San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
Budget Development FY 2022-23 and FY 2023-24 Operating & Capital Budget Requests Summary of Questions from Commission Meeting: January 7, 2022 Enterprise Ref Commissioner
Question Lead
Responder Response
Overview - Budget Development
PUC-wide OVR1 Ajami Requests enterprise debt service costs, by principal and interest for 10 yrs. Perl Requested information has been provided and attached PUC-wide OVR2 Harrington What is the value of a FY23 3% inflationary rate increase for water/wastewater; what is impact on capital plan?
Perl Requested information has been provided and attached PUC-wide OVR3 Ajami Requests historical data on how revenue is spent by enterprises and by cost categories.
Perl Requested information has been provided and attached PUC-wide OVR4 Harrington Has sales volume sensitivity analysis been done and what are the effects on slide 34? What is the effect of the drought surcharge (expected 2.5 yrs.) on the
financial plan?
Perl Requested information has been provided and attached. Sensitivity analysis will be included in the financial plan report associated with the financial plan adoption on February 8, 2022.
PUC-wide OVR5 Ajami Requests per capita water use and changes over time with sensitivity analysis. Perl Staff will incorporate in the financial plan report to be provided to the commission on February 8, 2022.
PUC-wide OVR6 Moran/Ajami Requests historical and projected graph showing available Water supply volumes as compared to actual Water Sales.
Perl Requested information on historical per capita usage will be included in FY2023 10 YFP report appendices for Commission adoption
Infrastructure Budget Proposal
Infrastructure INFR1 Harrington Infrastructure has had a higher vacancy rate so they are available for future projects. Is there anything in the budget that will make this better? Johanson Infrastructure has not included anything specifically to address the vacancy rate. We will work closely with the new Chief People Officer to overcome various barriers and challenges in hiring such as Citywide testing, the impact of COVID -19, and the retirement of a significant number of City employees.
We will provide an update on our progress
later on this year after we have the opportunity to work with the new Chief People Office and the General Manager.
Infrastructure INFR2 Ajami Has there been a analysis of PUC jobs vs the marketplace? Requests analysis of pay levels of PUC engineers vs marketplace.
Johanson Salary negotiations for SFPUC engineers involve DHR and Local 21. Past practice has been for Local 21 to conduct salary surveys based on the 5207 Associate Engineer classification. This classification required the employee to have a PE license issued by the State of CA. DHR requires that the salary surveys be restricted to 22 jurisdictions within the Bay Area.
Infrastructure INFR3 Paulson Looking forward to policy changes for LBEs and workforce development contracts
Johanson With regard to workforce development work, the Infrastructure Division and the SFPUC collaborate with the Mayor’s Office of Economic and Workforce Development (OEWD) and partner with OEWD’s City Build program that works with the community and the Building and Construction Trades to identify candidates for City Build's pre-apprentice training program and later indentures the participants into Union apprenticeship programs. Additionally, under the SFPUC’s Project Labor Agreement, the Infrastructure Division and the SFPUC partner with OEWD’s City Build and the Building and Construction Trades and Affiliates to conduct outreach to identify community members who can participate in State approved Apprenticeship Training Programs to develop and train workers for Union jobs and opportunities on SFPUC capital projects.
Relating to outreach to potentials bidders for SFPUC contracts, the Infrastructure Division conducts targeted email campaigns for each contract, throughout the procurement process, communicating with relevant businesses and available LBEs in order to raise interest in the project, remind potential bidders of important events and deadlines and encourage multiple teams to participate in the bidding and proposal process. Additionally, the Infrastructure Division conducts public pre-bid and pre-submittal meetings to ensure uniform access to information about the projects. And, in some cases, follow up phone calls are made to businesses that expressed interest in the project, but may not have bid, so that the Infrastructure Division can make adjustments to future projects to increase competition.
Hopefully this addresses the question at hand, please let us know if further clarification is required.
Infrastructure INFR4 Ajami Requests statistics of staff with engineering degrees but not PE, with demographics.
Johanson There are a total of 20 engineers without PE licenses (14.6%). By Bureau the breakdown is EMB 13, CMB 4, PMB 3.
Civil Service Engineering Classifications 5201 and 5203 do not require a license.
