Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Meeting Votes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Votes at a glance: SFPUC approves consent items, development agreements, PPA and contracts
Summary
At its Dec. 13 meeting the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission adopted a lengthy consent calendar (with select items pulled for discussion), authorized a 10‑year renewable power purchase agreement for Clean Power SF, approved cost‑share and development agreements, declared surplus properties for sale, and awarded several contracts including a wastewater facility contract supported by community benefits commitments.
The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission conducted multiple formal votes on Dec. 13, adopting a mixture of consent items, individual contract awards and development agreements.
Key outcomes:
- Approval of November 8 minutes (voice vote). - Consent calendar adopted in a single vote after items A and O were pulled for separate discussion (motion and voice vote). - Item 11: Authorized a 10‑year renewable power purchase agreement to supply the small long‑term RPS obligation for Clean Power SF from the Sunset Reservoir solar facility (motioned and carried by voice vote). - Item 12: Authorized a cost‑share agreement with Contra Costa Water District for environmental review (not to exceed $100,000) for Los Vaqueros expansion (carried). - Items 13–16: Approved a seven‑year management agreement with Alameda County Resource Conservation District, a five‑year lease (with option), and two development agreements with the Housing Authority and partners, with associated CEQA findings and mitigation measures (each carried). - Items 17–18: Declared surplus property in Pleasanton and Millbrae and authorized sale agreements (carried). - Item 19: Awarded contract DB126 (Emerson Process Management) for wastewater facility work (total not to exceed approximately $20.4M); multiple community speakers and labor representatives supported the award because of detailed community benefit commitments. - Closed session: Commission asserted attorney‑client privilege, then returned and approved settlements for two closed‑session items; commissioners voted not to disclose closed session discussions.
Several items that had single bidders or bids significantly above engineer estimates were pulled for discussion or highlighted for future regular‑calendar consideration. Commissioners repeatedly requested that future single‑bid/high‑overestimate procurement items come to the regular agenda rather than consent for fuller scrutiny.
