One and two. Those are our true obligations. [reading notes] existing obligations to existing customers, 184 million gallons per day is our water supply assurance to wholesale customers. It is contained in the water supply agreement but it is also very clear the obligation exists regardless of whether it is in the contract with our customers. The rest of the 265 supply to retail customers in San Francisco. We need to bridge some gaps there. Some of the project may not deliver the full water supply that we anticipated. We need to make sure second, permanent and regulatory requirements to maintain healthy habitat. It could be a very large number of 293 million gallons per day to maintain our level of Service Goals while meeting the bay delta plan requirements. That may decrease based on the outcome of state negotiations or litigation. San mateo creek we are contributing about 3. 5 mgd. Alameda creek we have been streamflow which we are currently meeting and we will be bringing to the Alameda Creek recapture project where we are working to recapture some of that supply without disrupting the instream flow. The next water supply planning goals are addressing additional customer demands through 2040. The first is the request of san jose and santa clara to become permanent customers. We were trying to resolve by the end of 2018 we have now deferred to the water supply amendments up to 2028. That is a historic allocation level of 4. 5 mgd each for san jose and santa clara. Meeting increased demands protected by individual wholesale customers. San francisco, under the most recent urban Water Management plan we are looking at an increase of 1 million gallons per day, that will be refined in the upcoming urban Water Management plan. We are to anticipating hearing from the Planning Department are additional growth projections for San Francisco in terms of population and jobs. San jose is looking for an additional 4. 5 mgd above the interruptible guarantee he guarantee. Brisbane has a development which they are looking for 2 million gallons per day. East palo alto had a prior request of 1. 5 million gallons per day and that was resolved by transferring supply guarantees from palo alto. That only goes through about 2035 through that point in time. Those are with projections they look like they need additional supply at that time. What is mgd . Million gallons per day. Again, that covers the goals we are aiming for. And some are very and some are still to be resolved. We cant let time go by without Getting Started on the process. That is what we are looking at potential water supply projects. Can you go back a slide . Share. So, san jose and santa clara are not permanent customers. What i am seeing here is it would not only be historic allocation level, but it could potentially be at this increased level that they are requesting . Yeah, it actually differentiates those, the commitment level for us to reevaluate and make the hard decision on making them permanent at the 4. 5 mgd level. Since that time, since that was discussed back in 2,008 and 2,009, water supply agreement they have developed additional desires. 2008 and 2009, water supply agreement they have developed additional desires. The question of permanency at 4. 5 mgd level, we actually have to come up with an answer on that. We dont have an obligation to increase demands that are without their info form. We want to make sure the commission is aware that they are there i will be asked to confront that decision. We dont have an obligation on number three either, but we have to respond to them . Yeah, the obligation is to give them a definitive answer on that. Great. Thank you. When we look at number four, the goal for making increased demands projected, or even number three, when we look at that are we taking into consideration trying low flow toilets and all of the other things we are trying to do are we looking at that within . Is there a menu of things that they would have to do in order for us to give them this allocation . Everybody, you know, in our service area is doing a quite a good job on conservation. I think nicole can speak directly to that. For example, in San Francisco, we are down to about 42 gallons per person per day. Residential usage. That is based on heavy penetration of the marketplace for low flow factors fixtures throughout. Our wholesale customers as well come are doing a very good job. In the last ten years the bulk of them have been in the 85 gallon per day category. They are now down to about 65. They have made significant reductions. Similar types of programs and their areas which also includes much more suburban landscapes. Their big landscape modification programs that are underway throughout our service area. We are not in the position to tell them what to do, but we are in a position to work with them, and help support them in those efforts. Even if they wanted to become permanent customers we couldnt say, you know, working on getting you down to what San Francisco does, or at least close to it . Is there a goal for them . There is not a goal for them. I think that gets into an area where there may be some, you know, as discussion we have to have about what we can or cannot do. In terms of how they use the supply and their area. The fact that that san jose and santa clara are not permanent means they are not part of the 184 billion gallons per day