Human Resource Services Budget Proposal
HRS HRS1 Maxwell Requests data for why staff vacancies are occurring; is there an attempt to conduct exit interviews?
Gardunio Requested information has been provided and attached External Affairs Budget Proposal
External Affairs EA1 Harrington Requests details about Advancing Environmental Justice through secondary land use strategies and air quality monitoring
Ordikhani/Lam The SFPUC Environmental Justice and Land Use program implements the SFPUC Environmental Justice Policy throughout the agency, develops secondary land uses on SFPUC properties, and advances activities that benefit environmental justice communities impacted by SFPUC operations. SFPUC will further assess SFPUC properties for additional secondary land use opportunities that provide public benefit, building on the program that developed three sites for urban agriculture uses in partnership with community-based organizations. Additionally, SFPUC will support air quality monitoring at the Southeast Community Facility, including providing publicly accessible data.
External Affairs EA2 Harrington Requests dollar amounts for substitutions Appendix B1 Perl Requested information has been provided and attached
SFPUC 10 year Projected Debt Service
FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 FY2031 FY2032 Water Existing Debt:
Principal Payments 130,254,656 140,114,353 145,554,547 157,050,242 162,806,444 168,348,159 175,760,390 184,378,144 191,006,426 199,905,240 Interest Payments 204,729,512 199,093,281 193,125,654 186,597,098 179,416,538 171,818,816 163,806,438 155,342,303 146,980,750 138,683,993 (Less) Capitalized Interest - - - - - - - - - - Water New/Proposed Debt:
Principal Payments - - - 8,107,579 8,417,423 15,293,440 15,894,943 24,492,464 25,467,667 26,481,739 Interest Payments 8,622,516 14,781,456 22,519,960 27,895,446 36,998,301 43,268,886 42,667,383 41,882,751 50,040,334 76,470,433 (Less) Capitalized Interest (8,622,516) (14,781,456) (21,288,172) (13,266,007) (21,573,205) (16,136,055) (14,791,384) - (9,132,786) (36,576,956) Total Water 334,984,169 339,207,634 339,911,988 366,384,358 366,065,501 382,593,246 383,337,771 406,095,662 404,362,391 404,964,449 WWE Existing Debt:
Principal Payments 38,148,485 40,944,650 44,221,241 46,291,980 51,667,452 53,765,369 55,965,595 58,273,167 60,698,120 63,240,489 Interest Payments 88,713,740 92,162,372 93,110,050 91,653,482 91,877,835 91,337,541 88,973,004 86,491,387 83,886,425 78,505,529 (Less) Capitalized Interest (13,317,950) (13,317,950) (1,701,738) - - - - - - - WWE New/Proposed Debt:
Principal Payments - - - - 11,236,359 20,042,448 33,453,075 45,075,872 46,859,539 61,923,129 Interest Payments 1,707,145 21,758,412 37,890,542 63,089,898 82,010,471 84,142,166 113,023,219 111,505,655 109,721,988 110,236,302 (Less) Capitalized Interest (1,707,145) (21,758,412) (37,890,542) (51,139,883) (52,826,711) (34,252,338) (41,314,097) (32,618,072) (13,590,863) (2,665,846) Total Wastewater 113,544,275 119,789,072 135,629,553 149,895,478 183,965,407 215,035,186 250,100,796 268,728,009 287,575,208 311,239,603 Power Existing Debt:
Principal Payments 1,972,764 1,589,797 3,598,606 3,747,524 3,896,555 3,760,097 3,638,432 3,810,635 3,997,869 4,175,134 Interest Payments 7,062,693 6,999,335 6,885,114 6,712,902 6,533,618 6,341,934 6,157,975 5,972,380 5,787,108 5,592,733 (Less) Capitalized Interest (5,130,050) (5,130,050) - - - - - - - - Power New/Proposed Debt:
