SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
City and County of San Francisco
London N. Breed
Mayor
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
Tuesday, May 23, 2023
1:30 PM
(Approved June 13, 2023)
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
City Hall, Room 400
Commissioners
Newsha Ajami, President
Sophie Maxwell, Vice President
Tim Paulson
Anthony Rivera
Kate H. Stacy
Dennis J. Herrera
General Manager
Donna Hood
Commission Secretary
1. Call to Order
President Ajami called the meeting to order at 1:37 PM.
2. Roll Call
Present: Ajami, Paulson, and Stacy
Excused: Maxwell and Rivera
The Commission Secretary announced that the Commission would be considering a proposal to adopt water rates for FYE 2024 through FYE 2026 ( item 6); and the proposal to adopt sewer rates for FYE 2024 through FYE 2026 (item 7). She stated the Commission has received written protests against the proposed rates by mail and considered those protests pursuant to Proposition 218. She asked that any property owner or customer submitting a written protest in person at the meeting do so before the Commission acts on those items.
3. Approval of the Minutes of May 9, 2023
Commissioner Stacy indicated that although she was excused from the May 9 meeting she watched the meeting via video archive and stated she was prepared to vote on the minutes.
No public comment.
On motion to approve the Minutes of May 9, 2023:
Ayes: Ajami, Paulson, and Stacy
4. Report of the General Manager
a) Report on Recent San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Activities, Events and Announcements
Dennis Herrera, General Manager (GM), announced that Charles Perl, Deputy Chief Financial Officer (CFO) was retiring and that after 15 years of service to the SFPUC and three years of service at the San Francisco Airport and at the Mayor’s Office, this was his last day. He outlined Charles’ many achievements and thanked him for his dedication, support, and for his work fighting on behalf of the ratepayers.
Deputy CFO Perl thanked GM Herrera. He recognized and thanked finance staff for their work and support.
President Ajami and Commissioners Paulson and Stacy thanked Mr. Perl for his work and wished him a joyful retirement.
No public comment.
5. Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) Update Nicole Sandkulla, BAWSCA CEO, discussed BAWSCA’s support of the State Water Resources Control Board’s (Board) evaluation of the proposed Tuolumne River Voluntary Agreement as a possible amendment to the Bay Delta Plan. She stated that BAWSCA provided oral comment at the Boards’ meeting. She recognized the SFPUC’s work on the November 2022 revised memorandum of understanding.
Public Comment
• Peter Drekmeier, Policy Director, Tuolumne River Trust, discussed his attendance at the Board’s meeting. He provided thoughts regarding BAWSCA’s comments at that meeting. He discussed the Tuolumne River Voluntary Agreement.
• Dave Warner offered his thoughts on the Board’s meeting and stated the Tuolumne River Voluntary Agreement will have a difficult time getting through the Board. • Denise Louie stated the fish need increases in water flows which are not provided by the Tuolumne River Voluntary Agreement.
• Francisco DaCosta provided comments on CEO Sandkulla’s report. He asked for empirical data regarding salmon flows.
At the request of President Ajami the Commission Secretary called items 6 and 7 together.
6. Public Hearing to consider and adopt a new three-year schedule of rates for retail water service in San Francisco and suburban areas to be effective with meter readings on or after July 1, 2023.
This action constitutes the Approval Action for the Project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code section
31.04(h). The Planning Department has determined that this action is exempt from the CEQA.
If the item is approved, the Commission will rely on that determination to make its decision. (Resolution 23-0103)
7. Public Hearing to consider and adopt a new three-year schedule of rates for sewer service in San Francisco, to take effect on or after July 1, 2023. This action constitutes the Approval Action for the Project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code section 31.04(h). The Planning Department has determined that this action is exempt from the CEQA. If the item is approved, the Commission will rely on that determination to make its decision. (Resolution 23-0104) Erin Corvinova, Financial Planning Director, thanked everyone who worked on the rates items.
She stated that item 6 was for consideration of adoption of proposed water rates for fiscal year endings (FYEs) 2024, 2025 and 2026, and item 7 was for consideration of adoption of proposed sewer rates for FYEs 2024, 2025, and 2026.