supply assurance. We are obligated to provide. This is over and above. Exactly how we do that, we do have a little bit more flexibility. Thank you. I have a question on the sustainability goal. Maybe it is just semantics. As it is framed to meet our in stream requirements. It makes it seem like our sustainability goals are lobar rather than being Good Environmental stewards. I just want to quote go on record saying that. Meeting in stream requirements goal seems lobar to me. I talked to the commission in 2017 and we have been working with the City Attorney on how to move forward with those. Im hoping, this fall, potentially through the budget process of bringing you an updated set of Service Goals and objectives covering all things and beefing up the environmental part is part of that. This was done in 2,008. You are right, it is a minimum bar. I hope that is one of our goals. It is a lobar. We do have more to offer their that we can talk about when we bring the item back. Thank you. Lets look at the potential projects. I have broken them into regional and local projects. These are projects that are in the Tuolumne River area. Recycled water and purified water projects. When i say purified water, i mean, we are taking water to a whole new level and supply. Other projects, which helped make the other ones work better and i will talk about them in a little bit. But first, i want to include Regional Water supply projects be considered but did not include, they have been suggested to us before that we should somehow connect to the california aqueduct and become part of the state water project. I think we have no interest in doing that as part of a delta supply. Also, much as it might seem as a good idea to some people, i think that was a very difficult idea. I am not going to say never, because i have learned over time some things, you know, that you never expect to happen, do. I dont think that will happen anytime soon. Also, there is talk of a spillway raised there and we have not included this here. If they can convince us that is a good idea that we may want to frame the project in as well. There are some that we are not including, at this time, because we dont think they are right. The potential Tuolumne River projects. It is part of our proposed voluntary agreement. We have said that we will do Feasibility Study of that. This is actually a landmark thing that the irrigation district had never wanted to talk about that before. They have finally put that on the table. This would entail basically putting excess water where there are big flows in the Tuolumne River into the groundwater basin. So it is a healthy basin that the districts can then shift to in dry years. Leaving us with some of that flow on the Tuolumne River. There would also be an area dedicated to the Tuolumne River. It would be a package deal. One of the districts have never wanted to talk to us about. They are finally doing that. Interbasin collaborations between these rivers, particularly the stanislaus. The plumbing is close to each other. There might be ways we can operate the two rivers in conjunction to actually benefit, you know, the overall environment and users on both rivers on my thinking in terms of a Bigger Picture of water tools to manage. Lastly, dry year transfers. We continue to know that we are going to need to find some way to work a deal with the irrigation district for dry year water someday. Why do you think they havent wanted to talk about the groundwater baking. They see that as their resource, and they see us, i will repeat an anecdote that i heard when they talked about working with San Francisco before. One farmer reportedly got up and said, i dont want to transfer any water to those hippies in San Francisco. He was followed by another farmer that said ive got bad news for you, all of my relatives in texas think everybody in california is a hippie. It is just your perspective. They are very jealous of that. We work well together because of our water rights. But, you know, they are an Agricultural Community and they like to take care of agricultural folks first before they think about shipping water to other cities. That is kind of their deal. We did have a couple of Board Members on the tour of the system on the conversations were very good. Potential regional recycle projects. These are with daly city, alameda water project, Crystal Spring purified water in the Bigger Picture. On daly city, whips, too fast there. The picture on the left is plumbing with purple lines taking recycled water from expanded Wastewater Treatment plant and delivering water to the green areas which are irrigated areas in daly city and then the gold colored areas are the cemeteries and they primarily rely on groundwater at this point. The goal of this project would be to get them on recycled waters so than the groundwater basin can be used much more fully for the benefit of our system as part of the Regional Water system. We actually have money in the budget for this. This is a project that is actually moving forward. The next thing we need to do is work in agreement with daly city, our self and California WaterService Company who delivers water on a roles responsibilities going forward. The next is a map of the freemark yuba city area. It is the portable service boundary, the red boundary there in the upper lefthand corner. It is the el dorado Wastewater Treatment plant. That is where the sanitary district treats wastewater. To a higher level and then transport it to the quarry lakes which are right in the middle and into the groundwater. Then that water can be extracted into the facility which is blackish groundwater Treatment Plant. So, they run that from time to time. This would be a steady supply that will travel through the groundwater basin, to be treated there and our transmission lines go right through there. That water can be used directly by our Water District or it could be put into our Regional Water system and utilized that way. That is still to be determined. 