Principal Payments - - - 2,415,745 2,506,335 2,600,323 8,128,211 8,446,595 8,777,461 13,829,913 Interest Payments 2,055,750 4,111,500 4,111,500 9,190,464 14,213,573 14,119,586 19,309,221 24,363,387 24,032,520 23,601,199 (Less) Capitalized Interest (2,055,703) (4,111,406) (4,111,406) (5,113,636) (10,227,273) (10,227,273) (5,372,515) (10,745,031) (10,745,031) - Total Power 3,905,454 3,459,176 10,483,814 16,952,998 16,922,809 16,594,667 31,861,323 31,847,967 31,849,929 47,198,980 Total Existing Debt
Principal Payments 170,375,906 182,648,801 193,374,393 207,089,746 218,370,451 225,873,625 235,364,417 246,461,947 255,702,415 267,320,863 Interest Payments 300,505,945 298,254,988 293,120,818 284,963,482 277,827,991 269,498,290 258,937,418 247,806,070 236,654,283 222,782,256 (Less) Capitalized Interest (18,448,000) (18,448,000) (1,701,738) - - - - - - - Total New/Proposed Debt
Principal Payments - - - 10,523,324 22,160,117 37,936,211 57,476,228 78,014,931 81,104,668 102,234,781 Interest Payments 12,385,411 40,651,369 64,522,002 100,175,808 133,222,346 141,530,638 174,999,822 177,751,793 183,794,842 210,307,934 (Less) Capitalized Interest (12,385,364) (40,651,275) (63,290,120) (69,519,526) (84,627,188) (60,615,665) (61,477,996) (43,363,103) (33,468,680) (39,242,802) Total Projected Debt Service 452,433,897 462,455,883 486,025,355 533,232,834 566,953,717 614,223,098 665,299,890 706,671,638 723,787,527 763,403,032 Reference OVR1
Water Enterprise
Scenario 1 - Result of 3% retail rate change in FYE 23
FY23 Plan
FYE 23
0% retail rate change
5% drought rates
FY23 Plan
FYE 24
5% retail rate change
5% drought rates
FYE 23
3% retail rate change
5% drought rates
FYE 24
5% retail rate change *
5% drought rates
FYE 23
Change from
FY23 Plan
FYE 24
Change from
FY23 Plan
Retail revenue 326.0 368.8 334.2 378.0 8.2 9.2 Scenario 2 - Result of no drought rates in FYE 23, FYE 24 FY23 Plan
FYE 23
0% retail rate change
5% drought rates
FY23 Plan
FYE 24
5% retail rate change
5% drought rates
FYE 23
0% retail rate change
No drought rates
FYE 24
5% retail rate change
No drought rates
FYE 23
Change from
FY23 Plan
FYE 24
Change from
FY23 Plan
Retail revenue 326.0 368.8 312.9 339.4 (13.1) (29.3) Scenario 3 - Result of no drought rates in FYE 23, FYE 24 AND 3% retail rate change in FYE 23 FY23 Plan
FYE 23
0% retail rate change
5% drought rates
FY23 Plan
FYE 24
5% retail rate change
5% drought rates
FYE 23
3% retail rate change
No drought rates
FYE 24
5% retail rate change *
No drought rates
FYE 23
Change from
FY23 Plan
FYE 24
Change from
FY23 Plan
Retail revenue 326.0 368.8 320.8 348.0 (5.2) (20.8) All else equal, if the 0% rate change for FYE 23 was modeled at a 3% retail rate change, AND the 5% drought rates remained in place, the resulting retail revenues would be $8.2 million higher in FYE 23 when compared to the FY23 Plan. The question was posed as to how this impacts the capital plan, and the simple response is that the value of the 0% vs. an alternative retail rate increase is not directly tied to a specific impact in the 10 year capital plan. While total Enterprise projected revenues provide the are a source for the 10 year capital plan, the development of the 10 year financial plan forward projection of revenues is done independently of the initial development and drafting of the 10 year capital plan. *while 5% retail rate change is consistent with the FY23 Plan assumption for FYE24, part of the change in FYE 24 dollar values is also from the compounding effect of the 3% modeled rate change in FYE 23
Reference OVR2 & OVR4
Wastewater Enterprise
Scenario 1 - Result of 3% retail rate change in FYE 23
FY23 Plan
FYE 23
0% retail rate change
5% drought rates
FY23 Plan
FYE 24
8% retail rate change
5% drought rates
FYE 23
3% retail rate change
5% drought rates
FYE 24
8% retail rate change *
5% drought rates