Director Corvinova presented the following:
2023 Water and Wastewater Rate Study: San Francisco Charter requires an independent cost-of-service study for each utility at least every five years. The Rate Fairness Board reviewed the proposed rates. California Proposition 218 sets legal requirements for the calculation of water and sewer rates based on proportional allocation of cost to customer classes, noticing and outreach to customers regarding the rate increases, and providing the opportunity for public comment. The proposed three-year water rates for FYEs 2024, 2025, and 2026 would begin on July 1, 2023.
Rate Study Process: (1) Revenue Requirement Analysis: Calculate revenue adjustments necessary to meet policy, capital, and operating budget objectives; (2) Cost of Service Analysis:
Equitably link costs to system functions, develop unit costs, and distribute revenue requirements to customer classes; and (3) Rate Design: Design individual rates and charges to recover costs.
Revenue Requirement Analysis: Incorporates the adopted two-year budget, 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan, and 10-Year Financial Plan. Capital costs are 80% of the increase during the three years. Five percent (5%) annual increase for water and 9% annual increase for wastewater for each of the three fiscal years. Customer bill impacts will vary from revenue requirement increases due to cost allocation changes and individual use patterns.
Cost-of-Service Analysis: Allocates system costs to a customer class based on proportional use.
Key updates for the study: (1) Detailed allocations of operating, revenue-funded capital, and debt service expenses; (2) Updated water peaking factors for system and customer classes to reflect post-pandemic usage patterns; and (3) “mass balance” of billed wastewater discharges vs. inflows to the treatment plants, allocating both flow and strength/contaminants to wet vs. dry weather.
Water Rate Structure: No proposed changes to current structure of (1) Fixed monthly service charges based on meter size; and (2) Tiered volumetric charges for residential customers and uniform volumetric customers for non-residential customers.
Key changes in water rates: (1) Increased untreated water rates resulting from higher cost allocation to raw water supply; and (2) Slight increase to Single Family cost allocation mainly from water peaking behavior changes.
Director Corvinova reviewed: (1) Proposed Water Rates – Fixed Charges: Current rates and charges and those for FYEs 2024, 2025, and 2026; (2) Proposed Water Rates – Volumetric Charges: Current rates and charges and those for FYEs 2024, 2025, and 2026 (Single-Family Residential, Multi-Family Residential, Non-Residential, and Untreated Water Service).
Sewer Rate Structure – Current: (1) Fixed Charge ($ per month) customer charge flat amount per account; (2) Volumetric Charge ($ per CCF). Residential (charge per CCF of wastewater discharged) and Non-Residential (charge per CCS of waster discharged. Strength charges based on flow and business type).
Sewer Rate Structure – Proposed: (1) Fixed Charge ($ per month) customer charge flat per account; (2) Wastewater Charge ($ per CCF). Residential (charge per CCF of sanitary sewer discharged); Non-Residential (charge per CCS of sanitary sewage discharged. Strength charges based on flow and business type; and (3) Stormwater Charge ($ per month). Residential – three tiers of flat monthly charges; Non-residential monthly charges per 1,000 square foot of permeable and impermeable area.
Key changes in Sewer Rates: Bifurcate current sewer rate into two components - Wastewater charge and Stormwater charge reflecting the SFPUC’s combined sewer system. It does not change the overall revenue collected and enhances rate equity by charging customers for total flows contributed to the combined sewer system. The seven-year phase-in allows customers time to adapt.
Stormwater Charge Structure: (1) Standard Charge: Applicable to non-residential, mixed use, vacant, and large residential parcels. Impermeable areas cause more runoff and pay more; and (2) Simplified Residential Charge: Applicable to residential properties with six or fewer dwelling units and parcel areas less than 6,000 square feet. The tier is based on total Assessor parcel area.
Director Corvinova presented a sample bill for an average single family residential customer showing current charges and charges for FYEs 2024, 2025, and 2026 charges, with the bill broken down by the water, wastewater, and stormwater portions of the bill.
Director Corvinova discussed how the SFPUC’s average bill compares to SFPUC’s peer agencies and stated the bills are compared with peer utilities. She noted the affordable discount program that is available to customers.
Director Corvinova responded to a request from President Ajami regarding the combined sewer system, indicating they are not as common in California as they are on the East Coast due to the newer age of most California systems. Brief discussion ensued. Director Corvinova responded to an additional question about the potential system impact from the recent storms on the stormwater charge.