23 Commission Meetings ago you approve the next phase of study. The next one is Crystal Springs purified water. This is work we are doing with Silicon Valley clean water. It is a nice fancy name. Potentially the city of san mateo as well. It shows sites where advanced Water Purification facility might be built. And then a potential Pipeline Route that would take water and could send it up to Crystal Springs reservoir. Where it would be blended with supply there. And then that water, as already established would be treated at the tracy water Treatment Plant. Both this and the previous project are purified water projects where we are basically treating wastewater into making water ultimately. Just like nature does. And then i dont have a map here for it. The other is looking at evaluating opportunities for all of the Wastewater Treatment plants in the service area. We know from other situations, it is a delicate relationship that you develop with the Wastewater Agency on that. On whos water it is and how it works. We are not presuming to tell them what to do there. We are just making sure we have identified opportunities. The next potential regional project is the reservoir expansion. Conveyance alternatives and the reservoir expansion. They have been proposing to expand that reservoir. They voted preliminary proposition one funding. They also have federal funding. They are looking at a large number of potential partners without project. This can work a lot of different ways to move water into it. It basically is just a storage volume. What kind of water you move in, when, where, and how . And then how you move water out to particular customers . We are trying to figure out if there are benefits without project. When we expand reservoirs that means we are Holding Water . Yes. That means that water is not going back into the aquifers, back into the ground, back into the sky and involved in what water does. Right. Are we doing anything to make up for that . The waters not going back into the ocean. How is that working . In this case you take water out of the system to move it into it. It does not have a big watersh watershed. It doesnt deflect local water drainage there. Is taking water of the system. Particularly in big years, they are built to take water as fresh as possible to improve the water in the contra costa Water District. It is the only time it would take water into it. This would look at different ways to put water in there. Again, from different mechanisms, all of these intakes work together. The one opportunity that we see looking at here is taking some a nation water from the delta potentially storing that. Are we looking at the ramifications of not putting water back into the underground system . Are we looking at that . Yes. This water doesnt work with the groundwater basin there. It all flows out and that is when you get into the whole bay delta discussion, how much water do you need to flow out to her how much do you divert for different uses. One of the uses here would be the Water District which would be using the water for wetland habitat. That they had developed in the central valley. There are different ways to use it, that is what the state money would pay for would be for that beneficial use that the public overall benefits from. Are we looking at the more reservoirs we build, are we looking at building more habitats in order to deal with that . I mean, the only way water works is when it does the cycle. It goes up and he comes back down. If it doesnt go up in the rate that it used to go up, what is going to happen ultimately . Every time you do a project like any of these you have to go through extensive Environmental Review process to identify the impacts that either will, or may occur and make sure that you mitigate for those in away that goes over and above just taking care of the problem. Making sure you actually make things better. That is the way we do business. Okay. I appreciate that. Thank you. If you look at the calaveras project, might be useful to take a look at some of the mitigation measures that were associated with that. Those are exactly the issues. We do acquisition of watershed land. We do a lot of watershed land protection. That would be perhaps a good case study to take a look at. What you are saying, when we do a project there is a mitigation that goes along with that . Always. That is good. Our case, these dams were built so long ago there were no environmental laws. We have been welcomed into the 21st century by others that we are doing our fair share now. What about going back into the ocean . I think colorado doesnt go back into the ocean anymore at all. The colorado river. They basically dried up that system. Theyre slowly and making improvements. The system