But artificial turf because theyre concerned of the gopher holes they have in the park and they female that they identify artificial turf, which is more tornadmore i guess they movey from the rubber. Theres a call for an update and that you let me know and i appreciate you bringing that back to life. I think its an important highlight to explore and see if we can then replicate. I dont love artificial turf and it seems to somewhat defeat the purpose of green infrastructure. How does that help our sewer system . Thats a big fight at rec and park of having natural turf versus artificial turf. Having sons that play soccer and baseball, you step in the gopher holes and thats why its been something of contingency in rec and park. Of course, i was going to say the same thing and i recognise the gophers and the gopher holes. There must be some way to do it because i cant do anything in my backyard because these gophers are rough but i think there has to be something rather naturally and creative that we can do because it does seem rather to defeat the purpose, but i think there are two different goals and thats what we have to reconcile. Whackamole. [ laughter ] i think wea were setting upe meeting. Any other comments or questions . To the general public, comments, questions . Oh, i have a question, actually. You are going to get to th the i have a question on greenways, very specifically like the sunset you reported on. Why do they cost so much money and what am i missing . I mate hav might have to geto you on that. It took awhile tor u for us to k the pilot. That was one of the first ones we did and we worked with the public works to try to construct that and it took some time and probably still trying to finalize what that cost was. We know better now. The bids came in well. We had a good contractor and were anxious and happy to move forward on that project. I appreciate that. Referring to the irving thing, the 8 million. It was 8. 4. It just seems i just wanted to make sure. It seems so simple and i must be missing something that is involved with it. We could come back and report on that, to have you do that. Than thank you. Now if you could answer, commissioner, the next question. I was hoping to go through the waste water. I called the waste water first so you can answer it and wenandyou went ssip. Sarah, could you maybe speak to the cost because i have a better understanding because weve talked a lot about these projects. Theres a couple of things with the pilot block. We encountered problems with the steep learning curve and no staff that new about green infrastructure. The public works staff tasked with implementing the project needed to be trained from beginning to end on how to do it and ended up that the unit costs were higher than our engineers estimate and since that was a learning block, we then said, ok, lets document or Lessons Learned and try putting the next piece out to bid and so we had help from harlen, saying o, welok,well try it this way ane how the different ways can reduce our unit costs. What were finding is that teaming up with public works for design can be fine but for construction, putting it out to bid is more cost effective. So with this bid that were getting for the second phase of sunset, theyre much more align wialigned with the engineers estimate. It seems like it should be easier to implement or less costly. The reason it does cost that much is that were not just managing rain thats falling on the project. We have to capture whats called the drainage Management Area which so that infrastructure is draining stormwater from impervious services around the rain gardens. So the design, the grrating, the soils and plants are sooned ando capture unleinlet areas. Its engineered structured that requires sitespecific building interventions during construction and that is what generates the unit costs that you see for storm water management. Sunset boulevard has been our highest area, because we have infilinfiltration over 40inchen hour. With infiltrated 90 of al it during the rainy season. Ill have to learn more. It seems like a lot of money. We could do a presentation for you in more detail, if that would be helpful. Our next one that we do, that would be good. Ok, ill note that, thanks. So we finished the Sewer System Improvement Program update, and did we do a pub pubc comment. I believe so. You want to do the waste water one and start by responding to sophies question. Sure. Youre correct, when we first initiated the emergency declaration, we really didnt quite understand or know the actual costs. I think we were projecting it to be 2 million or 3 million, i believe, originally. We brought on a contractor, power engineering, a marine contractor and came in and looked at the project and the designs and they quantified that theres no way to build it for that amount of money. So we did change the first to a 5 million amount. Starting into construction, we had to change some of the construction methods, as well. We had to bring in a barge and actually build a barge at that location because we had to cross two bridges. The bridges werent working is we had to build a barge and walk our crane on to that barge and that required money. We had to change the shoring system to a coffer dam system. We had to change the shoring method and add a Monitoring System, a vibration Monitoring System for the palms t paper. Pipes. Of course, soils themselves are hazardous and we had to dispose of those in a legal way and those are the extra costs that we are looking at now. The good part is, actually, that our pipe is actually constructed and conducted, and so that leak that temporary pipe is fully connected and were looking to activate that in the effect couple onext couple of d. My concern is that it says that more poor soul