- Sustainactive - list.sfgreens.org

CleanPowerSF Talking Points FOR TODAY - LAFCo/SFPUC Hearing - 1:30pm SF City Hall, Rm 250
by Eric Brooks 25 Sep '15

25 Sep '15

Hi all, Here are CleanPowerSF talking points for today's 1:30pm joint LAFCo/SFPUC hearing in SF City Hall, room 250. Use any one or more of these points in your comments and emails to insist that there are no more delays and that CleanPowerSF must start immediately. 1) After over 10 years of delays the planet cannot wait any longer for this crucial clean energy program to be launched. 2) PG&E is launching its competing 'clean' energy program early next year. It would be a *big* mistake for us to delay at this crucial competitive moment. 3) The energy market and PG&E rates change all the time and CleanPowerSF has been designed to be flexible enough to stay cleaner and more affordable than PG&E, regardless of such changes. This delay is completely unnecessary. 4) CleanPowerSF's existing business plan can easily be adapted as the program moves forward. If we push the pause button every time the energy market changes, we'll never start the program! Approve the CleanPowerSF startup next month as promised! 5) For decades the SFPUC has been managing and delivering over 150 megawatts of power through the Hetch Hetchy system. The SFPUC clearly has the experience and expertise to manage the far much smaller 30 megawatt CleanPowerSF start up without reversing course for weeks to re-examine its business plan. *Close:**We need to get CleanPowerSF started *now*! Enough delays! Please make sure all approvals for CleanPowerSF are passed *on schedule* in October!** *** ###

1 0

PRESS RELEASE - Community-Labor Alliance Defeats Candlestick Stadium Implosion Proposal
by Eric Brooks 17 Jan '15

17 Jan '15

For Immediate Release: January 16, 2015 Contact: Eric Brooks, 415-756-8844 Social Justice & Labor Alliance Defeats Candlestick Stadium Implosion Proposal San Francisco, CA – Community, environmental justice, and labor organizers raised a cheer today when their unified pressure triggered Lennar corporation to withdraw its application for a permit to demolish Candlestick Stadium by implosion demolition. Led by months of organizing by the Bayview Hill Neighborhood Association and the Candlestick Point Neighborhood Committee, the effort to halt the implosion demolition eventually included community groups and organizers from all over the City, with a strong assist from labor unions. The final blow to the Candlestick implosion plan came Thursday night when the San Francisco Building and Construction Trades Council unanimously adopted a resolution sponsored by Laborers Union Local 261 to oppose implosion and support mechanical dismantling of the stadium. Julia Cuppa, Co-Chair of the Candlestick Point Neighborhood Committee said, "Imploding Candlestick Park would have polluted the community with a large plume of hazardous silica cement dust that would have had devastating adverse effects on many people with pre-existing respiratory illnesses and cardiovascular disease. It is a powerful turning point that the community, environmental groups, and local unions all joined together in solidarity to support mechanical dismantling, instead of a dangerous implosion plan." Joshua Arce, Laborers Local 261 community liaison and president of the San Francisco Commission on the Environment said, "This was an opportunity for San Francisco's building trade unions to stand in solidarity with community and environmental leaders to say that when we talk about jobs, we mean good-paying jobs that build communities, not hurt them." Eric Brooks, coordinator for the grassroots organization Our City added, “This groundbreaking victory through an alliance of union, environmental, and social justice organizations is exactly the sort of solidarity between labor and community that Martin Luther King was working for in the latter years of his life. I can think of no greater validation of King’s work on this year’s MLK holiday than the halting of this implosion plan. When labor joins with environmental, social justice and community movements, we together become an unstoppable force.” The plume from the proposed implosion demolition would also have inundated local and state parks, a bird sanctuary, and wetlands habitat near the stadium. Workers at ground zero on the site would have suffered the brunt of adverse health effects. Conversely, mechanical dismantling provides far more employment for local union workers, because it requires skilled hands-on labor for several weeks or more; whereas the implosion would have been accomplished largely via explosives and machinery. Community organizers were deeply alarmed that Lennar corporation, which had been fined $500,000 in 2008 for previous construction dust violations near Candlestick, was seeking permission to generate still more hazardous dust in that area in its implosion demolition plan. A study of the 1998 implosion demolition of a hospital in Calgary, Canada stated in its conclusions that, "Problematic issues surrounding public health protection in affected areas that could extend 10 or 20 km downwind from an implosion site suggest that implosions should be prohibited in metropolitan areas." See: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10473289.2005.10464605 For More Information: Bayview Hill Neighborhood Association - http://www.bayviewhillsf.org Our City - http://our-city.org/campaigns/AntiToxicDevelopment.html ###

1 0

[Fwd: [TrueGreen_NoNukes] Fwd: No Nukes national campaign and the next election]
by Don Eichelberger 27 Mar '11