is totally oversubscribed. We are not doing that and we are careful that no, we are not doing that. Dont laugh. Ive seen the colorado enough times that is a sad situation. Thank you. Back to the slides again. The bay area do, we have been studying this for some time with other partners, trying to figure out if there is a good place from an Energy Perspective so its less energy intensive. That is what we are doing, looking out the western end of the delta for that. That water could potentially be stored in the carroll reservoir, and would be moving from the system and a way that is protective of fish and wildlife. The big question on that one is how to move water to them in a place where we can actually make use of it which is like conveyance alternatives project in particular there is a redline there, the South Bay Aqueduct which takes water from the delta to the livermore valley. And the capacity of that conveyance system is in some question. If it cannot convey the water from the expanded it is not of any value to us. That is why we are intent on looking at that, but also in the hayward area looking at potential connection to our system. Those are both alternatives we will be looking at. And then the Calaveras Reservoir expansion, we could just about triple the size of that reservoir. In doing so that would give us an opportunity to store water from those large amounts of water that flow in really, really big years. We have talked about 2017 when San Francisco had 3 million acrefeet of water available but didnt have any place to put any piece of it. So that was actually, it would not even have helped to alleviate funding on top of everything else. We would have to be looking at conveyance of water periodically from the tuolumne system on the Calaveras Reservoir to make up for the supply. Is there any other way of doing things other than the reservoir . Are people looking at alternatives . Yeah. Also said if we could expand the reservoir. Im just thinking are there any ways to hold water other than building dams, or reservoirs. I mean, are there more progressive ways are there anybody anywhere on the face of the earth doing something different. Maybe beavers have they changed their plans yet . To make a system work particularly our system given our water rights. Ours is a storage bay system. The storage has to occur in a storage reservoir or in a groundlevel basin. You said ours is a storage based system. That means there is what are the other systems besides storage based . Those are the folks that divert from the river based on their water rights. Either you have to have storage or you have to have a steady supply of water. One of the other is necessary to make a water system work. That is why groundwater is starting to factor into these like the daly city project. Like the Union Sanitary district, how they use the groundwater and we can extend our supply. Like a reservoir but just , basically. That is the same issue with storm water. When we look at storm water supplies. You really dont have much use for it, because it is coming in a big shot all at once. If you can store it in metered out in different ways that is where we get the big benefit from it. A storage is key. Couldnt you also do some sophisticated system that is a closed loop concept theoretically . So the water comes in and we might not be there yet technologically but as a city there is a big storm. Rather than having to store it, we then can reuse it within our you are leading right into my next slide. Before you get onto the next one. We had a couple of storage projects in here where it says yield of storage. Storage produces yield, depending on how it is operated. I just dont want to lose sight of that. You dont build storage just to have storage you build it because there is a water supply benefit that is attached to that. I assume you havent put it in here because we dont know how its operated . Exactly. Perhaps a better summary of that would be not that the yield is not a storage it is undetermined. Twenty correct. The next slide im going to talk about a some of the local projects including east purified water, a San Francisco satellite recycled water facility. Innovations Program Including slides. The Innovations Program is really to try to look at, you know, a Grant Program or something to get frankly wild ideas. Different things that can be done. The ordinance is what people have done, in some cases where they have actually said to new developers, you have to find the water and bring it with you. That would be another thing there. The first one, you said purified water. I think this is a conceptual diagram that shows the southeast water control program is the black dot with a blue dash line going to a Storage Facility for water that is coming from the Wastewater Treatment plant. This would be purified water, where we would be treating wastewater in San Francisco and converting it directly to Drinking Water and bringing it into the Drinking Water system. It would lead to a tank not to a local reservoir or an underground basin. This is what we call direct portable reuse or purified water. Theres always going to be some residual, that you have to dispose of some way. You capture as much water as possible this way. I had not included this on the list originally when we started talking about this. But the commission said, why not . Regulations are being