conditions, limited waterside access, active marine life and delapidated and larger than expected void underneath the pipeline alignment. So i guess my concern is, what is it that youre putting this why should we think it will be better and, you know, when all conditions exyoand you having to shore it up, im concerned of the lifetime and what can happen because of the sentimentsediments, we dont kns in it. Its a temporary piping system. We have a permanent project which will reroute around, further away and around this access area. Sorry for the long story. Sounded like a typical day. [ laughter ] you can go ahead. I have to get the approval. Ask for the slides because sfgtv. There are no slides for this one. Im howard fung and for this, the waste water bee enterprise. Our forecasting extensions by six months or more or have cost variances for 10 above the approved budgets. The first one is the southeast plant, power feed and primary switch gear project. This is behind schedule because we need to rebid this project. Bids were due and received in may, but we had to reject the bids. And as harlin mentioned, were going do a prequalification process for this process, as well, so theres a lul little ln that time. The central bayside system, phase one, is behind the schedule. Phase one is to complete the design for the 35 level and we are currently extending out and were looking to reprioritize the remainder of the project and theres a little delay there. The permitted project, which is the southeast bay, the crossing replacement project, thats a long one. This is behind schedule, around eight months. We needed additional tame to incorporattime toincorporate thr the emergency contract and we anywayed to complete, of course, the sequa review. The rehab project, this one is projecting above the baseline budget due to higher costs from actual bids received. We did have to rebid, as well welcome and completion is slated for next year and that completes my report. Happy to answer my questions. Well a question i have has been answered, but im concerned when i look through the report and see the red dots. For example, on page 9, and also the time it takes to get up to speed on the project. And what can we do in the future so this isnt happening. Overall, i could see that weve never seen a report like this with so many red warning saints. Signs. Some of these projects, a lot of interdepartmental projects, sometimes their schedules are out of our control. We deal with mta and public works and depending how their schedule is, we have to coordinate because we only want to dig the roads once. We partner and caugh coordinatee projects with those agencies and it takes awhile and we get dragged along. Some of the other projects, were gettin getting higher bidd our prices rest that and some of the budget projects are higher. But overall, were trying to look at that to recoupe savings as we can. That makes sense, thank you. Put. I would just say that overall and this is were actually getting some data, not only in the bay area but nationwide, prices, construction prices are going through the roof with the tariffs and with the labor and were reaching out to atlanta, chicago and other cities experiencing similar situations with the other costs to see what strategies to do as an industry. Its challenging because you have to do these projects. We were fortunate enough before the water system improvement program, before the olympics in china, where prices went through the roof. And our program was trending a couple billion dollars over the program, but then, all of a sudden, you know, the economy just tanked and were the only game in town and getting bids 40 lower than the engineering estimates and everybody was a hero. So im hoping that this happens again. Is there any Public Comment questions . We have the presentation to acquire pg e asset. This is a let tear went out from the mayor and the City Attorney to pg e and we would just like to present to you what is in that letter so i ask barbara little to come up and present. Thank you. This item will be our first time in public talking about the information, about the citys nonbinding offer to purchase electric facilities from pg e. The offer was made on september 6th and it cover it was covered extensively in the news on september 8th. The commission has, of course, been engaged throughout the Development Process in closed session. This will be our first public presentment and there will be another session today for further q a and guidance from the council. Slides, please. So the nonbinding offer was made after extensive staff and consultant work. That work was conducted at the request of mayor breed and the board of supervisors and under the guidance of counsel, the City Attorney. This work was published in moose jaw. May. This is available online, on our website, sfwater. Org. If folks want to take a look, click power, about us and than n the link. Lets make sure everybody has the basics first. Sanfrancisco is a department sorry, sfpuc is a department of the city and county of San Francisco. We operate a Water Utility waste and stormWater Utility and it operates two retail electric service. Its hechhe power is a public utility serves city functions and new developments. City functions are like the muni system, the general hospital, the airport, fire and police stations, public schools. Some examples are the shipyard, mission rock, Treasure Island and clean power sf is a Community Choice program that serves electric supply only to businesses and residents here in San Francisco. Together, these two programs were serving 80 also of the electricity consumed in San Francisco. And that makes San Francisco the primary supplier of electricity in San Francisco. Pg e provides the grid services, and thats depicted hear. Here. The