John Cote, SFPUC Communications Director, discussed the public outreach efforts included an engaging, inclusive, and multilingual campaign. He described specific marketing efforts taken and stated that three multilingual “eBlasts” were sent to 78,000 customers. He stated that the SFPUC rates webpage was in the top five of the most viewed pages on sfpuc.org, with more than 8,900 unique users. He indicated that additional outreach was utilized through social media and display ads. Additional targeted focus was placed on low-income, immigrant, and Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC) communities with human translated materials and webpages, target ads in Chinese, Spanish, and Filipino media, ads in media with substantial Black audiences or those based in Bayview-Hunters Point, and in Univision, and Sing Tao.
Commissioner Paulson recognized the impactful outreach efforts and media campaign.
Howard Ash, Chair, Rate Fairness Board (Board) reviewed their membership and stated they were established by Proposition E, which was passed by San Francisco voters in 2002. He outlined the role of the Board as specified by Article 8B of the San Francisco Charter.
Chair Ash discussed multiple objectives for “rate fairness”. He noted that over two decades of positive change the SFPUC has moved toward a traditional utility service role with financial independence and integrity, rates that reflect the cost-of-service, traditional utility customer classes, and simplification.
Chair Ash presented the Board’s views on the rates proposals:
Water and Wastewater
• Three years of rates (instead of four or five) is reasonable given economic and hydrological uncertainties of long-term capital plan.
Water
• Maintain existing tiers for single-family and multi-family residential. • Predictable annual rate increases for three years to reflect current costs and the continued move toward full cost-of-service rate.
• Not much difference in rate between residential water tiers. Similar cost-of-service vs. conservation incentives.
Wastewater
• Predictable rate increases, mostly related to the Sewer System Improvement Program. • Changes to cost allocation are mostly small.
• High fund balance in early years decreases in later years with higher debt service. Rate stability vs. affordability; future fund balance projections uncertain; and difference balance of objectives.
• Stormwater charge and credit program is well-designed, relatively simple, and “fair” in and of itself. The pros outweigh the cons. Smaller customer impacts are the result of a shift of costs from variable charge to fixed charge.
Fire Service
• Another change in cost allocation methodology. Rates remain relatively low and stable, despite changes in methodology.
Hetch Hetchy Power Rates for Tuolumne County
• Relatively large increase but a move toward cost-of-service rates. San Francisco Public Utilities Commission-owned properties provide an opportunity to invest to reduce consumption.
Chair Ash thanked the SFPUC staff, Rate Fairness Board members, and consultants Raftelis, and McGovern McDonald Engineers for their work.
President Ajami thanked Chair Ash and the Board for their work. She discussed the balance of tiered pricing and provided thoughts on rate stability and affordability.
Director Corvinova responded to a question from President Ajami regarding peak residential users and trends stating automated meters allow for data on hourly usage and that pre- and post-pandemic information was collected and analyzed, and stated that data is included in the Rate Study.
Commissioners Stacy thanked staff and the Rate Fairness Board for their work. She indicated she attended one of the town halls and found the information well-presented.
Commissioner Paulson thanked staff and the Rate Fairness Board for their work and for the clear and succinct presentations.
Commissioner Stacy noted some protest letters discussed the drought surcharge and asked Mr.
Cote if there was any public notification that the surcharge ended, to which he stated that there was a press release issued to that fact and that notice was posted on the SFPUC website and on the SFPUC’s rates proposal webpage.
Public Comment Item 6
• Patricia (inaudible), representing 22 neighborhood and merchant associations, stated she did not receive information on the hearing. She discussed outflow at the Marina and Cow Hollow and the January floods. She stated the proposed rate increase needs to be reconsidered.
• Steve Murray, 7-11 Wash & Dry, discussed the negative impact of the proposed rate increase on his business and customers. He indicated the proposed increase should be on the ballot. • Patrick Durnal discussed his professional background and the SFPUC’s proposed increases as compared to peer agencies. He discussed the units he uses per month and the financial impact of the potential increase.
• Don Driscoll, Driscoll & Omens, stated the proposed rates are overcharges that exceed what is permitted by Proposition 218. He claimed the hearing was not a proper administrative hearing.
• Tracy discussed the outreach and stated the original mailer was missing information and needed to be resent. She stated the SFPUC has had steady rate increases since 2018. She discussed the quality of the water received in her home.
At the request of President Ajami, GM Herrera noted the need to push the hearing by two weeks due to an error in the first notice. He confirmed all customers were mailed both hearing notices and all proper procedures were followed.