developed now they should be in place in about 20232024. Where you can actually do this. San diego is working their way in this direction, and other places. We want to be out there, certainly looking at it and saying, you know, can this work for us . Then the east side satellite recycle facility. We have a number of dual plum buildings there for which the ordinance has swept up a lot of the demand. A small facility located someplace to help meet the dual plumbing demands within part of San Francisco. The challenge on this is finding a location. I hear about empty lots that have stormwater charges. Finding an empty lot to build a Treatment Plant on is a little harder. A little bit about our organization. Have some questions about that, too. Ive heard a lot about distributed systems, if you will. Its combine some of the stuff youre talking it might youre talking about. It might serve an eco district, or that type of concept, or eventually in a single large Building Development potentially. Have you done any projections are planning on what the possibility or opportunity for that might be. The ordinance requires those with Development Size be included for thousand square feet need to develop their own plans. We are working with a number of developers on most plans for again largely on the east side. These are the leading candidates for the salesforce tower. They werent obligated to come they just felt like it was the right thing to do. I think that could be interesting and concept even to hold up what salesforce has done and say look, you too can be a leading star and sustainability by reusing your wastewater, or whatever it is. I know Technology Still has a ways to go, but it just feels like throwing everything in the mix at this. Would be worth considering. I dont know . We have a Grant Program to help people do that. We upgraded. We have been working on that to make sure. Were doing a Research Project right now on a machine in our building, it is a water Research Project to test it directly monitoring. What we have is a small treatment unit that produces portable water off that. I still keep nagging staff, i want a picture on my desk. I have not gotten it yet. I will be getting that. Im not drinking that. You drink it. [laughter] i will have seconds. A little bit on the organizational structure. This is a water effort but it does affect a lot of the division. This will be managed through our Water Resources division. We are adding some stuff there, project level staff, to work directly on these projects. It does connect to a lot of parts of the organizations trade you cannot just do a water project. A lot of these have complex institutional rates that need to be put together. And then the Capital Project timelines. Most of these are in the early planning stage. Were going to be moving forward on them. They will take quite some time in. Just to wrap it up, we are pursuing various projects. We are adding temporary positions to support it. The ultimate goal is still in doubt because we are not sure about the delta Water Quality plan. Most of the projects include one or more partners. They are in the early stage. We will be reporting to you on a regular basis coming back on our progress on these. Have a question. Thank you very much for your presentation. I mean, we talk so much about water supply, but we seem to be still set on our 265 modern demand number. I guess my question is, when are we going to revisit that. Since it seems like we have been pretty significantly under that amount now for a. Of time every sense voluntary or otherwise. I would also welcome his thoughts on that as well. You know, i am wondering when an opportunity to have a deeper conversation in addition to the water supply conversation would be around demand projections . We will be talking about demand projections. One thing we have, and that is a contractual obligation to deliver 184 million gallons per day, if the demand is there. That is supply supply assurance. I am sure talking with them about that would be fine. Its obligation we have and if they have, you know, demands that come to that level, San Francisco has an operation obligation to meet those demands currently. It is a complex conversation. Since the demand has not been that, does it mean we revisit the demand . I know there is some discomfort around that. And there is some assurances that are built in. We have talked about it. I am wondering as we talk about supply, it is hard to make some decisions. Maybe that is the number were going to stick with forever for the foreseeable future. I know we have contractual obligations. If indeed our demand is less that is applications for our demand around supply. Have to look at longterm. You cant just look at today. Were going to supply water for very long long time. I think you have to put that in the equation as well. I would like to weigh in on this also. In my short time here, it is pretty clear to me with the incredible, you know, system we have right now and the amount of both demand, contractual obligations and other issues that people come up with that this department is looked very deeply into the future. Just to target one particular number, seems to me, you know, a little bit short sighted. I saw, you know, a letter that was written today that says some of the projections and the ideas are irresponsible. I take offense to that as a