OUR MISSION: To provide our customers with high-quality, efficient and reliable water, power and sewer services in a manner that values environmental and community interests and sustains the resources entrusted to our care.
525 Golden Gate Avenue, 13th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94102
T 415.554.3155
F 415.554.3161
TTY 415.554.3488
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
Correspondence Log
March 3, 2026 through March 16, 2026
Date
Received
From Subject
3/3/2026 Charles Adams Re OPEN LETTER: CleanPowerSF
Devaluation of Local Solar
(email + attachment)
3/4/2026 Elisabeth Reid-
Gonzalez
Re: Response to your demand - 36361
Walnut St, Newark CA
3/11/2026 Anna Stock and
Juan Cosme
Opposition To Removing Existing Trees
and Natural Meadows From Crocker
Amazon Park; Opposition To Artificial
Turf For Crocker Amazon Ball Field
Renovation
3/12/2026 SFPUC Acting Director
of Water Resources
Notice of Preparation of the City and
County of San Francisco Urban Water
Management Plan 2025 Update and
Public Hearing
3/12/2026 City and County of San
Francisco Officials
Recent Power Outages and City
Acquisition of PG&E’s Electric Assets
Serving San Francisco
3/12/2026 Jen McDonald Stolen emails used to lobby board (email + attachment)
3/13/2026 Bay Area Water Supply
and Conservation
Agency
March 19, 2026 BAWSCA Board of
Directors Meeting Agenda
(email + attachment)
3/13/2026 MYR Comm Affairs
Staff
[INVITATION] Women's History Month
City Hall Celebration
(email + attachment)
3/14/2026
Allyson Ritger Please upgrade Crocker Amazon and
don't listen to NIMBYs
3/14/2026 Mary Fecher Artificial Turf
3/16/2026 Tom Smegal NOTICE OF INTENTION TO AMEND
CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE FOR
BAWSCA AND RFA
(email + attachments)
1 From: cadams albionpower.com <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2026 9:10 AM
To: Commission; Hyams, Michael; Commission
Cc: Bevington, Andrew S; Arce, Julio C; Jeanine Cotter; JP Rapagnani; Mary Rodriguez Gaval; Hooper, Barry (ENV); Sheehan, Charles (ENV); [email protected]; Comerford, Cyndy (ENV); Commission; Hyams, Michael
Subject: Re OPEN LETTER: CleanPowerSF Devaluation of Local Solar Attachments: SF SSC opposes CCA Devaluation of Local Solar Energy .pdf Importance: High
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.
Report Suspicious
Dear CLEANPOWERSF,
AƩached is the local solar industry’s Open LeƩer regarding CleanPowerSF DevaluaƟon of Local Solar.
Based upon commission comments at the 1/27/2026 meeƟng, this leƩer was not provided to the commissioners.
Please confirm that the leƩer and this email have been received and noted by the commissioners as part of the public record.
Here is the SF Examiner’s coverage of the policy: hƩps://www.sfexaminer.com/news/climate/why-san-francisco-solar- firms-are-simmering-over-power-plans/arƟcle_add46560-0930-4f8e-838c-f8335b622089.html The San Francisco Public UƟliƟes Commission (SFPUC) and its Community Choice AggregaƟon (CCA) program, CleanPowerSF, are strongly mandated and explicitly commiƩed to prioriƟzing local energy in its CCA formaƟon.
The proposed avoided cost calculator (ACC) devalues local energy, omitting costs of transmission and environmental destruction that local solar avoids to build a more eƯicient grid. The Avoided Cost Calculator (ACC) value is driven by tax equity structures, where roughly 60% of utility-scale solar project costs are eƯectively transferred to Wall Street investors as tax benefits. Policies based upon the ACC calculator have recently been voted down unanimously by the California Supreme Court:
https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2025-08-07/california-supreme-court-sides-with-environmental- groups-in-rooftop-solar-case
The renewable energy credits (RECs) CleanPower SF purchases to claim 100% clean energy often come from environmentally-destructive solar farms hundreds of miles away.
Due to lack of transmission to move power to population centers, these solar farms often sell their energy at a loss to other states or are forced to curtail the energy completely. Compared to local energy, these credits represent 'paper-only' generation that burdens ratepayers and society with added costs and environmental destruction.
We are familiar with SFPUC’s generation versus transmission dilemma; we share in that accounting fight. But a San Francisco CCA cannot possibly use an ACC calculator designed by entrenched interests to exploit a problem that they’ve caused, designed for funding rather than function. At best, the ACC relates energy subject to long distance transmission, not local energy. Main Street is working to oƯer local solutions and, as someone present in CCA formation, it is disturbing to see an ACC policy introduced in this City. The City is not going to meet it’s clean energy goals without local economy participation.
2 RooŌop solar is local clean energy, all on the San Francisco side of the sub-staƟon. It is the only energy generated in the City limits.
It also anchors the local green economy. Local economies promote local jobs, decreased inequality, increased wages, higher income growth, lower levels of poverty, civic well-being, and local tax revenue.
Big picture, the U.S. is 5% of the world’s populaƟon using 25% of the world’s energy. Less than 20% of nature, upon which we are solely dependent for existence, remains.
In Western economies, the most immediate, cost-effecƟve carbon reducƟons—the 'low-hanging fruit'—come from boosƟng energy efficiency, reducing overall demand, and deploying local, distributed generaƟon. This was once well- served by Ɵered rates, creaƟng equity from everyone having an affordable baseline while promoƟng energy efficiency and load reducƟon for heavy users. San Francisco’s clean energy policy cannot be to follow the flawed logic of “every load reducƟon is a cost shiŌ” promoted by the uƟliƟes. Such places uƟlity shareholders above community choice aggregaƟon. The misunderstanding, incompetence, and regulatory capture of the ACC are the depraved policies CCAs were created to fight.
3 Please understand that we want the Lurie AdministraƟon, General Manager Herrera, and CLEANPOWERSF to be successful. We have worked to promote San Francisco as a CCA for decades and understand the technology in its Main Street seƫng well. We encourage you to revisit and account for the benefits of local energy as was intended by CCA formaƟon. Thank you.
Regards,
Charles Adams
Albion Power Company
218 Pierce Street San Francisco, CA 94117
O: 415.558.1786| C: 415.971.3155 |F: 415.723.7294
[email protected] | www.albionpower.com
Lic.# 878027 | General B | C-10 | C-46
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail transmission and any attachments may contain legally privileged, confidential information belonging to the sender. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action based on the contents of this electronic mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic mail in error, please contact sender and delete all copies.