27 Mar '11

Here is a good call from Lorna Salzman of NY Greens to immediately shut down Indian Point Reactor, less than 50 miles from NYC, shut down all nukes near earthquake faults, and shut down of all nuclear power in the next year. I would only add to repeal Price -Anderson Nuclear Liability law. It is not up for renewal until 2025, but I wonder if it is repealable before it comes up for renewal? Anyone know? Don -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [TrueGreen_NoNukes] Fwd: No Nukes national campaign and the next election Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2011 11:18:33 -0800 From: Abalone Alliance Clearinghouse <ABALONE(a)ENERGY-NET.ORG> Reply-To: TrueGreen_NoNukes(a)yahoogroups.com To: TrueGreen_NoNukes(a)yahoogroups.com -------- Original Message -------- Subject: No Nukes national campaign and the next election Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2011 11:37:40 -0400 From: Lorna Salzman <lsalzman1(a)verizon.net> To: Lorna Salzman <lsalzman1(a)verizon.net> Dear No Nukes people and those on the verge: Many people are now eager to revive the formidable anti-nuclear movement of the 1970s, which was able to prevent new reactor construction since 1974, though not that in other countries. Of immediate and justifiable concern is the shutdown of existing reactors and protection of the public from the radioactive fallout that has already reached the west coast. Interviews with scientists, policy experts and investigative journalists prove beyond a doubt that operating reactors present a grave ongoing threat to the public due to inadequate government regulation and oversight, the inability to predict or prevent reactor and human failure accident, emergency planning that disregards the full consequences of serious accident, and the abdication by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, congress and the president of their responsibilities to put safety ahead of their obeisance to the nuclear industry. This is not new. As part of the anti-nuclear movement from the early 1970s, I learned that, like the Japanese government, our own government has continued to ignore expert scientific evidence and advice from its own agencies, and, when confronted with facts on the lack of safety and the inherent hazards of nuclear power, immediately denies the facts and suppresses any studies or information that might reveal the truth to the public. This is still true today. The Indian Point reactors 25 north of NYC, located on the Ramapo fault, have a 10 mile emergency planning zone but there is no plan dealing with potential exposure of the NYC population despite the recent announcement by the head of the NRC regarding Fukushima that residents out to 50 miles should evacuate. The whole NYC water supply lies to the west, within the "radiation-shed" of Indian Point. Forcing full shutdown of operating reactors must be the first order of business. There is sufficient excess electric capacity nationwide to compensate for all the power provided by all these reactors. Enhanced by serious energy efficiency measures and conservation (also needed to mitigate global warming) we can easily provide for an extra margin of power. Our next concern must be a political and electoral one. Right now there is a bipartisan "Washington consensus" on nuclear power, headed by Pres. Obama: that the nuclear reactors must continue to operate but under a new "improved" safety regime. Our government is asking us to trust them to protect us, to pass tougher regulations and beef up safety standards....even though they have FAILED TO DO THIS SINCE THE INCEPTION OF THE NUCLEAR POWER ERA. Putting aside the inherent and irremediable risks of nuclear power, they are now trying to convince us that some tweaking here and there will suffice to protect us from a Fukushima-size catastrophe. This is the BIG LIE. There is no such thing as an infallible technology or human being. It is, as we all have seen, impossible to identify all possible causes of an accident or component failure. Past experience is no guarantee or proof. And the regulators continue to be part of the problem. There is no such thing as a safe nuclear reactor...except the one 93 million miles away. It is important to understand that safety and health standards for nuclear reactors were not developed a priori, that is, before reactors were designed. They were developed afterwards, to insure that they would not interfere with or raise the costs of constructing nuclear reactors. Every single standard in existence was developed using a cost/benefit ratio based on a specific dollar value of a human life. Any component or regulation that would result in exceeding that cost is ELIMINATED. The protection of the industry itself is the sole concern of the NRC. You can be sure that any new safety regulation will be developed to insure that it does not raise the industry's costs of repair or retrofitting and cut into its profits. In light of the Washington conspiracy to protect the nuclear industry, the impossibility of predicting or protecting against reactor or human failure, the lack of any plan that could protect the public from radiation exposure and environmental contamination, the proven hazards of low level radiation for human health, the extent of IRREVERSIBLE devastation of land, infrastructure, water and crops that will result from a serious accident (admitted by the government itself in its updated WASH-740 report that was suppressed for years), and the countless possible causes of reactor failure, it is not folly but insanity to allow this technology to continue to operate for one more day. Recall that the Brown's Ferry fire that almost destroyed the entire safety instrumentation of the reactor was caused by a workman's CANDLE as he explored the cable spreading area. This cause of an accident was not included in the government's own "fault tree" studies of possible accident-initating events. Nor can all the other causes be identified. What recourse do we have even if a few reactors, such as Indian Point, are shut but the hundreds or so remaining reactors are allowed to continue operation? Our only recourse is at election time. We must right now predict the response of congress and of the Democratic Party in particular, which will try, feebly, vainly, and insincerely, to convince us that we must re-install them in control of Congress in 2012. In order to respond, we need to be ready: not to accede out of wishful thinking like that which elected Obama but to prepare a list of unconditional non-negotiable demands. Unless our congressional representatives agree to support and work to implement these, we must tell them that they WILL NOT GET OUR VOTE, no matter how repugnant their opponent in the election is. With this in mind, I would like to suggest the basic list of demands and ask that groups and activists work to persuade their members and friends to support them. 1)Immediate closure of all reactors that are located on or near earthquake faults, as well as all other reactors that lack demonstrably effective evacuation plans out to a 50 mile radius; 2)Enforcement by the NRC of the existing rule that limits the amount of spent fuel that can be stored at each reactor (this rule has been in continual violation for years and spent fuel pools now contain many times the amount of fuel rods and radioactivity allowed by law; each American reactor spent fuel pool contains several times more radioactivity than any of the Fukushima plants); 3) Removal of excess spent fuel rods, and eventually all the others, to secure dry cask storage with multiple layers of defense against terrorism, earthquakes, fires, floods, airplane crashes, bombs, etc. 4)Imposition of mandatory federal energy efficiency standards to reduce energy demand; 5)Acceleration of distributed renewable energy, mainly wind power, through incentives, loans and public investment, accompanied by a carbon tax on all fossil fuels, with dividends returned to citizens, so as to level the playing field for renewable energy development; 6)Prompt termination of all government subsidies, tax breaks, and loan guarantees for nuclear power and fossil fuels; 7)Commencement of a rapid phase-out of all other operating reactors, to be completed promptly and safely within one year; 8)Prohibition against licensing of new reactors or license extensions of existing ones; You will notice that items 4,5,and 6 are also necessary for reducing CO2 emissions and mitigating global warming. This is a list of what I consider the bottom line demands we must make as a citizenry to our elected officials. I also would like to advise those of you who agree with these not to argue or waste time with those who may go along with one or more items but are not yet willing to shut down the whole nuclear enterprise. Most of them are not ready to change their minds but with time and more information may come to that conclusion on their own. In the meantime, reach out and talk to those who now understand the gravity of the problem and who are not ideologically or politically beholden to the Democrats or the nuclear industry. These people are our potential constituency and we need to contact them quickly. LS Lorna Salzman lsalzman1(a)verizon.net We are already fighting World War III and I am sorry to say we are winning. It is the war against the earth - Raymond Dasmann Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction - Blaise Pascal "If we don't change direction we'll end up where we're headed" ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1498/3533 - Release Date: 03/27/11

1 0

[Fwd: Update: Japan nuclear crisis takes turn for worse/take action]
by Don Eichelberger 15 Mar '11