commissioner. I believe, you know, singling out one particular number, you know, and set up an entire conference about that is not the perspective that this commission should have. There are a lot of issues, a lot of things that are moving forward. I dont want to get sidetracked by, you know, one particular number, or one particular issue. I like the idea that this department is looking into the future longer than short term. Thank you. Consistent with that, one thing that would help, the next to last slide you had up there was a chart of basically the Construction Forecast for the various projects. It would be really useful to have in some either a graphic, table or something, a projection both needs and sources. Some of those are easier to forecast than others. The big elephant in the room is the Water Quality control plan. Whether that happens, what forum and when, that is a big function that messes everything up. It would still be helpful to have, the various obligations that we see into the future, the various options we have for meeting those obligations and see how they line up. Where we have a big unknown like Water Quality control plan we can put something in, you know, as one scenario. Put it someplace else in another scenario. What that exercise does is it rationalizes the difference between demands and obligation. The contractual obligations. The contractual obligations are very longterm. The demand is current. Sooner or later they meet, probably, or might not. You can try to lay that out. I think that is the way you rationalize those discussions that sometimes sounded very much at odds. If you put it on a timescale, i think that will make more sense. I know that you have a Public Comment. Would you like to weigh in on this first . Certainly. I will be pleased to answer your questions. On the issue have demands, and i think i mentioned we are in the midst of updated regional demand process for all 26 agencies. That process started in july. We will complete it this fiscal year. My expectation is i will come to you beginning february is probably a good time when i will start to have, you know, the projected demands. What is that picture look like . When we start to do this, getting to your question of how we go about these projections. You have to look at, you know, what is the adopted land use and practice within jurisdictions. What is supposed to be your projected growth, how are you dealing with growth, population and employment. That is on your demand side. And then looking what will be due on the demand reduction side . I will tell you, the agencies, as steve mentioned, are highly interested in reducing their use as much as possible. There is multiple reasons for that. First, you know, there are the current, new legislative requirements making Water Conservation in california way of life. My Staff Members are going to the state board talking to them about how we are implementing that on a regional basis. She gave a whole day primer to them about the efforts we are taking to really challenge our agencies to really reduce their use and figure out what that means moving forward. I would be pleased to give you an update on that as that report gets closer to being done. That information is going to roll into this demand study. All of the actions of what further conservation can be do done. We have a big focus on outdoor use certainly. Also implement things like recycled water. Our agencies are very proud of the fact that they implement recycled water. Many parts of the service area. Particularly in the south bay. That said. They also do not want to pay for projects that they dont need. They also are concerned about the bottom line to the fact that they can reduce investments that you make. They pay two thirds of every dollar. They are very interested i dont think there is a competition here for this idea of trying to invest in something they dont need. Its trying to find the right investment. It balances what is also their need for making sure they have respect for the environment, but respect for the fact that they i would be pleased to give your presentation on that sometime around february and see if that is helpful to you. And then continue to work with sd. These will go out to 2045. That is our that said. There is a very good chance for my agencies, that number will not reach that by 2045. I dont know the answer right now. Our last process did. That doesnt mean that you dont have a potential obligation. That is an important thing to remember because that is a critical component of our relationship with you, contractual or otherwise. They will need to hold you to that. But we can have that conversation after we have the numbers and figure out what that means. That would be my preference. That is very helpful. That is exactly where i was heading. I would hope, and i think this is what commissioner moran was getting out as well as we are looking at these supply opportunities both from a cost, as well as need to be able to meet our demand. At the same time we are having the conversation of, you know, but actually are those demands. We do know that they are known at the state level. We are getting these development requests, and a lot of them. All of a sudden it is like whoa, there is another demand we were not anticipating, or projecting, or what have you. By desire, also, is to have an understanding. Number sometimes