until the merger has been completed. Okay. And we have concurrence from the commission. So done. Very good. Item no. 5, please. Item 5 status update regarding the study on the implementation and opportunities for undergrounding wires and expansion of Fiber Networks in San Francisco. Executive officer again, earlier this week you received from me a final version of the report we did. We have gotten we did get feedback. I took all of that feedback and made edits. Its my understanding that supervisor tang and her office are satisfied and happy with the work that was completed. What i would say at that point, what i would request that we accept the report and have it be completed. There might be some next steps that come out of this in future. But the next steps in some ways are sitting with the city and county at least and we might come back to these items later on. On the undergrounding utilities side, one the next steps that im recommending to the city and county of San Francisco that they put together an Implementation Plan and the costs for street resurfacing and sfpuc work underneath and fiber expansion and if they also incorporated undergrounding of utility wires with a real cost estimate. At that point, somebody would figure out where do we find the money to pay for that . There are several options in the report that could be available for folks, but at this point is, i would consider lafcos work on that side to be completed. On the [kpapbgs ] of expansion of the Fiber Networks, what would be my next steps recommendation is something that supervisor farrell asked to look at a Business Model perspective of what would it take . Would it be smart for the city potentially to use the fiber that we have and expand it and create its own Fiber Network system that it sells or has some sort of Publicprivate Partnership . I would recommend that if lafco wants to get into this to wait for that report to be done to give us the next steps to move forward. That would have been what i would have actually recommended what is being put into the report or at least what i understand is going to be put in the report and wait until that is done. At this point i would request that we accept the report and wait to see what the city and county does on the report and the undergrounding of utilities once we get that information back, at that point to come back to the item as individual, separate pieces. Thank you. I thought we had a presentation on the undergrounding of utilities, poles, at one of our last meetings. But we didnt really go into a summary of what was explored in fiber, is that correct . We did the entire report at that meeting and so i didnt bring a powerpoint with me today. But can i talk about it if you want i can go into a little more detail. How is the report being used at this point . Well, its my understanding supervisor tang has it and is reviewing it. On the fiber side, what i would honestly consider the next steps, is there a potential Business Model that the city wants to get into a full Public Ownership or privatepublic partnership and how do we use it throughout the city . They are doing that report and i would wait for that report to be done because that would have been next step i would have taken. I dont want to repeat work that they are already doing. In terms of supervisor tang, and her office, have you been given clear direction on what to do next . She had requested the utility pole undergrounding effort in the report. I believe the report covers what she was looking for at this time. I believe in terms of fiber undergrounding that was supervisor mar, commissioner mar had discussed that and commissioner mar, if you would speak to that . I just wanted to say that im supportive of mr. Frieds suggestion that we accept the report and take a waitandsee for what the budget and legislative ao whether its municipal broadband or Publicprivate Partnership. I wanted to thank eric brooks and bruce wolfe from various Community Groups for raising the various issues and thanking jean glenen one of the activists from our neighborhoods for continuing to bring the issue of undergrounding. Hi mope whether its lafco or budget analyst or any effort that involves organized groups work on this issue. I want to say that with supervisor farrells office and others and senior organizations who are working on a Digital Inclusion task force that would look at how the economic and tech boom doesnt believe behind lowincome communities and that there is always a process where we engage our communities so that the city is doing everything that we can. So that the Public Institutions that we set up are really serving our communities and not just the various departments that set them up. So i wanted to say that we always have people from the various organizations speaking here and my hope is that even though were accepting the report and looking at a budget analysts report that were always seeking that input from the community entities. I wanted to thank you, mr. Fried. Okay. Very good. So we have had Public Comment on this item. Any member of the public who would like to comment . Good afternoon, im jean glenen from the San Francisco coalition to underground utilities. I mainly wanted to thank mr. Fried and the commission for their attention to this item. And i think its going to go a long way in our pursuit of this goal. And i hope we can count on your continuing support, as we try to put into place a plan that will actually rid our city of these ugly telephone poles. Thank you very much. Thank you. Good afternoon again, commissioners, eric brooks, San Francisco green party, our city San Francisco and also, cocoordinator of Public AccessSan Francisco. So i just want to thank lafco for geting this rolling. What is happening with the budget analyst sounds like its an exciting nextstep. Its a little funky because it sort of sounds like they are deciding werent we should do a public broadband system. I dont think where we are at. The issue is clear especially because of underserved communitis that we should do a universal citywide broadband system owned by the city and not a Publicprivate Partnership. I dont know if director fried can speak to it, but supervisor ammiano, when he was on lafco got the city to commission a very good study, i think back in 70 2007, i may have the year wrong, but scoping out public broadband in San Francisco if the budget analyst and others who are not looking at, should look at it