San Francisco Solar and Storage Coalition Open Letter: CleanPowerSF Devaluation of Local Solar July 9, 2025 San Francisco Solar and Storage Coalition (SF SSC) opposes CCA CleanPowerSF efforts to reduce the solar credit rate provided for local solar generation placed onto the grid to a marginal cost of energy, inclusive of fossil fuels and environmentally damaging solar farms. Such a rate excludes the economic, environmental, and social benefits of rooftop solar and undervalues the energy solar generators put back onto the local grid. CleanPowerSF was created to provide residents and businesses with clean energy options and promote local renewable energy development. Such a rate undermines this premise. Simply imitating the rates of Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) is counter to the CCA model. CleanPowerSF was created as a community response to the practices of PG&E. A community choice aggregator is intended to promote clean energy in the San Francisco community and SFPUC should consider all of the benefits of that energy. Now, CleanPowerSF proposes to replicate the very model it was intended to disrupt. CleanPowerSF’s use of the avoided cost calculator (ACC) would be a betrayal of the formation of San Francisco’s CCA. California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) prejudicially authorized unnecessary distribution spending into the ACC, essentially eliminating the value of local generation. These actions manipulate the ACC calculator to assume centralized power plants and transmission to devalue rooftop solar. Utilities, as investor-owned entities, earn a guaranteed 10% return on capital investments, which incentivizes overspending at a cost to ratepayers. Guaranteed “cost plus 10%” on billions of dollars of infrastructure has corrupted California policy against energy efficiency, environmental conservation, and local generation. This has transformed SB 100, intended to decarbonize the economy, into an entrenched-interest infrastructure bill. The ACC is antithetical to everything CCAs are intended to achieve and defend locally. Rooftop solar is differentiated by its ability to generate electricity at the point of consumption. Rather than transmitting power over long distances from centralized power plants, rooftop solar uses existing infrastructure and San Francisco resident investment to benefit the local grid and society. This creates benefits central to Community Choice Aggregation that cannot be Docusign Envelope ID: 7FB97E1D-ECD0-4048-B2C9-2AACB05774F3 calculated using models for distant power generation - such as the CPUC avoided cost calculator. All CCA rooftop solar generation is on the San Francisco side of the substation using existing infrastructure (roof, structural framing, electrical service) existing wires, poles, producing clean generation, load reduction, and a smaller grid. Rooftop solar benefits include: • 100% local clean energy from community aggregation • 100% local job creation, local tax revenue • Containment of load growth and “plug load” on the local distribution system • Reduced peak demand on the local distribution system • Reduced dependency on transmission and need for new long-distance power lines • Reduced carbon emissions • Reduced future wildfire ignition risk from the need for new long-distance power lines • Reduced ecosystem, wildlife, and habitat destruction from solar farms and long-distance transmission. Nature is the most significant asset that we have. None of these values are “zero” and excluding them undermines CleanPower SF as a CCA. Residents creating local, clean energy must be the provider of choice for any CleanPowerSF "Green" and "SuperGreen" option. The benefits that they create must be accounted for in the tariff they receive for energy created using their own monies and infrastructure. Another goal of AB 117 in creating CCAs was local job and business creation. Local economies promote local jobs, local tax revenue, increased wages, decreased inequality, and lower levels of poverty. The City of San Francisco allocates millions of dollars annually to local job creation. Rooftop solar creates a local economy funded by San Francisco residents without burdening the City’s general fund. It is curious that San Francisco government would create policies against City residents contributing to the local economy. It is important for the City of San Francisco to understand that when rooftop solar energy is not put to direct use in a home or stored in a battery, it simply enters the grid and is used by the Docusign Envelope ID: 7FB97E1D-ECD0-4048-B2C9-2AACB05774F3 nearest available load (i.e. neighboring San Francisco property). Citing the local benefits above, this is significantly different for community energy aggregation than cap-and-trade market manipulation or credits purchased from distant power production requiring infrastructure investment. While devaluing and obstructing local solar, CleanPowerSF has chosen an energy transition outside of the City that many see as environmentally catastrophic. An example being in Livermore Valley where CleanPowerSF is set to be the primary buyer from the Aromas solar farm, a project destroying the Bay Area’s last undeveloped valley; the area being permanently destroyed consists of wildlife habitat and prime soil for farmland. Only 26 % of California’s land remains protected and only 23 % of the world’s wilderness remains.1 Climate change and environmental degradation are interconnected processes. Rooftop solar mitigates environmental damage and reduces load on the grid.
Figure 1- Energy produced in San Francisco stays in San Francisco Docusign Envelope ID: 7FB97E1D-ECD0-4048-B2C9-2AACB05774F3 Other projects are hundreds of miles away on the eastern side of the Sierra, particularly Kern County. Due to a lack of transmission, a significant amount of solar farm energy is being curtailed or being sent to other states like Arizona at low or negative prices. The overall effect of solar farm curtailment is that Californians are paying for power capacity they cannot use. It is not local rooftop solar that is responsible for the “duck curve” but over building of solar farms that have millions of mega-watt (MW) hours curtailed or sold at a loss to ratepayers.2 Building new transmission infrastructure in California contributes to increased wildfire risk. Since 1992, over 3,600 wildfires in California have been linked to power generation, transmission, and distribution, according to the U.S. Forest Service.3 In 2018, transmission fires, including the transmission-caused Camp Fire, eliminated 18 years of California carbon emission reductions.4 Rooftop solar contributes to a smaller, less stressed grid.
Figure 2 - From left to right, Livermore Valley today and tomorrow Figure 3 - Not if but when – maximizing transmission is a roadmap to maximizing future transmission-caused wildfires.
Docusign Envelope ID: 7FB97E1D-ECD0-4048-B2C9-2AACB05774F3 NREL studies indicate a potential for rooftop solar power up to 50% of estimated consumption in San Francisco. Nearly 40% of the state's solar power comes from customer-owned systems, all without long distance transmission or destroying nature.5 Assuming that Golden Gate Park and the Presidio are off limits, using the rooftops of the residents is the only way community aggregation can occur locally. The western ¾ of the City is replete with houses perfect for solar generation. This was intended as part of San Francisco’s leadership in CCA formation. San Franciscans should be encouraged to use their properties to be part of the climate solution; certainly, they should be compensated in their export rate for the benefits they provide, Instead, San Franciscans are seeing efforts to devalue rooftop solar benefits compounded by unfeasible energy storage building codes. San Francisco is now failing local clean energy implementation. CleanPowerSF must involve local stakeholders and diversify evaluation criteria away from vested interests in a larger grid (including Berkeley Energy Institute at Haas). Such analytical bias suggests regulatory capture. The result has been that CleanPowerSF is eliminating the San Francisco main street economy from community choice aggregation. This is a mistake. San Francisco Solar and Storage Coalition insists CleanPowerSF must account for and credit the clean, local benefits of rooftop solar and environmental preservation to residents who contribute to local generation. This is not a subsidy nor a rebate, but a crediting of the true benefits of local rooftop generation per unit of energy as community aggregation. The benefits are essential to both climate and the local economy.