15 Mar '11

Friends- If you take no other action today on behalf of the future of our earth: please tell your congressional representative NO MORE MONEY TO DEVELOP NUCLEAR POWER. Read the following Japan update and report from NIRS and do what you can to destroy nuclear power before it destroys us.We must act immediately in the light of now knowing how very quickly a disaster of this magnitude can come to pass. MY COMMENTARY- Sadly,we cannot evade acting now on this warning from the events in Japan. With all the rest of the concerns that have been raised about nuclear power, we now see that we must reevaluate the potential role of tsunamis in the siting and safety of nuclear power reactors, in addition to their seismic safety. I have seen both Diablo Canyon Reactor and San Onofre Reactors' majestic perches before the sea. Each stands before faults running as little as two miles off shore capable of producing large quakes and tsunamis at any moment. Even if they are not capable of producing tsunamis as gargantuan as those in Japan, a much smaller one could devastate either reactor. We saw relatively small waves, after traveling thousands of miles, do millions of dollars damage to boat harbors in Santa Cruz and the north coast. Diablo Canyon is especially vulnerable; Diablo Cove could act like a funnel, leading directly toward its on-site spent fuel storage ponds. In addition to calling for an end to our tax dollars being used to subsidize the building of more nuclear power reactors, we should see that our Pacific Coast reactors are placed on emergency stand-by for shut-down, or outright shut down, and evaluated for tsunami potential in light of what we are learning out of Japan. May the spirit of the Japanese people stay strong and find healing from this as they have from past catastrophes. On behalf of them, the survivors, present victims and future victims of events unfolding, we urge you to make a voice. Don Eichelberger Abalone Alliance Safe Energy Clearinghouse -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Update: Japan nuclear crisis takes turn for worse Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 19:02:54 -0400 (EDT) From: Nuclear Information and Resource Service <nirsnet(a)nirs.org> Reply-To: nirsnet(a)nirs.org To: done7777(a)sbcglobal.net web banner 6930 Carroll Avenue, #340, Takoma Park, MD 20912; 301-270-6477; nirsnet(a)nirs.org [ mailto:nirsnet@nirs.org ]; www.nirs.org [ http://www.nirs.org ] *UPDATE: NUCLEAR CRISIS IN JAPAN TAKES TURN FOR THE WORSE IMPLICATIONS (AND ACTIONS) FOR U.S. NUCLEAR POWER* Sunday, March 13, 2011, 6:30 pm Dear Friends, The nuclear crisis in Japan has taken a turn for the worse this afternoon, as Tokyo Electric Power (Tepco) has reported that six to ten feet of the core of its Fukushima Daiichi Unit 3 reactor has been uncovered for a considerable period of time despite efforts to pump seawater into the reactor. Moreover, Tepco says it believes water may be leaking and preventing the water from covering the core. According to a translation of a Tepco statement by our Japanese colleagues, "The fuel's integrity has been considerably compromised. We are assessing a considerably serious situation." This unit uses plutonium-based MOX (mixed-oxide) fuel; accident consequences from a reactor that uses MOX fuel are even higher than for a more traditional uranium-fueled reactor. At this point it is clear there has been some fuel melting at Fukushima Daiichi, probably at both Units 1 and 3. What we don't know yet is whether that will continue or whether utility workers will be successful at preventing any further melting. We hope they are successful and wish them our best. They are working under intolerable conditions and getting exposed to high levels of radiation in their ongoing effort to prevent a broader disaster. We believe that a catastrophic accident still can be prevented. In all, there remain six reactors in various stages of trouble at two sites in Fukushima. Another three reactors, further north at Onagawa, are in a low-level state of emergency, although the utility there says they are under control. We are regularly updating the situation as we receive reliable information and posting new relevant documents as we identify them. Check the front page of our website, www.nirs.org [ http://www.nirs.org ], often for these updates. I*mplications for the U.S.* It would be nice to think that U.S. politicians and authorities will suddenly snap to their senses and begin work to end nuclear power and prevent new nuclear reactor construction. It won't be that easy. However, one prominent pro-nuclear politician, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) this morning did call for a moratorium on new reactors until any lessons from Japan can be incorporated. And Rep. Ed Markey wrote a strong letter to President Obama calling for a moratorium and other actions (we will post it on our website as soon as it is posted on Rep. Markey's site). Still, it's going to take all of us working as hard as we can right now to make a real difference. *Our number one priority today: ending taxpayer subsidies for new nuclear power.* If you haven't yet sent a letter to your Congressmembers, please do so now [ http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5502/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=58… ]. If you haven't yet passed the word on to your friends and colleagues, organizational e-mail lists, shared the action page [ http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5502/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=58… ] on Facebook, Twitter, etc., please do so now. We need the broadest outreach possible. More than 18,000 letters have gone in so far (thank you!), but we'll need more than that. *Beyond that, however, we want to know what your priorities are and help develop a coordinated plan of action.* Thus, we are sponsoring two grassroots conference calls this week. The first is tomorrow, Monday, March 14, 2011 at 4 pm eastern time. This will be a "listening" call. We invite you to call in with your concerns and suggestions: we will listen to them and we ask all of you to listen respectfully to each other. The call-in number is 218-237-3840; the code is 110336#. >From that call and the ideas generated, we will put together a second grassroots strategy call later in the week. If you are interested in this second call (date/time have not been set yet), please send an e-mail with your name, organization (if one) and location to us at nirsnet(a)nirs.org [ mailto:nirsnet@nirs.org ]. *Finally, we urgently need donations for a rapid response to the developments in Japan and the strongest possible actions here in the U.S. **We need to be letting all Americans know that a nuclear future is not needed, that we can end nuclear subsidies now, that out of this disaster can come real hope for the future. Thank you to everyone who has donated this weekend. We ask everyone who can to please dig a little deeper right now and support our expanded efforts at this crucial time [ https://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5502/shop/custom.jsp?donate_page_KEY=3… ].* Thanks for all you do, Michael Mariotte Executive Director Nuclear Information and Resource Service nirsnet(a)nirs.org [ mailto:nirsnet@nirs.org ] www.nirs.org [ http://www.nirs.org ] *Stay Informed: NIRS on Facebook: * http://www.facebook.com/pages/Nuclear-Information-and-Resource-Service/2649… [ http://www.facebook.com/pages/Nuclear-Information-and-Resource-Service/2649… ] http://www.facebook.com/nonukesnirs [ http://www.facebook.com/nonukesnirs ] http://www.causes.com/causes/49098-no-nukes-nuclear-information-and-resourc… [ http://www.causes.com/causes/49098-no-nukes-nuclear-information-and-resourc… ] NIRS on Twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/nirsnet [ http://twitter.com/#!/nirsnet ] Please note: NIRS never sells, rents, trades, or otherwise makes our e-mail lists available to other organizations or individuals for any reason. If you would like to unsubscribe to NIRS list, click here to unsubscribe [ http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5502/p/salsa/supporter/unsubscribe/publ… ].

