Building for use as for nonpotable and uses such as total flushing and irrigation. In 2015, this ordinance became a mandatory requirement for all new development over 250,000 square feet or greater. The ordinance under the mandatory requires the treatment and reuse of gray water, rainwater and Foundation Drainage to meet toilet flushing and irrigation demands. And this ordinance is applicable city wide. Next. Just wanted to share with you a few examples of some of these nonpotable water projects. Obviously our headquarters at 525 golden gate we have installed and engineered wetland treatment system to capture and treat our water for toilet flushing and irrigations. The center opted to collect Foundation Drainage, as a voluntary project to collect it and treat it and reuse it to flush toilets, approximately 200 toilets. As well as to build a truckfill station for department of public works to pick up the water for streetcleaning purposes. Another example is the chase center. This actually is a project that falls under the mandatory requirement. The chase center has a system designed a system to collect graywater and rain water to flush toilets throughout the center, as well as the adjacent Office Buildings next to the arena. Next. Weve been doing a lot of analysis over the past few years about the nonpotable ordinance and we recognize that theres an opportunity to further increase potable offsets from new developments and New Buildings in San Francisco. Weve also had the opportunity to streamline some of the requirements. And also provide for increased opportunities for more costeffective systems. Next. So these proposed nonpotable water ordinance amendments, that were proposing, is that convert commercial buildings, that they capture and treat blackwater, all of their wastewater not just graywater. Weve seen some buildings only being able to reduce about 20 of their potable offset, if theyre using gray januarywatt, unlike our building, were able to use 100 of the water to flush toilets. So we can certainly see a greater opportunity to save potable Drinking Water. Also within the multifamily, residential and mixeduse residential building sector, we want to add an additional enduse and thats for clothes washing demands, in addition to the toilet flushing demands. And finally, the other amendment that were proposing for getting into the buildings is that for new developments that have more than one building, for example, the chase center, the project i just shared with you, to install one treatment system to share that water with several buildings within that new development project. Next. Were also proposing some exemptions in the nonpotable ordinance and this is to exempt 100 Affordable Housing and homeless Supportive Housing in San Francisco. Also to exempt Hospital Health service and Institutional Health care facilities. And, finally, facilities that are zoned for production, distribution, repair and industrial use. We have recommended that we eliminate the requirement to collect and treat and reuse rainwater. Certainly can be voluntary in nature. But to not require it as weve seen it to really provide just a small potable offset. And finally theres some additional modifications that our partner in this, the San Francisco department of Public Health is proposing in terms of penalty structure, as well as their application fees. Next, please. Also wanted to share with you a few recycled water ordinance updates that were proposing as well. Next. The recycled water ordinance has been in effect since 1991. The recycled water ordinance applies to new or remodeled buildings over 40,000 square feet, as well as new and existing irrigation over 10,000 square feet. And the recycled water ordinance, unlike the nonpotable ordinance, is just designated areas in San Francisco and its shown on the map, in the purple area. And the recycled water ordinance also requires the installation of dual plumbing to serve the toilets. Next. And our planning for recycled water, just to also provide a little context, really our traditional approach has been to assume centralized recycled Water Treatment plants on both the west side and the east side of San Francisco, to produce recycled water for nonpotable purposes. But our planning really has evolved over the last 25 years. That really has to do with San Francisco geography and landscape. As we all know on the west side of San Francisco, we have large irrigated landscapes such as golden gate park, and on the east side we have much more dense housing, as well as commercial development. Next. Weve certainly been working very hard on centralized recycled water opportunities. We have completed the recycled water construction at both the golf course in the city of pacifica and the hardin Park Golf Course project. And were completing the construction of the west side enhanced water recycling project on the west side of San Francisco, the ocean side treatment plant. That plant should be up and running in 2021 and will serve golden gate, linkin Park Golf Course and the San Francisco zoo. Next. And so really our proposal is to rescind the recycled water ordinance, as i discussed earlier since 2015. The nonpotable ordinance requires all new large buildings to treat water for onsite treat water on site for toiletflushing and irrigation. Really the ordinance really captures the majority of the new indoor and outdoor demands there is a limited value to for the demands in the ordinance. As well as we see a much greater opportunity in the future, certainly in terms of greater water supply opportunities to treat wastewater for source of drinking purposes. Next. And so in conclusion, we see that the recycled water, the centralized