Figure 4 - Local energy, if valued.
Docusign Envelope ID: 7FB97E1D-ECD0-4048-B2C9-2AACB05774F3 The San Francisco Solar and Storage Coalition Charles Adams; CEO & Founder Albion Power Company ___________________________ Jeanine Cotter; CEO & Co-Founder Luminalt ___________________________ Greg Kennedy; CEO & Founder Occidental Power ___________________________ John-Paolo Rapagnani; Co-CEO & Founder Sutro Power ___________________________ Docusign Envelope ID: 7FB97E1D-ECD0-4048-B2C9-2AACB05774F3
FOOTNOTES 1 https://www.cbsnews.com/news/more-than-a-10th-of-earths-wilderness-lost-since-the-1990s-study/# 2 https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2024-11-24/california-has-so-much-solar-power-that-increasingly-it-goes-to-waste 3 https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/01/13/us/los-angeles-fires-cause.html 4 https://ph.ucla.edu/news-events/news/ucla-led-study-finds-californias-greenhouse-gas-reductions-could-be-wiped-out-2020 5 https://environmentamerica.org/california/center/articles/rooftop-solar-is-a-win-win-protecting-the-environment-and-saving-all-ratepayers-money/ Docusign Envelope ID: 7FB97E1D-ECD0-4048-B2C9-2AACB05774F3 1 From: Elisabeth Reid-Gonzalez <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2026 3:30 PM
To: Read, Emily; Commission
Cc: Francisco Gonzalez; Wayne, Lisa B; Herman, Jane
Subject: Re: Response to your demand - 36361 Walnut St, Newark CA This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
Report Suspicious
Dear Ms Read and Commissioners:
We are adding the SFPUC Commission Leaders to this email.
As stated clearly in our email, SFPUC's prolonged acquiescence and failure to act—despite full awareness of the ongoing growth of said plants within that property beyond the 2012 lease end — this constitutes a waiver or abandonment of any right to now demand removal of these plants at an elderly couples expense who have not leased the property since 2012.
It would be unethical to enforce such a requirement after so many years of your silence and ongoing plant growth (as is the natural course).
We requested you look into your own construction resources, of which you have abundance, and address your internal operation and it's neglect of this growth - these past 13 plus years.
Thank you and I think we deserve an apology!
Elisabeth and Francisco Gonzalez
On Wed, Mar 4, 2026, 12:48 PM Read, Emily <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello Elisabeth and Francisco,
Please see the attached response to your email.
Emily Read | Right of Way Manager
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
Natural Resources and Lands Management Division
1657 Rollins Road Burlingame, CA 94010
2 [email protected] | (650) 652-3204
From: Elisabeth Reid-Gonzalez <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2026 9:03 PM
To: Read, Emily <[email protected]>
Cc: Francisco Gonzalez <[email protected]>
Subject: Response to your demand - 36361 Walnut St, Newark CA
Re: Response to your demands to remove pla nts at our own expens e Dear Emily Re ad: We ar e respondi ng to your recent letter from January 15, 2026, that set forth your demand for the rem oval of the trees and plants fr om the portion of your company's Re: Response to your demands to remove plants at our own expense
Dear Emily Read:
We are responding to your recent letter from January 15, 2026, that set forth your demand for the removal of the trees and plants from the portion of your company's (SFPUC) vacant land adjacent to our home at our expense.
Historically, the original lease was solely for renting a parking space on the vacant land. Although planting was not part of the lease, we added and maintained trees and plants there with the land owner's knowledge and permission. The lease ended in 2012 when we stopped paying lease rent as there was no longer the need for the parking space. After that time, the land owner (SFPUC) explicitly granted us permission to continue maintaining the plants. The land owner (SFPUC) also permitted—and in fact encouraged—us to maintain a defensible space in the area, including regular weed trimming and other fire-prevention or safety-related upkeep. For over 13 years since then, we have openly and continuously maintained the plants, weeds, and defensible space without any objection from the land owner (SFPUC) until your recent letter.
In this case, SFPUC's prolonged acquiescence and failure to act—despite full awareness of these ongoing activities— constitutes a waiver or abandonment of any right to now demand removal at our cost. It would be inequitable to enforce such a requirement after so many years of silence, implied acceptance, and benefit from the maintained defensible space. Additionally, our continuous, mutually beneficial, open, and uninterrupted maintenance and use of the area for planting, weed control, and defensible space purposes since at least the end of the lease (and particularly after any permission was not renewed) has established a prescriptive easement under applicable property law principles. The use has been:
Open and notorious (visible and obvious, including regular trimming and upkeep); Continued use for well over the statutory period in most jurisdictions (13+ years); Adverse/hostile once any permission ended or was not actively renewed.
This grants us a protected right to continue accessing and maintaining the plants and defensible space without interference. To resolve this amicably, we suggest agreeing to let the plants and defensible space remain, perhaps formalizing our ongoing maintenance rights. If removal is insisted upon, your company should handle and pay for it given the history of permission, failure to act, abandonment of your right, and the overall benefit derived.
Please reply in writing by March 6th 2026. We are open to discussion or mediation but will defend our rights from SFPUC's request of payment given your clearly un-leveraged position. 3 We also kindly request that your company's President (or appropriate senior executive) be made aware of this correspondence and our position. Mr and Mrs Gonzalez are an elderly couple who have been amicable neighbors for decades. They face language barriers in navigating these matters and we expect an ethical company like SFPUC to equally stand up for (not manipulate) the rights of their neighbors - which in this case is clearly in Gonzalez's favor. We trust that bringing this to higher-level attention will help ensure a fair, ethical and complete consideration of all relevant details.
Thank you for your attention. We look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Representatives of the Family
Elisabeth Reid-Gonzalez
Francisco Gonzalez
Cell: 510-421-5287
*Letter enclosed
Cc: President (or appropriate senior executive)
On Thu, Jan 15, 2026, 1:00 PM Read, Emily <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello Mr. and Mrs. Gonzalez,
Please see the attached response to your email.
Emily Read | Right of Way Manager
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
Natural Resources and Lands Management Division
1657 Rollins Road Burlingame, CA 94010
[email protected] | (650) 652-3204
4 From: Elisabeth Reid-Gonzalez <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2025 5:18 PM
To: Read, Emily <[email protected]>
Cc: Francisco Gonzalez <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: 36361 Walnut St, Newark CA
Dear Emily, Just one la st addition. Mr and Mrs Gonza lez will be out of the country from Ja nuary 1st thru March. Ple ase k now that they will be away and unabl e to commu nicat e or receive c orresponde nces during that time. Thank you Elisabet h Reid-Gonza lez Dear Emily,
Just one last addition. Mr and Mrs Gonzalez will be out of the country from January 1st thru March. Please know that they will be away and unable to communicate or receive correspondences during that time.