1 1

Re: [SustainActive] URGENT NOTICE - SUPERVISORS On Bayview/Hunters Point EIR
by Eric Brooks 08 Jul '10

08 Jul '10

Hi all, What this all boils down to, is that starting next Tuesday at the full Board in an appeal hearing, if the Supes don't reject an environmental approval, Lennar corporation will be able to build condos and parkland on a state park wilderness area -and- and toxic superfund site that is to be capped instead of cleaned up - all in the Bayview Hunters Point. For the breakdown and a way to write or call Board President David Chiu to sway his vote in our direction so that we will win, go to: http://our-city.org/campaigns cheers Eric On 7/7/2010 7:22 PM, Martin Zehr wrote: > > URGENT NOTICE AND APPEAL > > If ever there is a time to take a stand on behalf of the oppressed – > *it is now!* > > On Tuesday, July 13^th , before the San Francisco Board of > Supervisors, there will be a hearing of an appeal of the narrow > approval by the City’s Planning Commission of an Environmental Impact > Report (EIR) related to the massive development of the Bayview > Hunter’s Point area of San Francisco. This is the most important > issue facing the people of the Bayview and the City of San Francisco > since the devastating redevelopment of the Fillmore in the 1970s, and > potentially, seals the fate of the African American presence in San > Francisco. This final step in removing safeguards for the health and > wellbeing of present and future residents of the Bayview has been > sought by a confederation of corporate and governmental forces rarely > aligned except where billions of dollars are at stake – again – the > aggravated pursuit of profits at the expense of long-suffering people > and environmental degradation, a long practiced pattern of racism. > > Those who are driving this “acquisition” of the Bayview are using the > current economic recession to their advantage by dangling the creation > of jobs as a carrot, using the “historic” (read racism) neglect of the > Bayview as the springboard to “doing something positive”, using the > surgical application of “promises and crumbs” to neutralize > opposition. The reality is that there is a nearly bankrupt, deceitful > corporation named Lennar, hired by a quasi-governmental Redevelopment > Agency guilty of destroying an African American community in the past > in the Fillmore, which is handpicked by a Mayor whose policies are > created by San Francisco’s corporate power (including Nancy Pelosi, > Diane Feinstein, Richard Blum, Shorenstein family, etc.), protected > by the politically influenced Bay Area Air Quality Management District > (BAAQD), San Francisco Health Department, and the federal EPA, > collaborating in this profiteering effort. Money has been no object > in advancing the agenda of this project: from financing ballot > measures to allow for the “legal” acquisition, to paying local > residents to “testify” in required public venues, to promising > “benefit packages” for compromised unions and community organizing > groups, to letting minor contracts to well placed self aggrandizing > local “religious” contractors, to media driven spin artists, even to > high level policy arm twisting by congressional figures and US Navy > administrators. Opposition has been maligned, provoked, spied upon, > ignored, and feared. > > In a hearing before a joint gathering of the San Francisco > Redevelopment Agency and the City Planning Commission, the EIR was > considered for final passage. Courageously, two of the five > Commissioners of the Planning commission voted to return the EIR > because it was inadequate; and true to form, the entire Redevelopment > Agency Commissioners rubber stamped the document. Now the final > hurdle in this hostile takeover of the Bayview is the support of a > majority of the SF Board of Supervisors. On Tuesday the Board will > hear the appeal we have put forward calling for the rewriting of this > flawed and insufficient EIR so as to protect the present residents f > the Bayview, future generations of residents, and correct the > environmental damage which has been done to the Bayview over the past > decades. Your presence at this hearing supporting the appeal would go > a long way to achieving at least a chance of justice. Also, a news > conference sponsored by our coalition featuring a nationally renowned > environmentalist, Wilma Subra, will be held on Monday, July 12, > calling upon the Supervisors to exercise their power to stop the > willful profiteering of the Bayview. Your presence would demonstrate > solidarity with those who desire justice over profits. > > Come, stand with us; for the sake of the oppressed. > > Pastor Daniel Solberg on behalf of a coalition of individuals and > organization committed to justice. > > FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT: Daniel Solberg, > Solberg(a)saintpaulus.org <mailto:Solberg@saintpaulus.org> or 415 596-9586 > > > The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your > inbox. Get started. > <http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:…> > > The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your > inbox. Get started. > <http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:…>= > > > > _______________________________________________ > San Francisco Green Party Active Members List > To unsubscribe or edit your options, go here: > https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/active >

1 0

CleanPowerSF Hearing Today! 2pm, SF City Hall, Rm 250 (Strategize 1pm @ Celtic Coffee)
by Eric Brooks 21 May '10