recycled water project, as well as the project that falls under the nonpotable ordinance, will meet 90 of all of the feasible nonpotable demands that we see today in San Francisco. We are, however, studying the opportunity for a satellite, recycled Water Treatment facilities to serve the existing dualplumed buildings, as a result of the recycled water ordinance to meet the remaining 10 . We also have a Grant Program that provides Grant Funding for buildings that have and installed dual plumbing. An example of that is the sales force tower. They did apply for a grant and went ahead and are in the process of installing an onsite system. And again as i mentioned, looking forward and certainly to the future, there are greater water supply opportunities to treat wastewater for Drinking Water purposes. Were certainly seeing this kind of application throughout california, as many communities are benefiting from purified water, including san diego, Orange County and monterey. And im happy to take any questions or any comments that you may have. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioners . Thank you. I have no questions. Thank you. I assume youre coming forward with legislation for the commission at a further date . Yeah. Rescinding . Yes. We estimate that the drafted legislation will be done by the end of october. Okay. Thank you. Okay, without any further commission comments, madam secretary, this is the point we were going to open this up for Public Comment, right . Clerk for items 7 a and 7 b. Members of the public who wish to make up to four minutes of Public Comment on items 7 a and 7 b dial 415 6550001. Meeting i. D. 146 500 3304 and pound, pound. To raise your hand to speak, press star. And please identify which item or items youll be speaking on when you call in. Thank you. Mr. Moderator, do any callers . We do have some callers in the queue. Clerk thank you. Operator caller, you have been unmuted. You have as much time as you specify in terms of which items youre going to speak to. Thank you, acting chair and members. Alita dupree for the record, my pronouns are she and her. Im going to speak a little bit on both a and b. Concerning a i appreciate the continued focus on keeping safe in this crisis, that is covid covid19. I think the opportunity for atwork home is something that i would hope would become a new normal, one way that people can be more productive and to save money by not commuting is to work at home. And it makes their paychecks go farther and i think its a benefit that can help promote longevity at the sfpuc. And as far as reducing the interaction with people to continue to work on ways that people can pay their sfpuc bill without having to go somewhere in person. Just because the person is unbanked, doesnt automatically mean that theyre restricted to cash. There are many opportunities out there that i would hope can be looked at. Moving on to b, i certainly advocate conservation. I think the exemptions that are mentioned about Affordable Housing and health care, i think that needs to be investigated as to why we are proposing exemptions, when i would like to see people who live in Affordable Housing and homeless facilities be able to participate in this form of conservation, as well as health care facilities. This really needs to be an all hands on deck. The least expensive gallon of water is the one that we dont use. And i support conservation because the fewer gallons of water we can import from hetch hetchy, lower the perunit cost for everybody. My water bill last month was 21. 85. So lets continue to work on maximizing the use of our water and continue that very much. Thank you. Operator thank you, caller. Madam secretary, there are no more callers who wish to speak on these items. Clerk thank you. That closes Public Comment on item 7 a and 7 b. The next item under the g. M. Report is item 7 c, presented by michael carling. Good afternoon, commissioners. First, id like to take just a moment to express my appreciation for president caen and Vice President vitor. I actually started at the p. U. C. When president caen came onboard. And so ive been here as long as her. And my First Experience with Vice President vitor was the night we adopted the water supply improvement program, programmatic e. I. R. And i sat there and rewrote a program in the resolution with her. So that was my First Encounter with her and i enjoyed working with her all these years. Both of them. Thank you for allowing those comments. Im here to talk about the voluntary agreement negotiations that are ongoing with the state. We have another meeting with the state team this thursday. The subjects that we will be discussing are mainly around habitat. The state has proposed an increase in the number of acreage of habitat to be proposed. They would like 160 acres of habitat restored. Weve asked for information from them of why that habitat is needed and what the benefit will be derived. Because it was their proposal and we need to understand. Weve had tentative agreement on predator control. There are nonnative fish that eat the native fish, especially when theyre young, fry or smelt. So we have agreement on a predator control program. And were still negotiating on gravel augmentation and wanting to breed in the upper river for fish spawning. We still have discussing critical water. This is one of the biggest subjects that we are at right now. As you know, water types go by wet, above normal, below normal, dry, and critical. So a number of dry years would actually lead to critical years when not that much water is available. We have a proposal on the table and were still discussing with them whether or not that proposal is adequate. And