Thank you
Elisabeth Reid-Gonzalez
Francisco Gonzalez
On Tue, Dec 23, 2025, 3:04 PM Elisabeth Reid-Gonzalez <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Emily Read:
This email is in response to your letter sent certified mail on 11/18/2025.
Mr and Mrs Gonzalez have received your letter and understand the concerns you have raised regarding the plants within your property by January 1st.
Mr and Mrs Gonzalez understand that you need to root out the cactus plants that pose a risk to your staff on your property. Please do so.
5 They ask, however, that you consider saving the avacodo fruit trees as these do not typically have risk and their root system is shared on both side of the property line.
Thank you and Happy Holidays,
Francisco Gonzalez
Elisabeth Reid-Gonzalez
Son & Daughter in Law
510-421-5287 (cell)
On Wed, Oct 29, 2025, 7:23 PM Elisabeth Reid-Gonzalez <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Emily Read,
I hope you are doing well. We recently received a letter from you dated October 7th, 2025 in the regular mail. We have mailed out a written response via certified mail back to you on October 28, 2025. We are unable to act on this unexpected November 1, 2025 deadline as we need to discuss the matter further with our legal counsel. We have occupied the area for many years unsolicited.
In the meantime, please feel free to contact us if you have any questions or concerns in writing to [email protected].
Thank you,
6 Elisabeth Reid-Gonzalez
1 From: Anna <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2026 5:33 PM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]; Herrera, David; [email protected]; Commission
Cc: Chen, Chyanne (BOS); Madland, Sarah (REC); John-Baptiste, Alicia (MYR) Subject: Opposition To Removing Existing Trees and Natural Meadows From Crocker Amazon Park; Opposition To Artificial Turf For Crocker Amazon Ball Field Renovation This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
Report Suspicious
Dear Commissioners and Mayor Lurie,
We are writing to urge you to protect Crocker Amazon Park from a proposal that would replace its natural open space with a fenced-in artificial turf sports complex.
The plan proposed by the San Francisco Recreation and Park Department in partnership with the San Francisco Giants and team owner Charles B. Johnson is being framed as a "gift." However, many neighbors did not ask for this project and do not support paving over meadows, cutting down mature trees, and fencing off large portions of a beloved community park.
Artificial turf also raises serious concerns. Synthetic fields are associated with higher surface temperatures, increased injury rates compared to well- maintained natural grass, and exposure to toxins like PFAS and microplastics.
It's particularly troubling that the majority of artificial turf installations have been clustered in neighborhoods already burdened by asthma and environmental justice challenges.
We strongly support renovating Crocker Amazon Park, but doing so the right way:
- Yes to meaningful community input.
- Yes to natural grass fields and open green space.
- Yes to preserving mature trees and the park's character. - Yes to space for seniors, families, cricket players, dog walkers, and youth sports alike.
- No to expanding toxic artificial turf.
- No to increased traffic, noise, and late-nightly bright field lighting. 2 - No to privatization and fencing that limits access. - No to cutting down the majority of existing trees.
Please stand with neighborhood residents and protect this city treasure. Invest in improvements that enhance public health, environmental justice, and shared access, not in plastic infrastructure that narrows and intensifies use.
We are long time Excelsior residents and property owners. Our family, our dogs, friends, neighbors, and us enjoy the use of beautiful Crocker Amazon Park on a regular basis. Please improve the park for all to enjoy.
Sincerely,
Anna Stock and Juan Cosme
Sent from my iPhone
1 From: San Francisco Public Utilities Commission <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2026 10:00 AM
To: Commission
Subject: Notice of Preparation of the City and County of San Francisco Urban Water Management Plan 2025 Update and Public Hearing
Dear Customers, Community Members, and Interested Parties, The Urban Water Management Planning Act (California Water Code §10610-10657) requires urban water suppliers to update and adopt their Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) and Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) every five years. The City and County of San Francisco is currently preparing its 2025 UWMP and WSCP and will be updating to these documents. The 2025 UWMP and WSCP are due to the California Department of Water Resources by July 1, 2026.
The 2025 UWMP will provide an overview of our water deliveries and uses, water supply sources, and water conservation programs. It will also include discussions on supply and demand projections over a 25-year planning horizon (from 2025 to 2050), available water supplies to meet existing and future demands under a range of water supply conditions, and our water demand management measures to reduce long-term water demand.
The UWMP and WSCP will be available for public review and comment from March 16, 2026 to April 20, 2026. The Draft 2025 UWMP and WSCP will be available for download on the SFPUC website at www.sfpuc.gov/uwmp and available for physical review at the San Francisco Main Library. The City and County of San Francisco invites you or your agency to review these plans.
Notice of Public Hearing
On Tuesday, April 14, 2026, at the regular San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (Commission) meeting that begins at 1:30PM, the Commission will hold a public hearing on the Draft 2025 UWMP and WSCP in San Francisco City Hall, Room 400, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, San Francisco, California, 94102.
2 Interested members of the public are invited to attend the public hearing and may provide public comment. The public hearing can also be accessed virtually using the following information:
Remote Public Comment Call-in: 1 (415) 655-0001 / Access Code: 2661 529 2962
Submission of Comments
Any interested parties may also submit written comments to the City during the public comment period in the following ways:
1. Written comments may be emailed to [email protected].
2. Written comments may be mailed to the address below. To ensure that comments can be reviewed and incorporated, any mailed comments must be post-marked by April 16, 2026.
Steve Ritchie, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission 525 Golden Gate Avenue, 13th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94102
The final 2025 UWMP and WSCP will be adopted by the Commission no later than June 30, 2026. If you have any questions about the UWMP or WSCP, please contact Jennifer Lee at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Manisha Kothari
Acting Director of Water Resources
Manage your preferences | Opt Out using TrueRemove™
Got this as a forward? Sign up to receive our future emails.
View this email online.
525 Golden Gate Ave | San Francisco, CA 94102 US
This email was sent to [email protected].
To continue receiving our emails, add us to your address book.
WATCH LIVE MEETING ON APRIL 14
1 From: Jen McDonald <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2026 6:07 PM
To: Commission
Subject: Stolen emails used to lobby board
Attachments: SF Chon fake emails to BAAD.pdf
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
Report Suspicious
Dear SFPUC commissioners,
Today's SF Chronicle broke the story that a local public agency was being lobbied with fake emails using stolen email addresses. The group behind it? The Bay Area Council, of which SFPUC is a member.
I'm sure you more than most know how critical it is to hear from your constituents, and not be influenced by professional lobbyists using identity theft to fake genuine contact. So, I'm asking you to take a minute, just now, to contact your staff responsible for Bay Area Council membership, and ask them to demand that the Council abandon this reprehensible campaign, and break ties with the lobbying group doing the identity theft. After all, you could well be their next target.
