3.  Minutes - August minutes have been approved.

4.  Public Comment

Richard Hansen mentioned a couple of events at the USF campus on sustainable cities that might be of interest to the WWCAC members adding that he would be sending the details to the members as soon as they are available/finalized.

5.  S.F. Sewer System Master Plan (MP) Update – status of Commission presentation, draft plan, EIR - Jon Loiacono gave a quick update on the MP:
* We’re currently looking into potable water offsets.
* We’re hoping to go in front of the Commissioners on November 13.

Questions and Comments on the MP Update
The WWCAC members made the following comments:
* Asked if the November 13 date was firm.
ANSWER: Yes.
* Asked if we are asking the Commissioners for policies and what kind of policies they were.
ANSWER: We can give you a list of those policies.
* Asked if policies are incorporated in CEQA.
* Asked when they will see the FEMA flood mapping
ANSWER: In October
* Asked if staff knew what the presentation was going to say yet, and also the use of the term “Environmental Justice”.
ANSWER: We are going to address it and work on how to say it.
* Asked if staff needed help in the use of the term “Environmental Justice”.
ANSWER: We’re going to go ahead and use it.
* Commented that to reduce confusion, it might be a good idea to provide a definition.
ANSWER: Yes, we will. The City has also to put up an ordinance.
* Asked when they could see a Summary Report.
ANSWER: We haven’t changed it yet.
* Commented that staff should be prepared to discuss the Environmental Justice issue.
* Commented that staff should present broad policy.
ANSWER: We will cover stormwater and flooding.
ANSWER: We called it “sewer impact management”
* Asked about purple piping.
ANSWER: We’re working with the water enterprise and try to figure out how to make new developments use less water.
ANSWER: This will be for low-lying communities.
* Asked if staff started getting in touch with the Supervisors yet, especially Supervisor Maxwell.
ANSWER: No
* Commented that there was a meeting planned.
* Suggested that other members of the board be contacted as well.
ANSWER: Yes, there will be a meeting.
* Commented that the main interest is the low-lying areas that will be affected.
* Commented that there are also the under-utilized, industrial lands. This is a political issue: Leaving those areas as is, without improvements will not be good.
ANSWER: A book entitled “City of Future” talks about the fact that when you are going to develop an area, you should look into what the best way of doing that is.
* Commented that whatever decision is made for future planning, the SFPUC does have a role, even though not a dictating one. Suggested to staff that they could say, “This is what you need to do, and if you don’t, this is what will happen.”
* Commented that what they recommend to staff is that they make the area an open space and recreational area.
* Commented that that wouldn’t happen.
* Commented that that it could happen.
* Commented that they wish there could be a conversation about this.
* Commented that “Speaking on graywater in the City” could be a potential agenda item.

Lurilla Harris commented about water reuse in the draft EIR.

No action was taken.

6.  S.F. Sewer System Master Plan (MP) Outreach – SFPUC’s strategy to vet the draft plan for the public - Tyrone Jue gave a quick update on the MP Outreach. Excerpts are as follows:
* The next round of public workshops are on November 13, 14 and 15.
* This round will be the biggest push to get people out there.

Questions and Comments on the S.F. Sewer System Master Plan (MP) Outreach
The WWCAC members made the following comments:
* Asked how staff is going to include the public’s input and commented that people stood up and asked for a few things.
ANSWER: We will present the preferred alternatives first, and then ask what they think.
* Asked staff how they are going to structure the meetings.
ANSWER: Focus Groups. That will be difficult on the day of the presentation with the Commissioners. We will try to do all three of similar structures.
* Suggested to parse it into different sections, such as, “this is what we will do for this issue, and this is what we will do for that issue.”
* Suggested to break it down and structure it as per the issues.
* Suggested to start the presentation with a big map of the City and do one piece at a time.
ANSWER: Do you see a problem with doing different structures?
* Commented that staff could be flexible.
ANSWER: Suggested to make a PowerPoint presentation for the Commissioners and one for different neighborhoods with poster boards.
ANSWER: We could do breakout groups. After the public workshops, there will be another round of roadshow.
* Asked if staff will seek for action from the Commissioners.
ANSWER: No, that’s not until 2008.
* This round will have the info on cost. January, February or March, the program will be proposed.
* Commented that it is then OK to have a 5-section PowerPoint presentation.
* Commented that it is good to give the president of the Commission a call about the presentation.
ANSWER: We will have protestors for other SFPUC issues at the meeting, such as Combustion Turbines.
* Commented that whatever is going to the Commission, a copy of the presentation be given. Asked if there will be a TAC meeting until November.
ANSWER: No, no TAC Meeting until November
* Commented that they should get a copy.

