Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Civic Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PUC budget battle: Hetch Hetchy capital needs put Clean Power SF reserve and GoSolar SF funding in dispute
Summary
Supervisors debated an SFPUC budget that reprogrammed $19.5M in CCA/Clean Power SF funds to cover Hetch Hetchy capital shortfalls, prompting motions to table or duplicate the PUC file; public testimony urged preserving GoSolar SF and community workforce funding.
The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) presented a two‑year operating and capital budget that highlighted major upcountry and Hetch Hetchy water and power infrastructure needs and proposed financial options including reprogramming a previously appropriated $19.5 million Clean Power SF (CCA) reserve. SFPUC officials told the Budget & Finance Committee that Hetch Hetchy facilities are aging and that the Mountain Tunnel and Rim Fire legacy projects require significant investment.
Todd Reichstrom, SFPUC assistant general manager for business, summarized the capital plan and said the department faces "over $2,000,000,000 of projected capital needs over the next 20 years" and explained tradeoffs including issuing power revenue bonds and reprogramming reserves to avoid sharper rate increases. Budget analyst Mr. Rose recommended ongoing reductions (roughly $4.3M–$4.4M per year in the near term) and noted outstanding differences with SFPUC staff; he also said the budget analysts will report further recommended reductions the following week.
Several supervisors voiced strong objections to using CCA funds for Hetch Hetchy solvency: Supervisor John Avalos said, "There was no communication to us whatsoever that... the balance for Clean Power SF $19,500,000 was going to be appropriated until it came to budget committee 2 weeks ago." PUC and mayoral staff disagreed about what was shared and when; Kate Howard, the Mayor's budget director, said the administration had worked with PUC staff on a financially responsible proposal but could not promise a different June 1 submission if the board tabled the budget.
Public testimony lasting several hours focused heavily on GoSolar SF, a city program that has delivered local job training and solar installations. Dozens of representatives from the solar industry, workforce training programs and environmental groups urged full funding for GoSolar SF and objected to diverting CCA reserve dollars to other needs. VoteSolar, SolarCity, Sunrun, Asian Neighborhood Design graduates and others described job placements, local investment and environmental benefits tied to GoSolar SF.
Committee procedure became the central issue: after failed motions to continue or immediately adopt changes, Supervisor Avalos moved to duplicate the file and table the SFPUC portion so the PUC budget would not be considered until the Mayor resubmits it. That motion passed on a 3–2 roll call (Marr, Avalos, Brie voted aye; Weiner and Chair Farrell voted no). The split vote left other departments' budgets to proceed while the PUC submission was set aside pending further negotiation with the Mayor's Office and the PUC.
No final appropriation reallocating the $19.5 million occurred during the meeting; the committee scheduled supplemental items and bond sales for further review at a subsequent hearing.