can be useful, to be able to say we are less than that number because it is xyz. Or it looks like way into the future we are going to be way over. I would hope, in San Francisco, we can be doing that demand projection work while we talk about supplies needed to meet demand. One of the things i think im partially why i was pushing, and i appreciate the presentation on this trade i have been in front of you pushing this issue of getting the supplies in front of you in starting this conversation more aggressively. This timeline is very long there is no decision youre going to make one way or another in the next two years that you wont have those numbers by the time you have to make some decisions. That is just the nature of these water supply projects and how long it takes for them to get developed. The numbers are very helpful. It is important and a helpful place to start. I go through the process with each of the agencies, where you going to meet this demand . You have San Francisco supply but you also have your own supply. Are you going to used recycled water . Lets balance that picture out so it actually makes sense. I think that helps everybody in the decisionmaking. I think you have Public Comment on this item. Before we go there i want to make sure the commissioners dont have anything else to say on this at the moment . If there is nothing else from the commissions i will open it to Public Comment and welcome yours. Thank you. I just wanted to remark on a couple of things. I appreciate the depth and breath of steves presentation. He started it with the level of Service Goals and i think that was very, very helpful i think that is where all of this flows from. The priority is keeping on in front, as you go through that, will be very important. And on the project list, and the project a single pages. The description of the project we are going to be dealing with these projects for a very long time. It has taught me a few things. One of the things is that coming up for these projects document them, so we are. That is not the problem is very, very helpful. I appreciate the effort. And then, the timeline thing is important. I am going to push you a lot on this, but respect the fact that this stuff is going to take a long time. It is critically important, you know, from your wholesale customers perspective. They are sitting back and having to respond to you. My presence here is the ability to say look, this is affecting us. Hopefully that will be clear as we go through this. And then lastly, just an appreciation for bringing this forward. I know i have been very persistent on this. The example with having a group within the staff that is focused on delivering this is one of the other key examples that i could take about trying to bring success to this. These water supply projects are very hard. They have multiple agreements. Not everybody is going to agree about them. To get them to be completed is going to be very difficult. That is a key component of success, i think. That completes my comments. We very much appreciate your persistence and keeping us on track. Thank you. I have a question. Probably from counsel. What was the difference between the mosca ceo comments that we heard, when she hit the microphone, and then when the chair actually let her stay and deal with Public Comment . What just happen there in terms of agenda Public Comment . I was confused by that switchi switching. The commission is allowed to ask any member of the public, or invite a speaker up to the podium to answer commissioner initiated questions. Is what happened . She came in answered your question . Yeah, i asked her to come up and answer my question. And then we went to Public Comment and it happened she had a Public Comment. For the record, i asked that question. I would like to know to a was received from peter at Tuolumne River trust regarding this item. Copies were forwarded to the commission yesterday and you also have copies placed in front of you. I just wanted to note that for the record. It will be placed in file. Thank you. Noted. Any other Public Comments on this item . Hearing none. Next item, please. That completes my report. Great. Thank you. Now, we are going to go to the next item. Item seven is the bay area water supply and Conservation Agency update. Good afternoon again. If i could have the slides please. I wanted to take my time today to walk through a recent study that we completed. I have provided a copy to each of you, i believe, at your spaces. This report is actually available on our website, as well, including all of the appendices which i will reference to what i am saying. We are calling it a cip comparison study. What we did with this as we surveyed nine water agencies, we interviewed them come on the west coast. What the summary report does is it presents a summary of their Capital Planning processes and recommendations for the p. U. C. The appendices include all of those. Its like a giant questionnaire that we sat through an interview process with each of the representatives from these organizations to really understand what they do in there cip . What makes their cip special . What works with our cip . And comparison. One of the questions you might ask is why would we do this . [please stand by] [please stand by] seattle, las vegas, metropolitan. Tried to pick a manageable number of agencies, some cities, some Water