21 May '10

REMINDER: Crucial LAFCo Hearing today for CleanPowerSF! 2pm, SF City Hall, Rm 250 PRE-MEETING STRATEGY SESSION: 1pm, Celtic Coffee 142 McAllister Street @ Hyde (near Civic Center BART - see http://www.celticcoffeecompany.com/ for directions) SEE EMAIL BELOW FOR TALKING POINTS: previously I wrote: Hi all, Sorry in advance for this being a little long, but it is very important that you all clearly understand what is going on with San Francisco's CleanPowerSF project, which is now close to a final contract, but is in immediate jeopardy, and is one of the -top- reasons that PG&E placed Prop 16 on the ballot. The meeting last night with the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission was, to put it bluntly, unreal. The SFPUC once again showed itself to be utterly incapable of delivering a valid workable contract and project plan for CleanPowerSF, at or below PG&E prices, making it absolutely clear that CleanPowerSF will fail unless the LAFCo (Local Agency Formation Commission - where we have Supervisor allies) takes a much stronger role this Friday, and hires Local Power to do the heavy lifting on the design of the contract and final work plan. Among the many outrageous points that the SFPUC presented to us last night were: 1) The SFPUC does not intend to deliver a contract to the Board of Supervisors until June 8th, which is of course far too late to get any possible fast track approval of a signed contract, before the public votes on Prop 16! 2) The SFPUC has not mandated local renewable and efficiency installations in the contract at all, and instead intends to pursue separate independent contract bids for any actual installation projects. This will make it nearly impossible for CleanPowerSF to be well designed enough to properly pay for itself, and deliver large scale renewables and efficiency with the thousands of local green jobs that come with these, all rapidly enough to combat the climate crisis. It is very important to note, in the seven years that the SFPUC has spent pulling every trick in the book to delay the 360 megawatt roll-out of the CleanPowerSF program; that over the same time period, using weak independent separate contract bids, the SFPUC has installed only 10 megawatts of electricity generation, and all of that was in overly expensive stand alone solar projects, over half of these privately owned, which have collectively failed to meet strong local hiring standards for green jobs. 3) The SFPUC intends to roll out CleanPowerSF with an outrageous 8% rate increase for each year in the first three years of the program! This is absolutely absurd and would mean that no commercial customers would join the program, causing it to completely fail. Very strangely, even though we have now gotten the SFPUC to agree to pursue a -20- year contract/payback period in order to greatly lower program start up costs, the charts that the SFPUC staff showed us last night to justify a whopping 8% rate increase were based on a -15- year, not 20 year, pay back period... 4) The SFPUC once again stated the desire to phase in the customer base of the program a little bit at a time; a suggestion which almost all other independent contractors and grassroots organizations have told the SFPUC over and over for the last 7 years straight is not an acceptable strategy for CleanPowerSF, and will likely make it economically too weak to survive. This poor strategy would also allow PG&E to much more easily target specific groups of customers receiving opt out notices with negative advertising, and if Prop 16 passes, would enable PG&E to force all customers who are not included in the program at the beginning (likely 80% of them) to face an impossible two thirds public vote to join CleanPowerSF. 5) The SFPUC made clear that it has completely failed on multiple fronts to use a strong project financing strategy which will allow CleanPowerSF to roll out at the start with a full renewables and efficiency portfolio which will deliver clean electricity at the same or lower rates than PG&E (instead of rates that are 8% higher per year). The SFPUC revealed last night: a) It has still not designed the program to be built with the self funding renewable energy revenue bonds that were passed by San Francisco voters in 2001 (known as 'H' bonds) and which were specifically designed to enable the rapid construction of projects like CleanPowerSF; this even though contractors and organizers have repeated over and over again for 7 years that these bonds are -fundamental- to the success of the program. b) In 2007 the law firm Nixon Peabody informed the the SFPUC and the LAFCo that it had discovered a mechanism for delivering the -very- low cost power which San Francisco generates at the Hetch Hetchy dam -directly- to San Francisco electricity customers instead of having to expensively wheel that power through PG&E's for-profit delivery mechanism. This would save the entire CleanPowerSF project huge amounts of money; savings that would make it much easier for the program to meet or beat PG&E prices. And yet the SFPUC revealed last night that it has not pursued this obvious winning strategy at all. c) The SFPUC has still failed to do the diligent work necessary to get the California PUC to transfer -from- PG&E -to- the City, local control of key energy efficiency funds (millions already paid for by San Francisco customers) so that they can be used to build large scale energy efficiency projects in the CleanPowerSF program. This too would make it -much- easier for CleanPowerSF to succeed and the SFPUC has completely failed to secure these funds for the City. It is very important to note that on all of the fronts noted above, the group Local Power (which is headed by clean energy guru Paul Fenn and which -created- the model for CleanPowerSF called Community Choice Aggregation) has presented the solutions to these problems to the SFPUC -repeatedly- throughout the entire 11 year history of pursuing CleanPowerSF, and the SFPUC has both utterly failed to listen and repeatedly failed to bring Local Power on board, to work out these and other vital aspects of the program. I and others at last night's meeting called out all of these shortcomings in the SFPUC 's plan, and then indicated that we could no longer trust SFPUC staff to get this right (especially with less than three weeks to go before the election) and stated emphatically that the SFPUC -must- therefore allow the LAFCo and Local Power to now step in and take the lead on the contract process in order to get it back on track. The SFPUC staff's only response to this demand was to make a legal claim that the LAFCo cannot force them to include Local Power in the contract negotiation process. They essentially said "You can't make us..." Those of you who haven't been following this process closely for the last several years should know two key points; 1) the LAFCo can -indeed- bring Local Power, as an advisor to its own staff, fully into the contract negotiations, and 2) this has been done before at -crucial- moments in the history of the fight to pass CleanPowerSF; most notably- Five years ago, when the SFPUC staff (even after being expressly directed to do so by the SF Board of Supervisors) was refusing to draft a full implementation plan for CleanPowerSF, Local Power -for free- drafted the massive visionary project plan and gave it to the LAFCo, and this led to the official plan for CleanPowerSF which was unanimously passed in 2007 by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. and- Last year, when the SFPUC was about to release a call for CleanPowerSF contract bids that would have completely left out the local renewable energy and efficiency components of the program as -optional- Local Power was hired to step in and re-write the call for bids so that it gave mandatory favorable bid points for companies including large scale renewables and efficiency in the program from the start. Now, the new and even more profound crisis of the SFPUC's total failure to design a strong contract, and one with mandated local renewables, efficiency, and local green jobs, -demands- that we once again bring in Local Power to take the lead in the contract negotiations. It is absolutely crucial that we as organizers go to the SF LAFCo meeting this Friday, 2pm, at San Francisco City Hall room 250 to insist that the LAFCo put the SFPUC in its place, and again hire Local Power to assume the -strongest- possible role in the contract negotiations from this point on. We should also insist that the LAFCo send an official communication to the SFPUC that the LAFCo in the firmest possible terms expects the SFPUC staff to follow the advice of the LAFCo and allow Local Power to lead the contract negotiation process. This is our best shot at getting the large scale local clean energy and green jobs which have been fought so hard for since 1999 in San Francisco. I'll send a hearing minder about LAFCo tomorrow morning so you have that info in a short email. peace and solidarity Eric Brooks 415-756-8844