• Ted Lowenberg discussed the proposed rate increase and his anticipated bill by 2023. He asked that future water rates be affordable and include a habitation tax. He asked that apartments and condos be sub-metered. He posed several questions for consideration. • Dean Truong, 1822 23rd Street Condo, stated that most of their residents don’t get individual water bills. He stated he will need to raise rents as a result of the proposed rate increases.
He discussed their median and projected usage.
• Molly Colton, Sierra Club California, discussed the water shortage emergency and drought surcharge and stated the SFPUC should reduce costs in other areas. • Francisco DaCosta discussed the presentation and stated qualified outreach was not taken. • Peter Drekmeier, Policy Director, Tuolumne River Trust, stated that rate increases go back a long time and stated that the proposed rate increases are a mistake. • Dave Warner discussed his letter to the Commission (attached) and discussed comparative water rate data. He asked for a pricing chart showing prices at lower demand.
Public Comment Item 7
• Patricia expressed opposition stating repairs for the recent flooding is not included in the studies. She noted the hardship on various populations. She indicated she receives recycled water and must use bottled water.
• Jennifer Vataru, Marina resident, discussed two sewage floods she has experienced since the closing of the Pier Street outfall and her negative experiences. She expressed opposition the proposed sewer rate increase. She stated there has been no outreach and that she has had difficulty reaching staff.
• Steve Murray, 7-11 Wash & Dry, discussed the impact of the proposed rate increase on his business and that indicated he has no plans to pass rate increases onto customers. He stated the proposed rate increase needs to be placed on the ballot. • Patrick Durnal expressed opposition to the proposed stormwater runoff charges. He discussed his property taxes and questioned why property taxes don’t cover runoff charges. • Tracy expressed opposition to the proposed stormwater runoff charge and indicated property taxes pay for those charges. She discussed stormwater charges imposed across the country. • Dean Truong expressed opposition to the proposed stormwater charges and stated that fixed charges will equal a 35% per year increase for his condo. • David Hooper, Solutions Not Sandbags, indicated the problem is the cost of the stormwater surcharge. He stated costs could have been lower if earlier flooding issues had been addressed.
• Francisco DaCosta asked for a needs assessment for the force main by Pier 80. He discussed the Phelps treatment plant.
• Unidentified caller discussed the Power Enterprise operations and rates they charge. • Peter Drekmeier, Policy Director, Tuolumne River Trust, discussed deferred maintenance of the sewer system and SFPUC’s fight against the Water Resources Control Board.
Written Public Comment Received (attached)
• Jennifer Vataru (item 7)
• The Marina 94123 (item 7)
• Supervisor Ahsha Safai (items 6 and 7)
President Ajami thanked those who took time to provide public comment on items 6 and 7. She provided clarification to some comments made and indicated that there is not a double charge for stormwater runoff via customer bills and property taxes. She stated that for fairness, the sewer changes are being separated into two distinct charges of stormwater and wastewater.
Director Corvinova confirmed that the SFPUC does not receive funds from either property taxes or the general fund. She confirmed the stormwater and wastewater charges are being separated into two separate line items on the bill.
Commissioner Paulson thanked everyone for their in-person and remote attendance. He stated water is free but the cost to operate and maintain the system is expensive. He noted the high quality of SFPUC’s water and discussed the poor quality of water and lack of infrastructure and system maintenance in other parts of the country, including Flint, MI and Jackson, MS.
Commissioner Stacy indicated it is a difficult and complicated decision with a need to balance the responsibility for system upgrades and maintenance with affordability. She addressed affordability concerns expressed in some protest letters and by some speakers and noted the SFPUC’s Customer Assistance Program may be able to help some customers. She questioned if a similar program is available to assist small businesses. Director Cote indicated there may be rebate programs available to small businesses. Commissioner Stacy discussed conservation efforts, fixed and volumetric costs, and stormwater fees. She expressed respect for the work done by staff. She acknowledged the correspondence received from Supervisor Safai and his concerns with departments being charged for water use and stated that city departments should pay for their water use so that cost does not fall onto the SFPUC and ratepayers.
President Ajami noted that every wastewater utility is dealing with specific challenges and aging infrastructure and that replacing infrastructure is more expensive than maintenance. She stated that no recycled water comes out of San Francisco taps and that constant testing of water takes place. She acknowledged Supervisor Safai’s letter and noted the importance of water conservation and efficiency by city departments.