Districts, different sizes, basically, to get a range to say its not all just Water Districts, its not all small cities or big cities. One of the things, we found some Common Elements in c. I. P. S. Really, the big question is what is your c. I. P. . Its a document thats guiding your agency about Capital Planning, and how those Capital Projects are delivered . And then, it also becomes part of basically your financing mechanism, your ratesetting process. How do you intend to pay for these . And c. I. P. S often answer a lot of key questions. What are the benefits of the plan, what are the longterm costs, and how are they going to be funded . Basically, everything your rted payers would want to know why youre doing these projects. For you as a governing body, this needs to be something sufficient for you to make a decision because youre asked to say yes, the c. I. P. Is sound, included in our rate base, included in what our costs are, lets move forward in implementing it. It needs to provide information to your engineer, specific information for what theyre going to do. And then, for your rate payers, it has to provide the information to make them feel comfortable that theyre doing the right then, youve got the right suite of projects, and youre paying for them in the right way. So what we did is like i said, we sat down with these different agencies, and we did, like, paper interview and one more interview and essentially did a sidebyside comparison and how they were different. Did everybody do a project description . Did everybody do a map . Some things where you would go oh, thats intuitive, but interestingly, there were some differences between them. Big pieces. How do different agencies develop their c. I. P. S . How do they document their c. I. P. S, and then how much detail is in each of these c. I. P. S, and what is provided to the governing board, the rate payers, etc. . So all this is presented in the report. Theres summary tables for each of these, and then, the details is also in the appendix. But the end result can i ask a question . Yeah. So you said that our agency does record keep different than others. What do you mean by that . Can you provide an elaboration . Well, you do your report differently, and if you go back to the slides, please, its the first recommendation. Your c. I. P. Is not presented as a standalone document, so it is you get your budget packets, so when you do your budget workshops, its incorporated into the city budget, if you call up and say i would like a copy of your c. I. P. , there is no document that says this is San Francisco c. I. P. , and that is different than other entities. Is that a good thing or a bad thing . From my perspective, i think its a bad thing. It makes it difficult for transparency. Several years ago, i tried to figure out where are all the pieces of the c. I. P. That i was concerned about. This is for bosca. This is for me, and i think it might be for your rate payers, as well. So thats why i think its the key recommendation. I think that it would increase transparency for you. Just because it isnt all in one place . Because it isnt all in one place, so its hard to say what is the entirety of the sfccip . If i wanted to know something about a rate or if i wanted to know how much water we had, you know, in some reservoir or Something Like that, that would be probably be the reason as a rate payer i would question that. So i just wanted to know what your judgment was on that particular piece. Thank you. Youre welcome. At this point, so that we wont like it like we dont have anything, we do have a tenyear capital plan. We have them broken up in water, wastewater, and power. Youre talking about in a Financial Plan and everything all the stuff that goes with it, youre talking about just breaking it up into water and just having a water c. I. P. . No. You have a c. I. P. , but the document that you prepare for it thats available as a single piece is really, at least from is more of a a document thats presented to the commission as part of a presentation package. And then associated spread sheets that have the numbers. But together, thats not something thats put together for someone to say hey, heres what the c. I. P. Is. And and in a readable fashion. So i would probably have to see what youre talking about. Because, you know, the city is trying to coordinate the whole city c. I. P. , and weve been cooperating with them to present our c. I. P. Consistent with the rest of the city. So im just interested in what you know, how others would produce the c. I. P. Because were trying to be consistent with the rest of the city because, you know, the mayor wants to say whats the whole scity c. I. P. Absolutely. Again, these were just recommendations of things to consider because people different agencies do do it differently. One of the recommendations was active engagement with us early, and i put a check mark back on to it because thats being done this year, and its great. We think theres some benefit to providing a remore fat of the project data sheets to provide a narrative of the current project status, to again, in the c. I. P. Document not just where the project is going, with the eventual expectation of this project, but these projects are multiple years, and helpful to understand whats the current project description . Also, some idea of prioritization quality thaitive