I've attached a copy of the Chronicle article. Also, here is a link to a rather desperate PR that the BAC sent out last night. Instead of apologizing or backing down, they double down, and claim that the many individuals who had their identities stolen were somehow mistaken. This brazen response, I think, demands that members of the BAC react strongly to this, particularly public agencies such as yourself.
Incidentally, the air district rules that they are opposing through their front group "Common Sense Coalition" are designed to eliminate more than 5 million tonnes of CO2 emissions every year, avoid 85 deaths a year, and costs of almost 1 billion dollars. Even if they weren't stealing identities to do so, does SFPUC really want to oppose such life-saving rules?
Sincerely,
Jen McDonald
3/12/26, 3:18 PMResidents deny sending emails pushing Bay Area air policy change
Trending:Weather forecast|UC, Cal State acceptance rates|FBI warning|Gas prices|Lurie bodyguard update|Alysa Liu rally|Mayor Lurie exclusive
BAY AREA
By Jennifer Gollan,StaD Writer
March 12, 2026
‘This was forged’: Residents deny sendingemails pushing Bay Area air policy change Anthony Clewis stands outside of his home in San Pablo. Clewis is one of 10 people whose names were on Alzheimer's Begins When YouCan't Say This WordU.S. Neural Review SALE: Only 25¢Sign in
3/12/26, 3:18 PMResidents deny sending emails pushing Bay Area air policy change
Several months ago, dozens of missives hit the inboxes of members of a regional air quality board, seeking to sway them before they considered a policy change. The proposal was relatively banal, but there was a problem: Several of the people identi@ed as having sent statements say they never did so.
The Bay Area Council, an inDuential business advocacy
organization, is overseeing the campaign that prompted
the messages. It hired Speak4, a @rm whose software allows corporations and other entities to send “custom letters… directly to decision makers,” according to its website, to create a platform for local voters to send emails to the Bay Area Air District, which regulates air pollution across nine counties.
Get Digital Access and Stay Informed With Trusted Local News.ONLY 25¢ The streamlining and bulk submission of letter-writing is a long-standing political tactic that critics call “astrotur@ng,” in which special interest groups try to display broad
grassroots support for a policy, even though the letters are being generated by professionals rather than ordinary
residents. What sets this situation apart is that some of the people credited with sending the messages dispute that
they played any part.
Listen Now:
‘This was forged’: Residents deny sending
emails pushing Bay Area air policy change
About 6 Minutes
1x
Anthony Clewis stands outside of his home in San Pablo. Clewis is one of 10 people whose names were onemails sent to a regional air quality board to support a policy change but told the Chronicle they played nopart in the messages and did not consent to use of their information.Jessica Christian/S.F. Chronicle 3/12/26, 3:18 PMResidents deny sending emails pushing Bay Area air policy change
Most Popular
1.Local o=cials con>rm FBIwarning of Iranian plot to attackCalifornia with drones
2.Johnny Depp once deliveredgreat performances. Then 2career turns changed everything
3.90-degree heat is headed for theBay Area. Here’s when to expect it
4.Kamala Harris abruptly cancelsCalifornia stops on book tour
5.The East Bay’s >rst H Mart isopening later this month Your Daily Puzzles
ADVERTISEMENTArticle continues below this ad
In interviews, 10 people whose names were on the emails told the Chronicle they did not send them, nor did they consent to Speak4 using their names.
In an email dated Nov. 25, 2025, San Pablo resident
Anthony Clewis purportedly wrote: “ Any new rule adopted by BAAD must include a new, more robust socio-economic
impact study before implementation. Such a requirement
would give families, renters, and small businesses a clear picture of the @nancial impacts before new costs appear on their bills.”
3/12/26, 3:18 PMResidents deny sending emails pushing Bay Area air policy change
Pile-Up PokerPoker meets Solitaire. Cardsand strategy combine in a newway.
Cross|wordAn approachable redesign to aclassic, featuring exclusiveweekday puzzles.
FlipartA quick daily Tip. Finallysomeone cracked the code ondigital jigsaw puzzles.
SpellTowerWord search but with strategy.Clearing the board feels reallygood.
See more S.F. Chronicle on Google
Make us a Preferred Source to get more of our news when you search.
Add Preferred Source
“This was forged,” Clewis, a 48-year-old Navy veteran, said in a phone interview. “I never wrote the letter. It’s a travesty and conDict of interest and an invasion of privacy. … It made me feel like someone is cyberhacking me.”
It’s unclear how Clewis’ and the other disputed names
ended up in the lobbying messages.
ADVERTISEMENTArticle continues below this ad
The 85 emails reviewed by the Chronicle were form letters
3/12/26, 3:18 PMResidents deny sending emails pushing Bay Area air policy change
sent to Lynda Hopkins, the board’s chairperson, between Nov. 12 and Dec. 19, urging the board to @rst conduct a socio-economic analysis of potential impacts of each new regulation it adopts.
The emails, which originated from domains ending in
@Speak4.co, were obtained under a public records request @led by the Energy and Policy Institute, a watchdog
organization based in Sonoma County that is focused on
the fossil-fuel and utility industries, and then shared with the Chronicle.
Analysis of lobbying emailssent to Bay Area Air DistrictThe Chronicle reviewed 85 emails sent toLynda Hopkins, the chairperson of the BayArea Air District. The letters followed one offive templates and were sent from a variety ofemail addresses.
Template 1: Used for 18 letters
Template 2: Used for 15 letters
Template 3: Used for 8 letters
3/12/26, 3:18 PMResidents deny sending emails pushing Bay Area air policy change
Rufus Je\ris, a spokesperson for the Bay Area Council,
whose members include charities, major retailers, tech
@rms and oil companies, said neither the council nor
Speak4 submitted letters without permission. “We didn’t Template 4: Used for 15 letters
Template 5: Used for 29 letters
Graphic: Todd Trumbull/S.F. Chronicle • Source: Chronicleanalysis of emails obtained from a public records request bythe Energy and Policy Institute Note: The names and email addresses of the senders havebeen masked for privacy, and the template body text hasbeen highlighted.
This Simple Hack That KeepsRodents Out Of Your Engine BayVamoose 3/12/26, 3:18 PMResidents deny sending emails pushing Bay Area air policy change
submit any letters on anyone’s behalf, this was all done by the users themselves,” he said.
Speak4 did not respond to emails requesting comment.
Je\ris said people who support the campaign can visit the website of the Bay Area Council’s Common Sense Coalition, which was created to support the change. They can submit a letter via a “Sign Now” button that takes them to a Speak4 website. A “Join the Coalition” button on the coalition’s homepage also takes visitors to Speak4’s website.
“The only way through our campaign for a letter to be
initiated is by the direct action of a person entering their @rst and last name, an email address, and a zip code, then hitting Send,” Je\ris said in a written statement. “That’s it.
Period.”
