civillib@cwnet.com wrote:

Hey folks,

I'm trying to put together a basic release re: below. HOWEVER, I do need a few things...

1. An update on what is going on tomorrow (news conference w/ammiano, ross, etc. right?).

Tomorrow, at 1pm, Supervisors Tom Ammiano and Ross Mirkarimi, will be introducing 1) The Implementation Ordinance for San Francisco's Community Choice renewable energy project, which will provide San Francisco with 50% solar and wind electricity by the end of the next decade, and 2) a Statement of Intent Ordinance to the California Public Utilities Commission announcing that San Francisco is moving forward with the project. The ordinances will be introduced during Board of Supervisors 'Roll Call For Introductions'.

2. When is the legislation due for a vote?

The legislation will go to the Board's Budget and Finance Committee either tomorrow, or Tuesday, April 24, and should reach the full Board of Supervisors for a final vote by mid to late May.

3. What's the very brief (1 paragraph or 2) history of it...introduced, etc.

The Implementation Ordinance has gone through a three year process of hearings before the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), and the Budget and Finance Committee, during which the implementation plan was continuously debated and re-written until it reached its current form, which Ammiano and Mirkarimi have decided is now ready to be introduced as final legislation. So technically, these ordinances are brand new and will not have been introduced until tomorrow (Tuesday, Apr 17)

4. Summary of the legislation?

The Implementation Ordinance will make use of a new state law passed in 2002, which allows individual California communities to withdraw from purchasing power from their private electricity providers (in our case PG&E) and become a buying co-op known as a Community Choice Aggregator, which is empowered to make its own electricity purchasing contracts. The City and County of San Francisco will use this new Community Choice status to contract with an energy provider which will make electricity purchases for the community as directed by the City, and most importantly, will construct sufficient wind, solar and efficiency projects such that, by 2020, the City will be meeting over 50% of its overall electricity demands through local renewable electricity production.

5. Couple of quotes (Ann already sent one).

Eric Brooks, Co-Chair of the San Francisco Green Party Sustainability Working Group said "With the newest science on global warming showing that all industrial countries like the U.S. will need to cut our CO2 emissions 90% by the year 2030 in order to avoid a global catastrophic climate collapse, it is absolutely vital that the Board of Supervisors pass the Community Choice renewable energy project immediately. The looming crisis also makes clear that no City on Earth should be planning to build any new fossil fuel power plants, and the Supervisors should immediately move to cancel the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission's plans to spend over 140 million dollars in public money to install a polluting, CO2 belching, natural gas power plant, in the Bayview Hunters Point neighborhood. That money should be dedicated to San Francisco's solar, wind and other renewable energy projects instead." cheers Eric

It's a new subject to me, and frankly, I've just spent an hour researching it and most of the info is years old...I also can't anything about it on the upcoming Sup agenda, at least for Tuesday.

Thanks,

Cres

At 01:28 PM 4/10/2007 -0700, Don Eichelberger wrote:

...

All-

It looks like we have a week to put together a press statement for the event, and I can help. One focus can be on how local action can make a statement against the exploitation of Native Lands for any industrial purpose, which is in line with the Social Justice Plank on Native Americans of the State Party. http://www.cagreens.org/platform/platform_justice.shtml#native

I don't think it would be hard to argue that the city greens would agree to oppose any energy put in to the SF grid by any source that violates environmental justice, but I do not believe anything specific to the subject has passed through general membership consideration. Should it be a release from the Green Party of SF or the Sustainability WG?

I look forward to tonight's event.

See you there,

Don

At 08:41 AM 4/10/2007, ErikaSF@aol.com wrote:

...

Hi Ann, Thanks for your thoughts on this, and for an attempt at a release. If no one responded to your thought about writing a release, it is because we did not think we needed to. I have written many releases for the SF Green Party, and I just write it, send it to the County Council for approval, and then distribute it to the media. There is no need for the extra step of telling people you might write a release. I wish I could help you expand these words into a release, but I have to work all day and will not have time. I also know nothing about the press conference today. I don't know when it will be, or who may be speaking. This is knowledge I would need anyway if I were to write a release.

Anyway, thanks for your efforts nevertheless.

Best, Erika In a message dated 4/9/2007 11:54:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time, anniegarrison@mac.com writes: I think I not only aimed this at the list but at most everyone else in the susainability group, plus Erika (the SF Greens sole publicist?), though I know there's at least one more gal in the working group, who just moved over here from the East Bay. I really wanted an answer 'cause I was still plannin' to try and get myself down to City Hall by noon tomorrow.

Has it been postponed? And could someone please remind me of the Howard Street address of the Peak Oil Education event tomorrow night? 7:30, right? I was planning to try to make both events---on time, which, as you know, would be a small miracle, for me.

Please don't make me go racing off to City Hall if this thing has been postponed. I'd expect Mary R. to get an announcement of a postponement before I would.

This came up because I offered to write a paragraph or so saying this means we won't be needing any gas turbine peaker power in Bayview Hunters Point or Lakeview-Oceanside-Merced, or any coal-fired power from the native Southwest and nobody took me up on it, so I hoped that meant somebody had it covered 'cause I don't care if I do it; I just hope it's included in the press conference. Actually, I'd just as soon see somebody else do it, but I will if no one else steps forward. Or maybe I already did:

This legislation means that the CIty and County of San Francisco won't be needing any gas turbine peaker power in Bayview Hunters Point or Lakeview-Oceanside-Merced, or any coal-fired power from the native Four Corners.

There. Done. Can anyone try and get that into the press release?

R&R, for one'n all---A.

---------- See what's free at <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503>AOL.com.