how maybe we kind of enhance that proposal, so we can get agreement on that. So thats where we are in the voluntary agreement at this point in time. Id be glad to answer any questions. Thank you. Commissioners, questions for mr. Carling . Mr. Maxwell, youre on mute. I have a question. Why do you think were so far off in the restoration . I mean, its half. We are saying 80, theyre saying 160. What is why are we so far apart . Its 80 plus 160, so it would be 240. Its an additional 160 acres theyre asking for. And we dont know how much acreage we can actually restore on the river. And they have offered we cant restore on the river, we can go outside of the watershed and restore some place else. We need to understand what the benefit is so we can explain why youre investing your money in that habitat restoration. I think i must have missed something. I thought you said we were at 80. And they were at 160. No. Thats my fault. I should have said it was additive. That was my fault. Okay. So they want to add another 160 to our 80 . Correct. So what goes into them thinking that we can do that . I mean, they did so analysis, right . I mean, im assuming that they did an analysis and im assuming they looked at things and said, wait a minute, i think they can do another 160. We dont have that analysis at this point. Weve asked them for that. That was something weve asked for several weeks ago. And we still have not received it. So i just a little while ago i asked for it again. And did you get any idea of when . Well, i hope before thursday when we meet with them again, so we can discuss that item. Okay. Thank you. Any questions . Clerk youre muted, chair moran. Im sorry. Thank you. Mr. Kelly, do we have an item under 7 d . Yeah. I just wanted to take this opportunity to express my appreciation for both commissioners ann caen and francesca vitor resigne vito. I have known francesca under willie brown. The First Department head of the department of environment. We, you know, the City Engineer at the time really helped me change the way i thought about Capital Projects from an engineering perspective to more of a Community Environmental perspective. I think her value on the commission has been fantastic. I think that she has really helped move this big Large Organization in a way that we, as you mentioned, commissioner moran, into a greener space. And she is a really good friend of mine. So im really going to miss her pushing the organization. And i know that sophie is going to push as well. And then also, you know, ann caen has been really a solid commissioner with a lot of expertise, as it relates to the history of the organization and her leadership on the budget. And then also really making sure that we live up to the commitment in the southeast, as it relates to the biosolid digester projects. So i just wanted to thank both of them for the time served at the p. U. C. Commission. I think their service has been tremendous and it really has been, you know, helping this organization be what it is today. And i just wanted to say thank you to both of them. Thank you, harlan. And i think we all share those sentiments. I appreciate your Public Comments on that. Commissioners, any other comments or should we go to Public Comment . Seeing none, well move to Public Comment. Clerk members of the public who wish to make up to four minutes of Public Comment on items 7 c and 7 d dial 415 6550001. Meeting i. D. 146 500 3304 and pound, pound. So raise your hand to speak, press star 3. Again please identify which item or items you wish to speak on when you are called upon. Mr. Moderator, do we have any callers . Operator madam secretary, there are callers in the queue who wish to speak to this item. Clerk thank you. Operator caller, your line has been unmuted. This is peter with the river trust. I wanted to comment on the voluntary agreement. A couple of weeks ago presented you with a letter signed by a member of the environmental and Fishing Group that alerted you to peer review of the irrigation districts fish model. It was commissioned by the National Fisheries service. And it found that habitat improvements and predator control would pale in comparison to higher flows. Now we encourage you to take a look at this, perhaps at a workshop. And really think about what youre backing here. Now maybe you can get away with voluntary agreement. And we dont see the improvements and people put up their hands and say we tried. But we know that they really have a poor chance of performing. And this is a really important time. Were going to see the extra salmon on the river. Staff is not interested in that. Theyre going to wait until the irrigation district responds with their technical review. Thats going to say more of the same. They obviously have a vested interest in not giving up water. But we shown over and over again the sfpuc is not threatened with running out of water. We dont have these discussions. Its really disappointing. Staff keeps coming back with voluntary agreements. The reason theyre stalled out, staff and state agencies know that theyre destined to fail, unless drafted improvements. They have to push for more water and be supportive of that. Thank you. Operator thank you, caller. There are no more callers in the queue, madam secretary. Clerk thank you. Public comment on items 7 c and 7 d are now close the. The next item, mr. Chair, is item number 8, results and followup actions for covid19 Employee Pulse survey number two. This will be presented by justine hinderwhitener. Commissioners, i should have a presentation mr. , moderator. Great, thank you. Good afternoon, commissioners. Im the chief officer for our wonderful organization. And before i dive into