and as soon as whatever word we get from the budget analyst and the others working on this, the next step for us should be to drive hard to get the ammiano study renewed. In other words, spend a little money to bring it up to date with current times, which shouldnt cost very much and either have the board or lafco do that. So that we can get this thing rolling and instead of discussing whether or not we should do it, discuss how were going to do it . So that is what i would recommend is making sure that we do an update of that study, either through lafco or the board of supervisors. Thanks. Thank you. And see nothing other member of the member of the public come forward well close Public Comment. Well move on to executive officers report. Madame clerk. I. 6 executive officers report. Thank you, jason fried, executive officer. First i wanted to introduce the person sitting next me, jabari, who has been interning with us over the summer, and lives in the east bay and we got him through james tracy, for those who know him, sent him to us and he has done an excellent job filling in random questions on various subjectmatter and he has been and able to do the research. He likes to study nonviolent direct actions as something that he has an interest in. So i know that fits well with a lot that goes on in San Francisco. I wanted to thank him for his work and introduce him, if you havent met him yet. Very smart, intelligent and has done a lot of very good work for us. First off i wanted to give a status update on the open source elections. As of kind of taking a step back and remind you, this was a report given to us through the board of supervisors. When we originally talked about doing this report, it was actually something that we were not going to be starting until right about now. Because we had so many other things going on, but we were able to find a very good and talented intern out of ucsf, who did her cornerstone project and she passed her cornerstone and was so talented she was already hired after graduating. So we no longer have access to her and brings me where we are now. What i am look at this point is probably taking the next probably next couple of months, i dont have a lot of spare and free time to work on it. To put in a little time and effort and recirculate it again comments. Because there were a lot of comments. The thing is to remember its a very technical item and you had myself and angie, the one who helped us do this report, starting brandnew and fresh. So i wanted to take some of the technical comments to figure out how to merge into a document for a nontechnical reader, for lack of a better term, because that is actually who the audience will be for this. Right now we have the comments that i will come back with you in future, once i have had a chance to get all of the comments put into place and recirculate it out, nor a second round of comments from everybody who gave us comments on the firstround for that report. The other item the cal lafco conference this time around they have an afternoon session on one of their days and they have two breakout sessions. One of them is on Climate Change. The other one is on broadband and i felt that fit very well within our purposes. I mentioned this at our last meeting. And there was some interest of possibly wanting to go. Just for that afternoon session. Its an expensive conference to attend fully. But what i got back from cal lafco if we wanted to attend just the afternoon session they would charge us 100 per person. Its 265 if you attend the full day, including meals and other things that are going on as well. If anyone is interested in attending please let me know. If no one is attending, im planning to go and can reportback. But im planning on going and i will reportback, if no one else attends with me. If someone else wants to attend, i would be happy to carpool. I might go the full day, because of the items relevant to staff rather than commissioners. If folks are interested, chime in; commissioner lindo. I wanted to thank jabari for coming and doing a lot of work and helping director fried. I know sometimes he is running out and pulling his hair out and having an extra set of hands im sure is appreciated and the work you have done is highcaliber. Hopefully we can discuss going, im very interested in attending the conference and that is a conversation that i would like to have. That is all i have. Thanks. Great. Commissioner crews. Thank you. Director fried, i spoke with him earlier today and let him know i have a work commitment. So i wont be able to attend. How to i thought it was really interesting to see that they are covering more of the special reportstypes of areas that our lafco is involved in. So i would be very supportive of you going and reporting back to us what you learned on the Climate Change and also the broadband areas. What is the date again . Date of those particular sessions is september 3rd in the afternoon; its in sacramento. So if anyone is interested, we would probably have to leave late morning if we wanted to carpool or to go on our own, i would get you the details commissioner crews. Chair, thank you. Just going back to the study on open source elections. I just want to echo the importance of having a pipeline and having studies in the queue. I think that was very important that we had that lined up. And whenever we have the opportunity to work with interns that are going to help you with those types of reports, i think we should very much take advantage of it, and have things in the queue. That is sort of leading into another agenda item. I dont want to get on that, but i do want to say that we should back up to agenda item 5, chair avalos. Okay. Yes. We need to make a motion to accept the report. So can we do that now . Commissioner crews. Just to accept the report on undergrounding and finalize it, so it can be released. Seconded by commissioner mar. Colleagues, can we take that without objection. Mr. Chair, that motion was under item 5, not item 6, correct. Correct. Do we have any Public Comment on the executive officers report . Hello, commissioners. My name is brent turner. I wanted to first start off by thanking mr. Fried, and also angie, who did report on the open source voting. I just wanted to mention to you that the speaker earlier talking about the Community Work for the electrical aggregation mentioned the words well, he didnt use the words green washing. But the nuancing of standards