FYE 23
Change from
FY23 Plan
FYE 24
Change from
FY23 Plan
Retail revenue 368.3 428.5 379.3 441.3 11.0 12.8 Scenario 2 - Result of no drought rates in FYE 23, FYE 24 FY23 Plan
FYE 23
0% retail rate change
5% drought rates
FY23 Plan
FYE 24
8% retail rate change
5% drought rates
FYE 23
0% retail rate change
No drought rates
FYE 24
8% retail rate change
No drought rates
FYE 23
Change from
FY23 Plan
FYE 24
Change from
FY23 Plan
Retail revenue 368.3 428.5 352.5 392.4 (15.8) (36.2) Scenario 3 - Result of no drought rates in FYE 23, FYE 24 AND 3% retail rate change in FYE 23 FY23 Plan
FYE 23
0% retail rate change
5% drought rates
FY23 Plan
FYE 24
8% retail rate change
5% drought rates
FYE 23
3% retail rate change
No drought rates
FYE 24
8% retail rate change *
No drought rates
FYE 23
Change from
FY23 Plan
FYE 24
Change from
FY23 Plan
Retail revenue 368.3 428.5 363.0 404.1 (5.3) (24.5) All else equal, if the 0% rate change for FYE 23 was modeled at a 3% retail rate change, AND the 5% drought rates remained in place, the resulting retail revenues would be $11 million higher in FYE 23 when compared to the FY23 Plan. The question was posed as to how this impacts the capital plan, and the simple response is that the value of the 0% vs. an alternative retail rate increase is not directly tied to a specific impact in the 10 year capital plan. While total Enterprise projected revenues provide a revenue source for the 10 year capital plan, the development of the 10 year financial plan forward projection of revenues is done independently of the initial development and drafting of the 10 year capital plan. *while 8% retail rate change is consistent with the FY23 Plan assumption for FYE24, part of the change in FYE 24 dollar values is also from the compounding effect of the 3% modeled rate change in FYE 23
Wastewater Uses of Funds
FY 2017-18 to FY 2023-24
FY 2017-18
Adopted
FY 2018-19
Adopted
FY 2019-20
Adopted
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Adopted
FY 2022-23
Requested
FY 2023-24
Requested
General Reserve - - - 0.4 - - -
Programmatic Proj ects 7.3 8.2 7.3 8.7 8.6 6.7 6.7
Services of SFPUC Bureaus 28.7 28.4 29.9 33.0 36.4 34.8 36.0 Cap ital Projects 47.5 112.8 113.0 107.9 110.3 83.0 93.0 Non-Personnel Operating Costs 63.0 62.1 66.9 74.6 79.4 75.1 77.8 Personnel 70.2 71.6 75.8 76.3 82.1 84.7 87.3
Debt Service 78.6 65.6 70.7 85.0 95.2 113.1 119.3
Total Uses of Funds $295.3 $348.6 $363.6 $385.8 $411.9 $397.3 $420.2 -
50.0 100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
350.0
400.0
450.0
$ Millions
Reference OVR3
Water Uses of Funds
FY 2017-18 to FY 2023-24
FY 2017-18
Adopted
FY 2018-19
Adopted
FY 2019-20
Adopted
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Adopted
FY 2022-23
Requested
FY 2023-24
Requested
Programmatic Proj ects 18.7 20.3 33.2 37.1 32.0 32.8 32.5 Cap ital Projects 33.6 62.1 51.8 47.6 55.7 46.6 48.9
Services of SFPUC Bureaus 45.7 46.8 49.3 54.4 59.8 58.5 60.4 Non-Personnel Operating Costs 54.2 59.2 61.2 66.8 68.8 71.3 72.1 Personnel 93.5 97.9 102.8 102.3 110.0 114.0 117.7
Debt Service 263.6 292.9 306.3 304.2 307.7 335.0 339.2
Total Uses of Funds $509.2 $579.2 $604.6 $612.5 $634.0 $658.2 $670.8 -
50.0 100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
350.0
400.0
450.0
500.0
550.0
600.0
650.0
700.0
750.0
$ Millions
Hetch Hetchy Water & Power Uses of Funds
FY 2017-18 to FY 2023-24
FY 2017-18
Adopted
FY 2018-19
Adopted
FY 2019-20
Adopted
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Adopted
FY 2022-23
Requested
FY 2023-24
Requested
Debt Service 6.1 6.0 4.7 4.4 3.9 3.9 3.5
