Public Utilities Revenue Bond Oversight Committee

MINUTES

Monday, April 16, 2007
9:30 a.m. –11:30 a.m.
1155 Market Street (between 7 & 8th Streets)
4th Floor Conference Room

Committee Members
Aimee Brown, Chair
Patrick Sweetland, Vice-Chair
Brian Browne
Stan Jones
Kyle Rhorer
Lisbet Sunshine
David Sutter
 

1. Call to Order and Roll Call
   
   Chair Aimee Brown called the meeting to order at 9:40 a.m. and roll call was taken. Present: Ms Brown, Brian Browne, Stan Jones, Kyle Rhorer; David Sutter, Lisbet Sunshine and Patrick Sweetland were not present. There was a quorum.

2. Public Comment
   
   Members of the public may address the RBOC on matters that are within the RBOC’s jurisdiction and are not on today’s agenda.

   There were no comments from the public.

3. Chair’s Report:
   
   a. Introduction of new RBOC members: Mr. Stan Jones and Mr. Kyle Rhorer
   b. Update on RBOC Audit by Robert Kuo
   
   a.) Ms. Brown introduced two new members of the Committee: Stan Jones appointed by the Budget Analyst’s office and Kyle Rhorer appointed by the Controller. Mr. Stanton Jones briefly described his background. He has served as a joint venture partner with the budget analyst on the Board of Supervisors for 20 years and during the course of that service worked as an audit manager and served on the audit team that participated in the audit of the PUC several years ago. Mr. Jones has an extensive military background as well. Mr. Rhorer then provided an overview of his background: He is a Vice President with R.W. Beck, primarily focusing on water, wastewater and energy. Mr. Rhorer has 16 years of experience in environmental consulting to the public sector and predominantly on large-scale capital improvement programs.
   
   b.) Chair Brown noted that the Committee is expecting a copy of the first part of Bob Kuo’s report in late April. After receipt of the report, RBOC members have 10 days to make comments and request changes.

4. Update on WSIP program – Tony Irons, Deputy General Manager

   Mr. Tony Irons, Deputy General Manager of SFPUC, provided a status update on the WSIP program. Mr. Irons estimated that 22 of 44 projects have moved out of the planning stage and into the design stage, with a few moving into the construction phase. There will be a CIP Risk Assessment conducted, which will analyze and make recommendations regarding future schedules, costs, materials and scope. PFM, a consulting firm, will conduct a drought analysis to determine the elasticity of demand. This analysis will run concurrent to the environmental review. Parsons and CH2M Hill will provide a Senior Advisory Consultant who will report to him and Susan Leal, PUC General Manager. Mr. Irons then addressed Committee member questions.

   Mr. Browne asked a question in behalf of Steve Lawrence, a member of the public. Mr. Browne stated that Mr. Lawrence suggested that incremental projects could have been done, and used the Irvington Tunnel as an example. According to Mr. Browne, Mr. Lawrence believes that because the Irvington Tunnel is a critical choke point that it could have been fixed before the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was in place. Mr. Irons stated that working on one project that is part of a larger set of projects would suggest piecemeal approach, which is not permitted under CA law. Mr. Irons clarified that the Planning Committee cannot certify a project specific EIR without the Certified Programmatic EIR. Mr. Irons stated that there is also no waiver in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) that allows the use of imminent disaster as a reason to expedite specific projects. Mr. Irons verified that once a certified EIR is in place for a CIP, certain projects could be given priority based on specific drivers, i.e. seismic vulnerability. Mr. Irons continued to review the EIR process, WSIP progress and in closing agreed to update the Committee with a big picture overview on a regular basis.

   Public Comment: Mr. Kalman asked for the ratio of PUC staff to Consultants working on WSIP and would like to know the cost involved with working with consultants.

5. Discussion and possible action to approve the minutes of the meetings held on February 9, 2007, March 12, 2007 and March 19, 2007

   Chair Ms. Brown requested that this item be placed on the agenda for the next meeting, as David Sutter, Lisbet Sunshine, and Patrick Sweetland are not present and should review the minutes before final approval. 

6. Discussion and possible action relating to RBOC meeting times and dates

   Mr. Browne motioned to have the next two scheduled meetings changed to afternoon time slots. With Mr. Rhorer’s second, the Committee voted three (Chair Browne, Mr. Jones, Mr. Rhorer) to one (Mr. Browne) against and the motion did not pass. Ms. Brown asked that this topic be added as an agenda item to be discussed at a future meeting.

   Public comment: Mr. Kalman stated that he finds it very difficult to attend the RBOC morning meetings and feels that there should be more public outreach to encourage citizens to participate. Mr. Kalman stated that he feels that it is very difficult to get the proper legal, technical and financial information from PUC staff.
   

7. Discussion and possible action relating to RBOC members requests for information from SFPUC staff

   Mr. Jones requested the calculation for cost and schedule variances from PUC staff.

8. Discussion and possible action for future agenda items

   Staff would provide an overview of recent activities in Capital Finance.

   RBOC meeting times will be discussed, exploring the notion of holding some meetings in the afternoon.

9. Adjournment
   
   Mr. Rhorer moved to adjourn the meeting and Mr. Jones seconded; the meeting was adjourned at 11:17 a.m.