The website includes a portal — “SIGN THE PETITION” —
that generates a prewritten statement, though users can change the text.
But several of the people named in the Speak4 emails told the Chronicle they weren’t aware of the campaign, nor were they aware of how to submit letters.
Eric Jordan, a behavioral health case manager who lives in Emeryville, told the Chronicle he did not write the letter attributed to him.
“Whoever is behind this, they should have gotten our
consent,” he said. “You’re forging a check almost. You need to get permission if you’re sending stu\ out like that. When it comes down to politics, it’s all about what people think and feel. That’s what keeps it organic and authentic.”
3/12/26, 3:18 PMResidents deny sending emails pushing Bay Area air policy change
Reached by phone, another person whose name was on an
email to the air quality board said he did not write it. “I rarely write emails because I don’t think it makes a di\erence,” said the person, who asked not to be identi@ed publicly, saying he fears being misused in another
campaign. “I’m not going to change anyone’s opinion about anything. Maybe a special interest group wrote these
letters. Maybe their intent is to bombard the district with emails.”
For at least the last decade, the district has conducted a socio-economic analysis before the board adopts or
changes a regulation, as required under state law. District sta\ are drafting a policy to formalize this practice, and ensure sta\ apply consistent criteria when they perform studies that go beyond the state’s statutory requirements.
Critics of the move worry making the analysis standard
could discourage more stringent air pollution regulations.
The district intends to publish a proposed policy for public comment and present it to a sub-committee for a vote in July. If approved, the district board would vote on it as early as September. Je\ris said the Bay Area Council began advocating for the measure last fall, though it’s unclear at whose behest.
Greg Nudd, deputy executive odcer of policy for the air quality district, said in an interview that the agency is still accepting comments via emails. However, it will replace that system with a website where people must submit their comments to address “this email spamming problem,” he
said. It’s unclear when that website will go live.
“It’s unfortunate because the policymakers need to have an understanding of what the various stakeholders in the Bay 3/12/26, 3:18 PMResidents deny sending emails pushing Bay Area air policy change
March 12, 2026
Jennifer Gollan
INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER
Jennifer Gollan is an investigative reporter at the San Francisco Chronicle. Shejoined the Chronicle from the Center for Investigative Reporting, where she lednational investigations that appeared in the Associated Press, the Guardian USand Politico Magazine. She also worked with PBS NewsHour and Al JazeeraEnglish’s “Fault Lines” on special television reports and documentaries.
Her investigations have prompted sweeping changes in federal law thatexpanded the power of local and state police and prosecutors to crack downon abusers with illegal guns; congressional hearings and new legislation to thwart labor abuse in elder care homes; and a review by the Pentagon andfederal legislation to protect workers building warships for the U.S. Navy. area think about a proposed action,” Nudd said.
While Speak4 touts its ability to produce “ AI-powered
custom letters,” Je\ris said that Speak4 did not use AI in its Bay Area campaign.
The use of platforms powered by AI to generate comments from constituents have been used to inDuence public
odcials elsewhere, signaling a new lobbying frontier. A Los Angeles Times investigation last month showed how an AI platform, CiviClick, was used to deluge the South Coast Air Quality Management District with more than 20,000
comments that helped thwart a proposal to phase out gas- powered appliances in Southern California.
Dylan Plummer, acting deputy director of the Sierra Club’s Clean Heat Campaign, said the emails to air district odcials subvert the democratic process and undermine
regulations.
“The ethical rami@cations of these misleading tactics are signi@cant,” Plummer said, “and there are real questions about whether laws safeguarding against identity theft
have been broken.”
3/12/26, 3:18 PMResidents deny sending emails pushing Bay Area air policy change
federal legislation to protect workers building warships for the U.S. Navy.
Projects she led have received various honors. In 2022, she received the RobertF. Kennedy Journalism Award and was nominated for an Emmy Award for“When Abusers Keep Their Guns,” an investigation that exposed howperpetrators often kill their partners with ^rearms they possess unlawfully. Herwork has also earned a national Emmy Award, a Hillman Prize for webjournalism, two Sigma Delta Chi Awards from the Society of ProfessionalJournalists, a National Headliner Award, a Gracie Award and two Society forAdvancing Business Editing and Writing awards. 3/12/26, 3:18 PMResidents deny sending emails pushing Bay Area air policy change
Latest Video
More For You
SAN FRANCISCO
Lurie’s tweet over antisemiticheckling creates online>restormIn the hours afterward Lurie's statement, a ^restormignited that reached the highest levels of Californiapolitics and Israeli media.
TRAVEL
Rick Steves says you should ditchthe ‘bucket list’ travel mindset
CALIFORNIA
How long can you drive withexpired registration inCalifornia?
MOVIES & TV
Tom Hanks’ son says he’s stuck in Colombia
TAHOE
Tahoe avalanche survivors describe life-or-death choice
Alysa Liu presented withthe key to Oakland
Alysa Liu returns toOakland for celebrationrally St. Helena residents arefed up with dirty water Bay Bridge lights made a>eeting return as an artisttweaks the code 01:11 00:34 01:19 00:50
Let's Play
Cross|word Flipart Really Bad ChessSpellTower Typeshift
1 From: Lourdes Enriquez <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2026 12:48 PM
To: BAWSCA WMR
Cc: Smegal, Tom; Deborah Grimes; Christiane Barth; Sandra Johnson Subject: March 19, 2026 BAWSCA Board of Directors Meeting Agenda Attachments: 26_BAWSCA_March 19_Agenda_FINAL.pdf
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.
Report Suspicious
Attached is the agenda for the BAWSCA Board of Directors meeting on Thursday, March 19, 2026 at 6:30pm.
Supporting documentation for agenda items are not included in this email because of its volume. Click here to download a complete copy of the agenda and attachments for these meetings from our website, or go to:
http://bawsca.org/about/board/agendas
If you have questions, please call (650) 349-3000.
Thank you,
Lourdes Enriquez
Lourdes Verzosa-Enriquez
Assistant to the CEO/General Manager
Bay Area Water Supply & Conservation Agency
155 Bovet Road, #650
San Mateo, CA 94402
650-349-3000
www.bawsca.org
2190242.1
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
Thursday, March 19, 2026
6:30pm
Burlingame Community Center – Sequoia Room
850 Burlingame Ave., Burlingame
CLICK HERE TO VIEW LIVESTREAM
(One Member of the Board will participate in this meeting by Teleconference. Location shall be:
2-15-1 Hon-Machi, Kanazawa-Shi, Kanazawa, 920-0853, Japan. When any member of the board participates by teleconference, all votes taken at this meeting will be by roll call vote.) AGENDA
Agenda Item Presenter Page
1. Call to Order/Roll Call/Salute to Flag (Vella)
2. Comments by the Chair (Vella)
3. Board Policy Committee Report (Attachment) (Ragsdale) Pg 3
4. Public Comments (Vella)
Members of the public may address the Board on any issues not listed on the agenda that are within the purview of the Agency. Comments on matters that are listed on the agenda may be made at the time the Board is considering each item. Each speaker is allowed a maximum of two (2) minutes.