Programmatic Proj ects 10.9 11.2 13.0 16.2 14.5 14.1 14.3 Services of SFPUC Bureaus 14.5 15.5 17.8 19.7 21.8 22.4 23.2 Cap ital Projects 35.1 43.5 40.5 6.2 2.4 4.9 7.6
Non-Personnel Operating Costs 35.7 41.1 40.0 53.8 53.3 58.0 62.1 Personnel 42.6 45.0 48.3 49.0 51.4 54.6 57.3
Purchase of Power 59.6 60.8 65.7 59.8 82.4 89.1 97.0
Total Uses of Funds $204.5 $223.1 $230.1 $209.1 $229.6 $247.1 $265.0 -
50.0 100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
$ Millions
CleanPowerSF Uses of Funds
FY 2017-18 to FY 2023-24
FY 2017-18
Adopted
FY 2018-19
Adopted
FY 2019-20
Adopted
FY 2020-21
Adopted
FY 2021-22
Adopted
FY 2022-23
Requested
FY 2023-24
Requested
Debt Service - - - 1.0 - - -
General Reserve - - - 15.5 - - -
Cap ital Projects - - - 1.9 2.4 1.6 2.2
Programmatic Proj ects - - 0.3 0.7 1.0 - -
Services of SFPUC Bureaus 1.2 2.0 2.1 2.5 2.7 5.1 5.3
Personnel 2.2 4.7 6.6 6.8 8.0 8.0 8.3
Non-Personnel Operating Costs 3.6 13.2 15.9 16.1 15.9 16.6 16.7 Purchase of Power 25.0 119.1 164.6 181.9 197.9 251.0 238.0 Total Uses of Funds $32.0 $139.1 $189.4 $226.5 $227.9 $282.3 $270.5 -
50.0 100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
$ Millions
1 SFPUC Exit Interview Process & Data (as of 12/2021)
Reference HRS1
2 This Deck
• Overview of process (pages 3-5)
• High level data from exit surveys provided by Quantum Workplace (pages 6- 9) • Appendix: additional data from QW (pages 10-18)
3 Exit Interview Process – Goals
• The objective of the exit survey is to:
• Collect actionable data that provides insight on why employees are leaving • Use that data to make changes to address organizational issues • Measure and monitor effectiveness of engagement efforts and other initiatives 4 Exit Interview Process – High Level
• The exit survey launches automatically through Quantum Workplace (via daily integration file) when ELC Team inputs an employee’s separation date in Position Control System (PCS), and reminders are scheduled automatically from there.
• Surveys are sent to employee’s secondary/personal emails. • Employees have 28 days to take the survey. Reminders are sent after 7 and 21 days. • Only employees who voluntary leave receive the survey. 5 Exit Interview Process – Details
• ELC will only enter the separation date once it has passed (not ahead of time). • The separation date is the employee’s last paid date, and not their last working date. It is very common for employees to use up accrued time when they separate, and therefore their last paid date is much later than their actual last working date. The impact this has is that the exit survey may not be sent to an employee for weeks or months after they have had their last working day. Therefore, they are less likely to respond.
• It is best practice to send the exit survey before or on their last day. A possible solution for this is to explore using Deprovision Assistant data as a trigger instead of PCS data. • There are multiple sections throughout the exit survey that allow separated employees to leave a comment or to further elaborate on their response. Open text fields elicit rich detail and nuances about an employee’s decision to leave.
• Sensitive comments left in the open text fields are shared with Employee Labor Relations (ELR) team.
Specifically, this information should be sent to the HRS Chief People Officer (CPO), and the Employee Labor Relations Manager to ensure confidentiality or any sensitive information. 6 SFPUC Exit Interview Data (as of 12/2021)
Provided by Quantum Workplace
Survey Overview
7 vs. 25.0% Overall
25.0%
15 of 60
Response Rate
SurveyOverview
FavorabilityCompareTo
53.7% Overall53.7%
Favorable
% of total responses that are
either Agree or Strongly Agree
for all items.