No action was taken.

7. How should the CAC Wastewater Subcommittee present the plan to the full CAC?

Questions and Comments on how the CAC Wastewater Subcommittee should present the plan to the full CAC
The WWCAC members made the following comments:
* Commented that the discussion should be on how to present it to the full CAC so that they understand it.
* Asked if they should parse it out.
* Commented that we should educate them so they can support.
* Commented that the preference is to make the engineers make the decision.
ANSWER: We suggest what this subcommittee has accomplished. LID, etc., a lot has been done and the WWCAC should take credit. It has been a collaborative effort.
* Commented that it could be called “infrastructure optimization”
* Asked if WWCAC should do it with the full CAC on November 19?
* Commented that the WWCAC should prepare for a presentation for November 19 and break it up in two different sections and set the stage for the meetings.
* Commented that on November 13, it should be brought up that they would like to present it to the full CAC.
* Commented that the following could be a future agenda item for October 18: Review the program, take position of support, potential action on specific items.

8. Update on Urban Watershed Planning Charrette and Stormwater Design Guidelines Open House #2 - Rosey Jencks gave an update on the upcoming Stormwater Design Guidelines Open House #2. Here are some excerpts from the update:
* The SFPUC and Port of SF are developing design criteria for new development and re-development areas in San Francisco where currently stormwater goes directly into the Bay.
* We’re asking to capture 80% if stormwater.
* The guidelines will be broken up by land uses/types.
* We will come up with urban design concepts.
* We will have hand-drawings and San Francisco landscapes be available as examples for the meeting.
* The second Open House will take place on Thursday, October 25.
* The separate sewers in the City are Mission Bay, Lake Merced, Candlestick Park and Presidio.

Rosey Jencks then gave an update on the Urban Watershed Planning Charrette and demonstrated/explained the game that took place at the charrette.

Questions and Comments on Urban Watershed Planning Charrette and Stormwater Design Guidelines Open House #2
The WWCAC members made the following comments:
* Asked if the SFPUC is eliminating flood area?
ANSWER: Yes.
* Commented that the game took into consideration the effectiveness and cost and that it was very interesting.
* Asked if the results would be published.
ANSWER: Yes. The results will be given to the design team.
* Asked if this was/will be integrated with the Better Streets Plan, and if this info could be used for the Better Streets Plan.
ANSWER: Yes, it could be used. The SFPUC might patent this game.
* Commented that the SFPUC should copyright it.
* Commented that it was interesting, accessible and was applying concepts.
* Asked if there was anyone from the SFPUC outside the Wastewater Enterprise.
ANSWER: There has been an internal one with staff a few weeks prior to the Charrette, which included staff both from wastewater and water, but no power.
* Commented that it would be great to go in front of the Commission and praise the meeting.
* Commented that it should also be mentioned at the full CAC.
* Asked if there were other people at the meeting.
* Commented that this should also inform DPW.

Rosey Jencks commented that the game was too technical for some people in the audience without much information.

No action taken.

Question by a WWCAC member before moving onto Agenda Item 9:
* Commented that the sewer project on Mission St. & Mt. Vernon is leaving dirt and materials at end of day after work is done.
ANSWER: It should be cleaned up at the end of the day every day.

9. Adjourned - 7:10 p.m.