President Ajami read the following statement: “With regard to Agenda Items 6 and 7, the Commission held the public hearing on the Proposal to Adopt Water and Sewer Rates for FYE 2024 through FYE 2026 in accordance with Article XIII D, Section 6, of the California Constitution, also known as Proposition 218. Proposition 218 requires that the Commission consider all protests against the proposed rates and provides that the Commission shall not impose the proposed rates if written protests are presented by a majority of affected property owners. In March 2023, the SFPUC provided affected property owners with written notice of the proposed rates and the date, time, and location of this hearing. The written notice advised property owners of their right to protest the proposed rates and instructed that any written protest be mailed to the Commission Secretary or be hand delivered at today’s hearing in order to be counted. The notice also instructed that any written protest must: (1) state that the property owner or customer is in opposition to the proposed rates increase; (2) provide the location of the affected property (by assessor’s parcel number, street address, or customer account); and (3) include the name and signature of the person submitting the protest. The notice stated that oral comments at the public hearing would not qualify as a formal protest unless accompanied by a written protest, but the SFPUC would welcome all input from the community during the public hearing. The Commission has received 351 written protests by mail, and 4 written protests were hand delivered to the Commission Secretary at today’s hearing. The SFPUC has 177,564 property owners or customers with water or wastewater accounts. The total number of written protests received, thus does not amount to a majority of the affected property owners or customers. Having counted and considered all protests against the proposed rates in accordance with Proposition 218, the Commission may act to adopt the proposed rates.” On motion to approve item 6:
Ayes: Ajami, Paulson, and Stacy
On motion to approve item 7:
Ayes: Ajami, Paulson, and Stacy
8. Authorize staff to adjust the stormwater charge portion of the sewer bill in accordance with proposed Rules and Regulations; and public hearing to consider and possible action to adopt Rules and Regulations for the Stormwater Credit Program, in conformance with the requirements of Charter Section 4.104, effective July 1, 2023.This action constitutes the Approval Action for the Project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act, (CEQA) pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code Section 31.04(h). The Planning Department has determined that this action is exempt from the CEQA. If the item is approved, the Commission will rely on that determination to make its decision. (Resolution 23-0105) Willis Logsdon, Urban Watershed Planner, reviewed the Stormwater Credit Program Goals and stated that the proposed current sewer rate will be bifurcated into two components (1) Wastewater charge, and (2) Stormwater charge, with customers paying their fair share for the combined sewer system. Customers fall into one of two categories for the Stormwater charge (1) Standard Charge which is applicable to non-residential, mixed-use, vacant, and large residential parcels; and (2) Simplified Charge for most residential parcels, with –three flat rate tiers.
Mr. Logsdon reviewed the stormwater credit structures: (1) Standard Charge Stormwater Credit Structure is based on the total area draining to the green infrastructure in relation to the total parcel area, with a maxim credit of 90% off monthly stormwater charge. He provided examples of a Standard Charge bill with Stormwater Credit; and (2) Simplified Residential Charge Credit Structure is based on a flat rate menu of credit options that are based on average parcel characteristics. Project drainage areas include roof area and ground-level surfaces such as patios or driveways, and projects that are eligible for credits may include rain gardens, rainwater harvesting cisterns, and permeable pavement. He reviewed the Simplified Residential Charge Credit Structure indicating thresholds vary between residential tiers to account for differences in property size and characteristics and stated credits are based on average parcel within each tier, with a maximum credit of 85% (combining two credit options).
Mr. Logsdon reviewed program eligibility, maintenance and evaluation, and expiration and removal of credits. He noted coordination with existing programs indicating that projects built to-date through SFPUC stormwater programs will be automatically enrolled in the Stormwater Credit Program on July 1, 2023. Annual self-certifications and SFPUC inspections will be integrated with existing programs. He discussed next steps and requested Commission approval.
Public Comment
• Patricia stated that the problem isn’t solved and that small business and property owners will need additional money for the credit program.
• Jennifer Vataru reiterated her previous comments. She stated a post-mortem of the storms and closing the outfall needs to occur.