Favorable
Overall % Favorable
8 Category vs Overall
9 % Favorable Overall
Career Growth & Development
Diversity & Inclusion
Communication & Resources
Individual Needs
Uncategorized
Engagement Outcomes
Manager Effectiveness
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Item % Favorable
I felt accepted by my immediate coworkers. 87%
My immediate manager cared about me as a person. 80%
I was adequately trained for my job. 80%
I was paid fairly. 73%
I received all assignments with adequate resources and materials to execute it. 67% This job was in alignment with my career goals. 40%
My job allowed me to utilize my strengths. 40%
I recommend this organization as a great place to work. 40% I understood the organization's plans for future success. 27% I saw professional growth and career development opportunities for myself in this organization. 20% Most and Least Favorable
10 Appendix
11 Item % Favorable Δ Overall
Everyone here is treated fairly regardless of race, gender, age, ethnic background, disability, sexual orientation, or other differences. 43% 0.0%
Goals and accountabilities were clear to everyone on my team. 50% 0.0% I felt accepted by my immediate coworkers. 87% 0.0%
I felt valued by leaders at this organization. 47% 0.0% I received all assignments with adequate resources and materials to execute it. 67% 0.0% Trending Since Overall
12 Item %
Favorable Overall
I saw professional growth and career development opportunities for myself in this organization. 20% 0.0% This job was in alignment with my career goals. 40% 0.0% My job allowed me to utilize my strengths. 40% 0.0%
Career Growth & Development Breakout
13 Item %
Favorable Overall
My opinions seemed to count at work. 53% 0.0%
Communication & Resources Breakout
14 Item %
Favorable Overall
Everyone here is treated fairly regardless of race, gender, age, ethnic background, disability, sexual orientation, or other differences. 43% 0.0%
Diversity & Inclusion Breakout
15 Item %
Favorable Overall
I felt accepted by my immediate coworkers. 87% 0.0%
I recommend this organization as a great place to work. 40% 0.0% Engagement Outcomes Breakout
16 Item %
Favorable Overall
I was paid fairly. 73% 0.0%
My job gave me flexibility to meet the needs of both my work and personal life. 60% 0.0% I felt valued by leaders at this organization. 47% 0.0% If I contributed to the organization's success, I knew I would be recognized. 40% 0.0% Individual Needs Breakout
17 Item %
Favorable Overall
My immediate manager cared about me as a person. 80% 0.0% My immediate manager regularly gave me constructive feedback on my job performance. 60% 0.0% Manager Effectiveness Breakout
18 Item %
Favorable Overall
I was adequately trained for my job. 80% 0.0%
I received all assignments with adequate resources and materials to execute it. 67% 0.0% This job gave me considerable opportunity for independence and freedom in how I do the work. 60% 0.0% Goals and accountabilities were clear to everyone on my team. 50% 0.0% I understood the organization's plans for future success. 27% 0.0% Uncategorized Breakout
19 External Affairs FY 2022-23 Position Changes
Indicator Position Position Title
AN 0923 Manager II 1 122,994 1 122,994
1820 Junior Administrative Analyst 1 64,431 1 64,431 AS 1842 Management Assistant -1 (101,268) -1 (101,268) 1844 Senior Management Assistant 1 116,067 1 116,067 AT 0923 Manager II -1 (159,732) -1 (159,732) 1314 Public Relations Officer -1 (130,343) -1 (130,343) 5408 Coordinator of Citizen Involvement -1 (141,018) -1 (141,018) 9252 Communications Specialist 1 137,103 1 137,103 9251 Public Relations Manager 2 353,916 2 353,916 OT 1314 Public Relations Officer -1 (130,343) -1 (130,343) 9252 Communications Specialist 1 137,103 1 137,103 Grand Total 0 66,686 2 202,224 2 268,910 AN Operating New Position
AS Operating Position Substitution
AT Position Substitution used to identify an existing (Operating budget) OT Off-budget Position substitution used to identify an existing TX'd position(Operating budget) External Affairs FY 2023-24 Position Changes
Indicator Position Position Title
AN 1823 Senior Administrative Analyst 1 101,952 1 101,952 Grand Total 1 101,952 1 101,952
AN Operating New Position
Communications Legislative Affairs Grand Total
Grand TotalLegislative Affairs
Reference EA2