City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: INFORMATION ITEM
Lead Department: Utilities
Meeting Date: April 21, 2025
Report #:2503-4359
TITLE
Communication from Utilities Advisory Commission to City Council Regarding SFPUC Water Supply Planning
RECOMMENDATION
No action is requested. The Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) requests the City Council assist in seeking answers to the questions below from Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation (BAWSCA) and/or San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC)
BACKGROUND
The Utilities Advisory Commission expressed interest in the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC), how these organizations operate, and the relationship with the City of Palo Alto and our water utility. The SFPUC is the City’s sole supplier of potable water, and BAWSCA represents the 26 wholesale customers, including Palo Alto. To support the interest of the Commission, both agencies presented to the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) and addressed their questions in an open style forum at the December 2024 commission meeting. The UAC wishes further engagement from these bodies and as an advisory commission to the City Council, seeks assistance from the City Council in this engagement.
ANALYSIS
The UAC expressed interest in receiving more details from the SFPUC on their water supply planning activities. At its March 5, 2025 meeting, a commissioner brought forward a draft letter requesting information from SFPUC via the City’s representation on BAWSCA. The UAC voted unanimously to transmit four questions they are seeking City Council support in advocating responses to. Specifically, the UAC articulated the necessity of responses to the following questions to effectively fulfill their advisory role to the City Council providing prudent feedback on issues related to water supply. Understanding that the City, as a member of the 26 whole
sale customers represented by BAWSCA, the UAC is seeking the City Council support in use of all its efforts with BAWSCA and ultimately SFPUC.
1. What is the return period of the design drought and the calculations behind it? Please provide a sensitivity analysis evaluating the impacts of a less severe design drought on the return period, the deficit, and associated financial impacts (costs)?
2. What is the impact of lower demand projections (including the Finance Bureau assumptions and current usage informed by the BAWSCA 2022 projection study high and low scenarios) on the revenue requirements and associated cost/acre foot to retail customers.
3. How would the combination of less conservative design droughts and lower demand projections influence the probability of requiring a 50% reduction and the need for SFPUC to pursue alternative water supplies?
4. Using current demand and the three droughts presented in the Long-Term Vulnerability Assessment, what would the storage levels have been if the Bay Delta Plan were implemented?
RESOURCE IMPACT
There is no additional financial impact. Future enhanced advocacy efforts would require prioritization of resources to support.
ATTACHMENTS
None
APPROVED BY:
Kiely Nose, Interim Utilities Director