1 0

Important Report Back: CleanPowerSF & This FRIDAY!
by Eric Brooks 20 May '10

20 May '10

Hi all, Sorry in advance for this being a little long, but it is very important that you all clearly understand what is going on with San Francisco's CleanPowerSF project, which is now close to a final contract, but is in immediate jeopardy, and is one of the -top- reasons that PG&E placed Prop 16 on the ballot. The meeting last night with the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission was, to put it bluntly, unreal. The SFPUC once again showed itself to be utterly incapable of delivering a valid workable contract and project plan for CleanPowerSF, at or below PG&E prices, making it absolutely clear that CleanPowerSF will fail unless the LAFCo (Local Agency Formation Commission - where we have Supervisor allies) takes a much stronger role this Friday, and hires Local Power to do the heavy lifting on the design of the contract and final work plan. Among the many outrageous points that the SFPUC presented to us last night were: 1) The SFPUC does not intend to deliver a contract to the Board of Supervisors until June 8th, which is of course far too late to get any possible fast track approval of a signed contract, before the public votes on Prop 16! 2) The SFPUC has not mandated local renewable and efficiency installations in the contract at all, and instead intends to pursue separate independent contract bids for any actual installation projects. This will make it nearly impossible for CleanPowerSF to be well designed enough to properly pay for itself, and deliver large scale renewables and efficiency with the thousands of local green jobs that come with these, all rapidly enough to combat the climate crisis. It is very important to note, in the seven years that the SFPUC has spent pulling every trick in the book to delay the 360 megawatt roll-out of the CleanPowerSF program; that over the same time period, using weak independent separate contract bids, the SFPUC has installed only 10 megawatts of electricity generation, and all of that was in overly expensive stand alone solar projects, over half of these privately owned, which have collectively failed to meet strong local hiring standards for green jobs. 3) The SFPUC intends to roll out CleanPowerSF with an outrageous 8% rate increase for each year in the first three years of the program! This is absolutely absurd and would mean that no commercial customers would join the program, causing it to completely fail. Very strangely, even though we have now gotten the SFPUC to agree to pursue a -20- year contract/payback period in order to greatly lower program start up costs, the charts that the SFPUC staff showed us last night to justify a whopping 8% rate increase were based on a -15- year, not 20 year, pay back period... 4) The SFPUC once again stated the desire to phase in the customer base of the program a little bit at a time; a suggestion which almost all other independent contractors and grassroots organizations have told the SFPUC over and over for the last 7 years straight is not an acceptable strategy for CleanPowerSF, and will likely make it economically too weak to survive. This poor strategy would also allow PG&E to much more easily target specific groups of customers receiving opt out notices with negative advertising, and if Prop 16 passes, would enable PG&E to force all customers who are not included in the program at the beginning (likely 80% of them) to face an impossible two thirds public vote to join CleanPowerSF. 5) The SFPUC made clear that it has completely failed on multiple fronts to use a strong project financing strategy which will allow CleanPowerSF to roll out at the start with a full renewables and efficiency portfolio which will deliver clean electricity at the same or lower rates than PG&E (instead of rates that are 8% higher per year). The SFPUC revealed last night: a) It has still not designed the program to be built with the self funding renewable energy revenue bonds that were passed by San Francisco voters in 2001 (known as 'H' bonds) and which were specifically designed to enable the rapid construction of projects like CleanPowerSF; this even though contractors and organizers have repeated over and over again for 7 years that these bonds are -fundamental- to the success of the program. b) In 2007 the law firm Nixon Peabody informed the the SFPUC and the LAFCo that it had discovered a mechanism for delivering the -very- low cost power which San Francisco generates at the Hetch Hetchy dam -directly- to San Francisco electricity customers instead of having to expensively wheel that power through PG&E's for-profit delivery mechanism. This would save the entire CleanPowerSF project huge amounts of money; savings that would make it much easier for the program to meet or beat PG&E prices. And yet the SFPUC revealed last night that it has not pursued this obvious winning strategy at all. c) The SFPUC has still failed to do the diligent work necessary to get the California PUC to transfer -from- PG&E -to- the City, local control of key energy efficiency funds (millions already paid for by San Francisco customers) so that they can be used to build large scale energy efficiency projects in the CleanPowerSF program. This too would make it -much- easier for CleanPowerSF to succeed and the SFPUC has completely failed to secure these funds for the City. It is very important to note that on all of the fronts noted above, the group Local Power (which is headed by clean energy guru Paul Fenn and which -created- the model for CleanPowerSF called Community Choice Aggregation) has presented the solutions to these problems to the SFPUC -repeatedly- throughout the entire 11 year history of pursuing CleanPowerSF, and the SFPUC has both utterly failed to listen and repeatedly failed to bring Local Power on board, to work out these and other vital aspects of the program. I and others at last night's meeting called out all of these shortcomings in the SFPUC 's plan, and then indicated that we could no longer trust SFPUC staff to get this right (especially with less than three weeks to go before the election) and stated emphatically that the SFPUC -must- therefore allow the LAFCo and Local Power to now step in and take the lead on the contract process in order to get it back on track. The SFPUC staff's only response to this demand was to make a legal claim that the LAFCo cannot force them to include Local Power in the contract negotiation process. They essentially said "You can't make us..." Those of you who haven't been following this process closely for the last several years should know two key points; 1) the LAFCo can -indeed- bring Local Power, as an advisor to its own staff, fully into the contract negotiations, and 2) this has been done before at -crucial- moments in the history of the fight to pass CleanPowerSF; most notably- Five years ago, when the SFPUC staff (even after being expressly directed to do so by the SF Board of Supervisors) was refusing to draft a full implementation plan for CleanPowerSF, Local Power -for free- drafted the massive visionary project plan and gave it to the LAFCo, and this led to the official plan for CleanPowerSF which was unanimously passed in 2007 by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. and- Last year, when the SFPUC was about to release a call for CleanPowerSF contract bids that would have completely left out the local renewable energy and efficiency components of the program as -optional- Local Power was hired to step in and re-write the call for bids so that it gave mandatory favorable bid points for companies including large scale renewables and efficiency in the program from the start. Now, the new and even more profound crisis of the SFPUC's total failure to design a strong contract, and one with mandated local renewables, efficiency, and local green jobs, -demands- that we once again bring in Local Power to take the lead in the contract negotiations. It is absolutely crucial that we as organizers go to the SF LAFCo meeting this Friday, 2pm, at San Francisco City Hall room 250 to insist that the LAFCo put the SFPUC in its place, and again hire Local Power to assume the -strongest- possible role in the contract negotiations from this point on. We should also insist that the LAFCo send an official communication to the SFPUC that the LAFCo in the firmest possible terms expects the SFPUC staff to follow the advice of the LAFCo and allow Local Power to lead the contract negotiation process. This is our best shot at getting the large scale local clean energy and green jobs which have been fought so hard for since 1999 in San Francisco. I'll send a hearing minder about LAFCo tomorrow morning so you have that info in a short email. peace and solidarity Eric Brooks 415-756-8844