5. SFPUC Report (Ritchie)
6. Consent Calendar (Attachments) (Vella)
A. Approve Minutes of the January 15, 2026 Meeting
B. Receive and File Budget Status Report – As of January 31, 2026 C. Receive and File Investment Report – As of January 31, 2026 D. Receive and File Bond Surcharge Collection, Account Balance and Payment Report – As of December 31, 2025
Pg 15
Pg 21
Pg 23
Pg 25
7. Action Calendar
A. Consider Resolution #2026-01 Concurring in Nomination of John H. (Smegal) Weed of Alameda County Water District to the California Water Insurance Fund Board of the Association of California Water Agencies Joint Powers Insurance Authority (ACWA/JPIA) Captive Insurance Company (Attachment) This item was not considered by the Committee at its February 11th meeting because the formal request from ACWD was received after the BPC meeting.
Pg 27
8. Public Hearing (Vella)
A. Public Hearing and Status of BAWSCA’s Employee Vacancies and Recruitment and Retention Efforts as Required by Assembly Bill 2561 (Government Code Section 3502.3) (Attachment)
Pg 33
March 19, 2026 BAWSCA Board of Directors Meeting Agenda Packet Page 1
2190242.1
9. Reports and Discussions
A. Preliminary Fiscal Year 2026-27 Work Plan, Results to be Achieved (Smegal) and Operating Budget (Attachment)
B. Wholesale Water Rate Setting in Accordance with the Water Supply (Tang) Agreement (WSA) (Attachment)
C. BAWSCA’s Long-Term Reliable Water Supply Strategy 2050 First Year (Ashoori) Year Accomplishments and Affordability Program Update (Attachment)
Pg 37
Pg 71
Pg 75
10. CEO Reports (Smegal)
A. Water Supply Conditions
B. Bay Delta Plan/FERC Update
C. CEO Letter (Attachment)
D. Board of Directors Policy Calendar (Attachment)
E. Correspondence Packet (Under Separate Cover)
Pg 83
Pg 91
11. Closed Session (Schutte)
A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation pursuant to Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Final License Application Proceedings for Don Pedro Hydroelectric Project, P-2299-082, and La Grange Hydroelectric Project, P-14581-002.
B. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation pursuant to Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9 - State Water Board Cases (Third Appellate District Court Case No.
C101232).
12. Report from Closed Session (Schutte)
13. Additional Time for Public Comments (Time Permitting) (Vella) Members of the public may address the Board on any issues that are within the purview of the Agency.
14. Directors’ Discussion: Comments, Questions and Agenda Requests (Vella)
15. Date, Time and Location of Future Meetings (Vella) (See attached schedule of meetings)
16. Adjourn to next meeting scheduled for May 21, 2026 at 6:30pm (Vella)
Pg 93
Accessibility for Individuals with Disabilities
Upon request, BAWSCA will provide for written agenda materials in appropriate alternative formats, or disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to enable individuals with disabilities to participate in and provide comments at/related to public meetings.
Please submit a request, including your name, phone number and/or email address, and a description of the modification, accommodation, auxiliary aid, service or alternative format requested at least two days before the meeting. Requests should be emailed to [email protected] or submitted by phone at 650-349-3000. Requests will be granted whenever possible and resolved in favor of accessibility.
March 19, 2026 BAWSCA Board of Directors Meeting Agenda Packet Page 2 1 From: MYR Comm Affairs Staff <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2026 1:55 PM
Subject: [INVITATION] Women's History Month City Hall Celebration Attachments: 2026 WHM Final (3).png
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.
Report Suspicious
On behalf of Mayor Daniel Lurie, I am pleased to invite you to join a City Hall celebration in honor of Women's History Month on Thursday, March 19, 2026 at 6:00 PM, doors open at 5:30 PM.
San Francisco City Hall
Rotunda
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
RSVP at https://bit.ly/2026WHMreception
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
Report Suspicious
From: Allyson Ritger
To: recpark.commission; Chen, Chyanne (BOS); Madland, Sarah (REC); [email protected]; John-Baptiste, Alicia (MYR); [email protected]; Herrera, David; Commission; Mauer, Dan (REC) Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Please upgrade Crocker Amazon and don"t listen to NIMBYs Date: Saturday, March 14, 2026 5:46:07 PM
A major reason why families leave SF is the lack of access to sports facilities nearby. I'm SO tired of the dangerous, unlit parking lots at Crocker, the fields full of dog poop, the gopher holes, the practices canceled due to a bit of rain, etc. Crocker desperately needs to be upgraded, and the SF Giants' contribution is exactly what we need. I'm so tired of these "Keep Crocker Real" folks, who disingenuously leave out information. Their flyer says that the new plan will "chop down 100+ trees," and of course doesn't mention that those trees will be replaced by even more native trees. Nobody's park access is being taken away. Please move forward with a plan that will make this city better for families with kids. It's already exhausting to try to make it here; please don't let NIMBYs decide yet another thing for selfish reasons. --
Allyson Klein Ritger (she/her)
1 From: Mary Fecher <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2026 8:36 PM
To: Commission
Subject: Artificial Turf
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
Report Suspicious
Dear water commission, hoping you can stand up against the powers that be who plan to install plastic grass at crocker amazon park. The neighbors are just learning about it and they don’t want it and worry about toxins in the water. I hope someday we can look back and be glad that we stood up.
A concerned citizen
Mary
Sent from my iPhone
1 From: Tom Smegal <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 16, 2026 10:20 AM
To: BoardOfDirectors
Cc: Francis, Tom; McPherson, Danielle; Ashoori, Negin; Ramey, Kyle; Tang, Christina; Lourdes Enriquez; Deborah Grimes; Christiane Barth; Sandra Johnson; Schutte, Allison C; BAWSCA WMR; Jessilyn J. Ho
Subject: NOTICE OF INTENTION TO AMEND CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE FOR BAWSCA AND RFA
Attachments: 26_March_COI_Notice of Intent-Amend_FINAL.pdf; [HB Edits] BAWSCA RFA COIC - redlined.pdf
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.
Report Suspicious
TO: BAWSCA Board of Directors
RFA Board of Directors
CC: BAWSCA StaƯ
Water Management Representatives
DATE: March 16, 2026
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF INTENTION TO AMEND CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE FOR BAWSCA AND RFA
Attached is a Notice of Intention to amend the Conflict of Interest Code (Code) for the Bay Area Water Supply & Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) and the San Francisco Bay Area Regional Water System Financing Authority (RFA). The Notice and the proposed amendments to the Code is posted on BAWSCA's website, and distributed via email to all BAWSCA and RFA employees, as well as members of the public who have signed up to receive notifications from BAWSCA or RFA. Following posting to the website, there will be a 45-day comment period, from March 16, 2026 through April 30, 2026 for the public and employees of BAWSCA and RFA to comment on the proposed Code amendment.
