LAFCO says EnerNex report supports Clean Power SF but asks for clearer job breakdowns; joint briefing with SFPUC planned

San Francisco Local Agency Formation Commission Chair John Avalos on Dec. 12 said LAFCO has received and posted a final EnerNex report analyzing a proposed Clean Power SF community choice aggregation program and its economic impacts. Executive Officer Jason Fried told commissioners the 190-page report has been distributed to commissioners, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) and the public.

SFPUC Assistant General Manager for Power Barbara Hale told the commission that SFPUC staff previewed the report at its Dec. 9 meeting and provided written comments to LAFCO staff. Hale said staff’s principal concern is clarity: several tables titled “construction jobs” in the EnerNex report combine direct, indirect and induced jobs, which could mislead lay readers about how many on-site construction jobs a San Francisco project would generate. "I think the tables should list the county for each project," Hale said, arguing that identifying project locations would let readers separate jobs that truly accrue to San Francisco from those that are regional or statewide.

Fried said EnerNex’s headline estimate was roughly 9,000 jobs statewide with about half—"around 4,700"—located in the local-hire ordinance jurisdiction, and that most of the positions identified in the report are construction jobs with "a couple hundred" ongoing operational positions. He told commissioners that EnerNex will be asked to present to a joint LAFCO–SFPUC meeting so staff and commissioners can probe the methodology directly and obtain a detailed breakdown of direct versus indirect job components.

Several commissioners urged prompt action while preserving transparency. Commissioner Campos said staff questions about labeling should not be allowed to delay the program’s progress and voiced willingness to hold SFPUC accountable if it stalls. Commissioner Lindo asked which audiences the report is aimed at and said clearer tables would reduce confusion for lay readers. Commissioner Marr and others emphasized urgency given climate goals.

Public speakers from advocacy groups—San Francisco Clean Energy Advocates, 350 Bay Area, Sierra Club and the San Francisco Green Party—generally supported moving the program forward and described staff concerns as matters of clarity rather than fundamental disagreement with the report’s findings. "The issues staff raised are about clarity; none deeply questioned the findings," said an advocate from San Francisco Clean Energy Advocates.

Hale also provided a regulatory update: the administrative law judge in the PG&E green tariff option proceeding at the California Public Utilities Commission reopened the record to reconcile integration-cost treatment with a recent CPUC decision. Reopening the record resets a statutory 90-day ALJ clock; Hale said the short briefing window should let the judge complete a proposed decision soon, with possible final action by the CPUC in March–April.

Next steps: LAFCO staff will schedule a joint briefing with EnerNex and SFPUC staff in the new year to review the report’s methodology and to ask EnerNex to separate construction, indirect and induced job totals and to identify which projects are located inside San Francisco.