1 0

Reminder: CRUCIAL CleanPowerSF Meetings This Wed & Fri
by Eric Brooks 19 May '10

19 May '10

Hi all, just re-sending this as a reminder of today's and Friday's vitally important public meetings on CleanPowerSF. Note: For those interested in more info on what's going on, we are having activist strategy sessions at 3:30pm today and 1pm Friday at Celtic Coffee (near City Hall) so that we can go into the meetings well prepared for action. See directions for Celtic Coffee at: http://www.celticcoffeecompany.com/ previously I wrote: CRUCIAL CleanPowerSF, Public Meeting This Wed, May 19, 4:30pm, SFPUC, 1155 Market St, 6th Floor Hi all, First some good news. The LAFCo staff has -finally- contacted Paul Fenn and Local Power in order to hire Local Power to work on the final CleanPowerSF contract that will be made with Power Choice LLC to initiate and build the project. This is -huge- because it means we will finally have a qualified ally who we can trust -in- the contract negotiations which, up to now, have been held in secret between Power Choice and the SFPUC staff, City Attorney staff, and the LAFCo staff attorney. These closed, failed negotiations are what led to SFPUC General Manager Harrington's absurd statements opposing the project's viability. Now we will need to push -hard- for Local Power to take a -strong- lead role in the contract negotiations to guarantee a contract that will ensure large scale renewables and efficiency, and that will be signed before the June 8th vote on Prop 16! (Note! This Friday May 21st, at 2pm in SF City Hall Room 250, the action item for hiring Local Power will be heard in a special LAFCo hearing and it will be very important for as many of us as possible to be there to argue for Local Power being given the lead role in the contract negotiations, so that those negotiations will have any true hope of succeeding.) But this Wednesday is also crucial! IMPORTANT!! The SFPUC staff has just called a community stakeholder 'Clean Energy Stewards' meeting for this Wednesday, and it is absolutely -VITAL- that we fill up that meeting room with strong clean energy advocates to demand that the SFPUC staff and General Manager Ed Harrington- 1) Stop attacking the project with bogus claims that clean energy is too expensive to work, and 2) Insist that SFPUC staff, because of their failed negotiations over the past few months, must now fully defer to Local Power to take the lead role in the contract negotiations so that we have a signed contract by the end of this month that can withstand PG&E's attacks and Prop 16. Here is the announcement from the SFPUC for the Clean Energy Stewards meeting (if you have questions, call me, Eric Brooks 415-756-8844)... BBroome(a)sfwater.org wrote: The SFPUC invites you to the next Clean Energy Stewards meeting on Wednesday May 19th at 4:30pm. This Stewards meeting is being convened to discuss CleanPowerSF and is scheduled on a Wednesday due to our tight timeline for community choice aggregation. Unfortunately, the short notice for this meeting could not be avoided. What: Clean Energy Stewards When: Wednesday, May 19 from 4:30-5:30 pm Where: SFPUC offices, 1155 Market Street , 6th Floor The agenda will be as follows: 1. Service Agreement with PG&E 2. Implementation Plan 3. Progress on the Supplier Contract with Power Choice - Balancing Rates, Risk, & Renewables We hope to see you on May 19. Please reply to me to RSVP. Thank you for your time and commitment to clean energy in San Francisco . Bart Bart Broome San Francisco Public Utilities Commission 1155 Market Street , 11th Floor San Francisco , CA 94103 Tel (415) 554-0706 Fax (415) 554-3424 bbroome(a)sfwater.org www.sfwater.org

1 0

CRUCIAL CleanPowerSF Public Meeting This Wed, May 19, 4:30pm 1155 Mkt St 6th Floor
by Eric Brooks 16 May '10

16 May '10

CRUCIAL CleanPowerSF, Public Meeting This Wed, May 19, 4:30pm, SFPUC, 1155 Market St, 6th Floor Hi all, First some good news. The LAFCo staff has -finally- contacted Paul Fenn and Local Power in order to hire Local Power to work on the final CleanPowerSF contract that will be made with Power Choice LLC to initiate and build the project. This is -huge- because it means we will finally have a qualified ally who we can trust -in- the contract negotiations which, up to now, have been held in secret between Power Choice and the SFPUC staff, City Attorney staff, and the LAFCo staff attorney. These closed, failed negotiations are what led to SFPUC General Manager Harrington's absurd statements opposing the project's viability. Now we will need to push -hard- for Local Power to take a -strong- lead role in the contract negotiations to guarantee a contract that will ensure large scale renewables and efficiency, and that will be signed before the June 8th vote on Prop 16! (Note! This Friday May 21st, at 2pm in SF City Hall Room 250, the action item for hiring Local Power will be heard in a special LAFCo hearing and it will be very important for as many of us as possible to be there to argue for Local Power being given the lead role in the contract negotiations, so that those negotiations will have any true hope of succeeding.) But this Wednesday is also crucial! IMPORTANT!! The SFPUC staff has just called a community stakeholder 'Clean Energy Stewards' meeting for this Wednesday, and it is absolutely -VITAL- that we fill up that meeting room with strong clean energy advocates to demand that the SFPUC staff and General Manager Ed Harrington- 1) Stop attacking the project with bogus claims that clean energy is too expensive to work, and 2) Insist that SFPUC staff, because of their failed negotiations over the past few months, must now fully defer to Local Power to take the lead role in the contract negotiations so that we have a signed contract by the end of this month that can withstand PG&E's attacks and Prop 16. Here is the announcement from the SFPUC for the Clean Energy Stewards meeting (if you have questions, call me, Eric Brooks 415-756-8844)... BBroome(a)sfwater.org wrote: The SFPUC invites you to the next Clean Energy Stewards meeting on Wednesday May 19th at 4:30pm. This Stewards meeting is being convened to discuss CleanPowerSF and is scheduled on a Wednesday due to our tight timeline for community choice aggregation. Unfortunately, the short notice for this meeting could not be avoided. What: Clean Energy Stewards When: Wednesday, May 19 from 4:30-5:30 pm Where: SFPUC offices, 1155 Market Street , 6th Floor The agenda will be as follows: 1. Service Agreement with PG&E 2. Implementation Plan 3. Progress on the Supplier Contract with Power Choice - Balancing Rates, Risk, & Renewables We hope to see you on May 19. Please reply to me to RSVP. Thank you for your time and commitment to clean energy in San Francisco . Bart Bart Broome San Francisco Public Utilities Commission 1155 Market Street , 11th Floor San Francisco , CA 94103 Tel (415) 554-0706 Fax (415) 554-3424 bbroome(a)sfwater.org www.sfwater.org