city has paid for both programs and thats 300 million a year if distribution fees by and over time, San Francisco has been reducing the Energy Dependency but in that grid, that reliance, we do encounter difficulties. These difficulties increase the cost luk like seen yes senior ae housing and theres safety and financial challenges. They have an alarming set of safety violations. They failed for bankruptcy protection and todays big news, theyre attempting to manage wildfire liability with planned power shutoffs in 30 counties and northern and Central California will be affected. Mayor breed requested a report to explore the options and that report, which i said was issued in may, identified three options that are listed here. And full independence depickettedepictedon the right,f public funds, oversight accountability, achievement of San Franciscos Climate Action goals i and that was identifieds the best option for San Francisco. So further exploration on acquiring pg e lor assets continued. This put the cost at a few billion dollars and the focus became answering this big question. This big question governed our study paths and informed nonbinding offer submitted to pg e and lets break this down. Can San Francisco purchase the assets . Were talking about electric transmission and distribution assets that serve San Francisco, the inventory and control, streetlights, everybody it takes to operate the system. Invest and separation costs. Thats the separation costs between that we will incur to modify pg e to create boundaries that they would continue to own and San Francisco would be the owner of between our systems and pg es allan the southern border and provide reliable, safe public service. Thats the cost to achieve the goals. These goals are included in operating, maintenance, Administrative Expenses and capital expenses. When we say consistent with our values on clean power content, were talking about the same supply costs incurring as an organization for our clean power sf program. Since were searching a portion of the city, its really only looking here at that increment were not serving, so about 20 , that last 20 . And equity. Wear proposing here to spend the same amount of dollars that pg es e collects as an operag cost. While meeting financial requirements, it means this program and the way we look at acquisition of pg e assets and operating a full scale utility throughout San Francisco, it would need to meet the same financial requirements that we currently operate under and that our waste water operates under. And then this chart illustrates that. We know we wouldnt go forward if we expected it would cost San Francisco more electric service. So we set a revenue ceiling by this black line, base on the other hand a projection of pg e rates over time and you can see this illustration goes out to year 2050. We calculated the operating costs and funded Capital Improvements for reliable, Sustainable Service and equity goals represented by the yellow line, the accumulation of cost to operate the utility, the electric utility serving all of San Francisco. We factored in the cost of the Purchase Price and thats represented by this Blue Triangle and the net revenues, the greenish triangle shows that all costs come in below the revenue so the acquisition is fundamentally sound. And we anticipate future rate savings for San Francisco at a 2. 5 billion offer price. That price was informed but our Due Diligence study efforts. And we utilized publically available information through the federal Energy Regulatory commission, securities and exchange and that pg e makes and relied on multiple experts noted here with jeffreys llc taking a lead role. Jeffreys is the largest u. S. Located independent bank. Together with these experts, we arrived at the nonbinding offer and theyre is the summary of that offer. The offer is the significant cash infusion to pg e at 2. 5 billion and thats a cash that the rate payers would not have to pay back. It would facilitate a timely emergence from bankruptcy with a premium valuation included there due to the unique expedited circumstances wed be in given the bankruptcy time frame. And its an offer for targeted assets that are identified here. More specifically, the 230 230150 kv transformers, street lights, Warehouse Service yards, systems, rolling stock, inven is in hope with pg e. Also on documentation and ancillary agreements, such as an approval from you, the sfpuc and board of supervisors and outside approvals from the bankruptcy and regulatory agencies. As we said in our preliminary options report in may, we also lacked furthelooked further at l fund. So first up, the pg e, our Analysis Shows modest impacts on other pg e rate payers that is fair to all customers. San franciscos leaving, we estimate, would increase other customers bills less than a dollar a month, much less than a dollar a month. The pending request, thats the california puc, would increase bills by 30 a month. The premium value that were offering in that 2. 5 billion offer includes a gain on sale, some of which can be used to make remaining pg e customers whole. San francisco is not pursuing this offer to avoid wildfire costs. The city will pay for and use the transmission services. Sanfrancisco will pay for operation and maintenance costs on the Transmission System and vegetations management and all things were paying for, we would pay for even were we to be become the provider of electric services for all of San Francisco. Thats the impact on others. So now lets take a look at what the impact is on San Franciscos general fund. The acquisition would be funded by revenue from electricity sales. These are funds that are only available if we actually go forward with the acquisition. Wear not drawing funds away from other city priorities. There