Upon conclusion of the 45-day comment period, we will present to the Board any public comment(s) received, and each Board will determine whether the Code amendment should be recommended for adoption as proposed or revised.
Attached is the redlined Code as proposed. The FPPC has reviewed and revised the Code.
Please see attached and contact the BAWSCA oƯice at 650-349-3000 if you have any questions.
Appreciatively,
Tom Smegal
2 Thomas F. Smegal
CEO/GM
Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency
155 Bovet Road, Suite 650
San Mateo, CA 94402
Mobile: (408) 640-6490
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.BAWSCA.org
22767557.2
NOTICE OF INTENTION TO AMEND THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE
OF THE BAY AREA WATER SUPPLY AND CONSERVATION AGENCY AND THE
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA REGIONAL WATER SYSTEM FINANCING AUTHORITY
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) and San Francisco Bay Area Regional Water System Financing Authority (RFA), pursuant to the authority granted by section 87306 of the Government Code, propose to amend their conflict of interest code (Code). A 45-day comment period has been established commencing on March 16, 2026 and closing on April 30, 2026. All inquiries and comments should be directed to the contact listed below.
BAWSCA and RFA propose to amend the Code to clarify the filing requirements for individuals who must file Statement of Economic Interests electronically with the Fair Political Practices Commission pursuant to Government Code Section 87200.
Any interested person may submit written comments relating to the proposed amendment by submitting them no later than April 30, 2026, or at the conclusion of the public hearing, if requested, whichever comes later, to the contact listed below. At this time, no public hearing is scheduled. A person may request a public hearing on this proposed amendment no later than April 15, 2026, by submitting a request to the contact listed below.
All inquiries concerning this proposed amendment and any communication required by this notice should be directed to: Lourdes Enriquez, Assistant to the CEO/General Manager, 650-349- 3000, [email protected], or 155 Bovet Road, Suite 650, San Mateo, California 94402.
2 CONFLICT- OF- INTEREST CODE FOR
BAY AREA WATER SUPPLY AND CONSERVATION AGENCY
AND
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA REGIONAL WATER SYSTEM FINANCING AUTHORITY
The Political Reform Act (Government Code Section 81000, et seq.) requires state and local government agencies to adopt and promulgate conflict -of -interest codes. The Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) has adopted a regulation (2 California Code of Regulations Section 18730) that contains the terms of a standard conflict -of -interest code, which can be incorporated by reference in an agency’s code. After public notice and hearing, the standard code may be amended by the Fair Political Practices Commission PPC air Political Practices Commission to conform to amendments in the Political Reform Act. Therefore, the terms of 2 California Code of Regulations Section 18730 and any amendments to it duly adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission PPC air Political Practices Commission are hereby incorporated by reference. This regulation and the attached Appendices, designating positions and establishing disclosure categories, shall constitute the conflict -of -interest code of the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) and San Francisco Bay Area Regional Water System Financing Authority (RFA).
Individuals holding designated positions Individuals Designated employees holding designated positions shall file their statements of economic interests with BAWSCA, which will make the statements available for public inspection and reproduction. (Gov. Code Section. 81008.) All statements will be retained by BAWSCA. will retain All the original statements for these designated employeeswill be retained by BAWSCA.
Note: RFA is administratively run by BAWSCA.
3 CONFLICT- OF- INTEREST CODE FOR
BAY AREA WATER SUPPLY AND CONSERVATION AGENCY
AND
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA REGIONAL WATER SYSTEM FINANCING AUTHORITY
APPENDIX A
DESIGNATED POSITIONS
Designated Positions Disclosure Categories
Attorney, BAWSCA 1, 2, 3
Office Manager, BAWSCA 1
Finance Manager, BAWSCA 1
Senior Water Resources Specialist, BAWSCA 1, 3
Senior Water Resources Engineer, BAWSCA 1, 3
Water Resources Specialist, BAWSCA 1, 3
Water Resources Manager, BAWSCA 1, 3
Consultants/New Positions *
*Consultants/nNew Ppositions shall be included in the list of designated positions and shall disclose pursuant to the broadest disclosure category in the code subject to the following limitations:
The CEO/General Manager may determine in writing that a particular consultant or /new position, although a “designated position,” is hired to perform a range of duties that is limited in scope and thus is not required to comply fully comply with the disclosure requirements described in this section. Such written determination shall include a description of the consultant's or/ new position’s duties and, based upon that description, a statement of the extent of the disclosure requirements. The CEO’s/General Manager’s determination is a public record and shall be retained for public inspection in the same manner and location as this conflict -of -interest code. (Gov. Code Sec. 81008).
Note: The position of Attorney is filled held by an outside consultant, but acts in a staff capacity.
4 Public Officials Who Manage Public Investments
The following positions are NOT covered by the designated in this BAWSCA and RFA’s cConflict -of - iInterest cCode because they must electronically file under their Statement of Economic Interests with the Fair Political Practices Commission pursuant to under Government Code Section 87200. Those who file under Government Code 87200 are required to file electronically with the Fair Political Practices Commission,, and therefore, these positions are listed for informational purposes only:
• Members, Board of Directors, BAWSCA
• CEO/General Manager, BAWSCA
• Members, Board of Directors, RFA
• General Manager, RFA
• Secretary, RFA
• Financial Officer, RFA
• Secretary, RFA
An individual holding one of the above- listed positions may contact the Fair Political Practices Commission for assistance or written advice regarding their filing obligations if they believe that their position has been categorized incorrectly. The Fair Political Practices Commission makes the final determination whether a position is covered by sSSection 87200.
5 CONFLICT- OF- INTEREST CODE FOR
BAY AREA WATER SUPPLY AND CONSERVATION AGENCY
AND
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA REGIONAL WATER SYSTEM FINANCING AUTHORITY
APPENDIX B
DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
Disclosure Category 1
Designated positions in this category must disclose all investments and business positions in business entities, and all sources of income (including receipt of gifts, loans, and travel payments), from businesses of the type to contract with BAWSCA to provide services, supplies, materials, commodities, books, machinery, vehicles or equipment utilized by BAWSCA.
Disclosure Category 2
Designated positions in this category must disclose interests in real property, located in whole or in part within the boundaries of BAWSCA, or within two miles of the boundaries of BAWSCA, including any leasehold, beneficial or ownership interest or option to acquire such interest in real property.
Disclosure Category 3
Designated positions in this category must disclose all investments and business positions in business entities, and all sources of income (including receipt of gifts, loans, and travel payments), entities of the type to receive grants from or through BAWSCA.