GM Herrera indicated a post-mortem of the storms has occurred and a letter was provided to Supervisor Stephani stating that closing the outfall did not have an impact on the flooding that occurred as a result of recent storms. He asked that Stephen Robinson, Assistant General Manager Infrastructure Bureau, speak with Jennifer.
Commissioner Stacy expressed appreciation for the Stormwater Credit Program.
On motion to approve item 8:
Ayes: Ajami, Paulson, and Stacy
9. Public Hearing to adopt San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Power Enterprise schedules of rates for Hetch Hetchy power service to customers in Tuolumne County charged per lease and/or tenant agreements to be effective for meter readings on or after July 1, 2023. This action constitutes the Approval Action for the Project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code section 31.04(h). The Planning Department has determined that this action is exempt from the CEQA. If the item is approved, the Commission will rely on that determination to make its decision. (Resolution 23- 0106)
Ma Yee Yap, Principal Revenue/Rates Analyst stated that per the San Francisco City Charter, a rates study is required at least every five years by an independent consultant. She discussed the 2022 Power Rates Study, noting key outcomes: (1) Ensure financial stability – program cost of service; (2) Modernize and standardize Hetch Hetchy Power rates; and (3) Support the City’s climate action goals.
Analyst Yap noted the customers under the lease/tenant agreements are the United States Forest Service (partnership to address source water quality and watershed protection), the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Fish Hatchery at Moccasin Creek), and Hetch Hetchy Water and Power-owned Housing. She presented the FY 2023-24 Power Rates proposal which would (1) Increase rates by 50% in FY 2023-24; and (2) Evaluate usage profiles as well as housing attributes and weather retrofitting to standardize rate structures in the near term. She reviewed the schedule of public meetings and notices that were provided to affected parties.
No public comment.
On motion to approve item 9:
Ayes: Ajami, Paulson, and Stacy
10. Communications
a) Advance Calendar
b) Contract Advertisement Report
c) Correspondence Log
d) Annual Hetch Hetchy Power and CleanPowerSF Source Disclosure Report Filing to the California Energy Commission
e) Water Supply Conditions Update
11. General Public Comment
• Faheem Carter, Co-Founder/Farmer In Charge, Florence Fang Community Farm, discussed the Farm and its mission. He noted the lack of fresh vegetables and open green space in the Bayview. He stated affordable water is needed to maintain the Farm and its operations. He discussed the importance of the Farm’s youth programs.
• Kelsey O’Hare, Florence Fang Community Farm volunteer, discussed the importance of urban farming for those living in food deserts and in underserved communities. She discussed barriers communities face with growing food, including their water rates. She asked that a water rate designated for urban agriculture be created, along with grants for urban agriculture enterprises to offset the cost of water, and a policy be developed around water budgeting.
• Caro Correa, Air Quality Coordinator, Brightline Defense, discussed their work to provide services to low income communities. She discussed the importance of urban agriculture and their work with the Florence Fang Community Farm. She stated that water should not be a barrier to community farms. She asked that a new water rate category for urban farms be created.
• Jarae Clark, Executive Director, City of Dreams, discussed their organization and mission.
She noted the lack of access to green space in the Bayview. She asked that water rates for urban farms be reduced to ensure access.
• Andre Torres, Florence Fang Community Farms, discussed measures the Farm takes to be efficient and effective in their water use, stating water conservation is a top priority. He welcomed any information that could be provided on water management practices. • Peter Drekmeier, Tuolumne River Trust, discussed the Water Supply Conditions Update, Tuolumne River Water available to the City, demand, and supply.
Commissioner Stacy thanked those who spoke on behalf of the Florence Fang Community Farm.
Ted Fang, Executive Director, Florence Fang Community Farm, responded to a question from Commissioner Stacy regarding their current water and wastewater charges. He asked that consideration be given for urban farmers and that policies be developed.
GM Herrera indicated that he would ask staff to work with the Farm and look at existing programs they may use for assistance.
In response to a question from President Ajami, Mr. Fang stated the Farm pays an irrigation water rate. President Ajami asked what could be done to assist those who provide services to low-income communities. GM Herrera noted current efforts the agency takes to assist those customers.
12. Items initiated by Commissioners
Commissioner Stacy commented on the Short Term Agreement on the Colorado River and the allocation of water.
Public Comment
• (inaudible) expressed a desire to help urban agriculture reduce food insecurity through SFPUC policies.
13. Adjournment
President Ajami adjourned the meeting at 5:06 PM.