1 0

SFPUC's Ed Harrington Openly Attacks CleanPowerSF
by Eric Brooks 03 May '10

03 May '10

Hi all, This is the most important update I've ever given on CleanPowerSF (Community Choice). With just one month to go before we must have a signed contract with Power Choice LLC to begin San Francisco's city wide clean energy program, San Francisco Public Utilities General Manager Ed Harrington has completely reversed his public position on the program and openly attacked it, trying to drive a dagger into its heart. Most notably Harrington said in a public hearing that "You cannot charge PG&E rates and get wind and solar." As most or all of you know, who have done extensive work on renewables and efficiency, Harrington's statement is laughable, especially in the case of CleanPowerSF, which has been carefully designed and redesigned over the course of seven full years to make absolutely certain that we can get a citywide renewables network while meeting or beating PG&E rates. Harrington made the statement on Friday April 23rd, during his presentation on the status of CleanPowerSF to a joint meeting of the SFPUC and LAFCo commissioners in City Hall. Harrington's entire presentation can only be described as a cartoonishly deceptive and corrupt attack on the integrity of CleanPowerSF with the purposeful intention of both, killing the program, and also giving PG&E a perfect sound bite that it can use to demonize community power projects and promote Prop 16. Harrington began his presentation by showing a completely meaningless graph that compared the up front cost of PG&E power to the up front cost of renewables and efficiency, which of course showed solar and wind power as far more expensive. By purposely leaving out the project's carefully designed combined renewable/efficiency mix, and, most importantly, the obvious and assumed 15-20 year pay back period of the project, Harrington was able to make his presentation appear to show that getting renewables for the same or lower rates than PG&E was impossible. Harrington referred to negotiations with Power Choice with statements which made it clear that he had been working for a 3-5 year contract with the company and avoiding a 10 year or longer term contract because, quote: "That means we really are sticking the City with somebody for a -long- time, that you may not know about; and do you really want to commit to that." Of course the truth is that no one in their right mind would plan a renewable energy project with a 3-5 year payback because it is impossible. The -only- way to get such a project done is to go -beyond- 10 years to a 15-20 year pay back period. We -have- to commit to that, or there will be no project...! As absurd as Harrington's new position is, he nonetheless outrageously tried to get away with it in public in front of the commissioners. Luckily, none of the 5 LAFCo commissioners present bought Harrington's obvious bullshit, and the 4 SFPUC commissioners appeared dubious, although alarmingly a couple of them indicated that Harrington's presentations had impacted their perspective on the matter. NEXT STEPS We have just a couple of weeks to strongly weigh in on this process and get it back on track so that Harrington and his staff cannot get away with tanking CleanPowerSF. The Board of Supervisors has a lot of lee way to take over the process if we give them strong encouragement. Luckily, the day before Harrington made his outrageous presentation, we had just (on Earth Day) delivered to all key City Hall decision makers, the new group sign-on letter that many of you helped get approved, from all of the major enviro, environmental justice, and neighborhood groups that signed last year's letter, but this time with the powerful addition of the Ella Baker Center, Green For All, the SF Gray Panthers, and Greenaction. The challenge that we now face is that we very recently have once again been completely shut out of the negotiation process toward the final contract. None of our allies, not even the new LAFCo staff, have been allowed to engage in the contract negotiations. The only City negotiators in the room are SFPUC staff, LAFCo counsel Nancy Miller, and City Attorney Theresa Mueller the latter two who have a long history of blatantly enabling the SFPUC staff to continuously get away with pulling maneuvers like Harrington's which totally undermine CleanPowerSF. Absolutely -no one- we can trust is in the room. And this means we need to push hard for Paul Fenn and Local Power to be hired by either the SFPUC, or more likely the LAFCo, to be the lead author of the contract with Power Choice. This is the only way that we have any hope of getting a contract that won't have poison pills in it that will surreptitiously kill the program. The key thing we will need from those of you who are reading this, is to help join in another big showing of public comment and constituent calls and letters to the Mayor, Supervisors, City Attorney and SFPUC Commissioners - to both get Local Power involved in the drafting of a strong contract - and to also get the thing signed into law by May 31st so that we can beat the June 8th Prop 16 deadline. The good news is that our ally Supervisors were appalled at what Harrington did, and are now stepping forward aggressively to call Harrington and the SFPUC staff to the carpet so that we can win a good contract in time. I'll email soon with alerts that you can join in, and also copy to others, to get comments and turn-out to City Hall. I'll close by showing you a comment that General Manager Harrington made to an SF Bay Guardian Reporter just one month before his presentation on April 23rd; a quote which is completely opposite what he said in the hearing: Harrington said he believed the CCA program would be attractive to San Franciscans because of its environmental edge. “I think people here want to take care of the world, they want to do things that are right. They probably don’t want to spend a lot of money to do it -- and I don’t think they have to,” he said. “That’s the part that makes me crazy: If we can provide greener power for equal to or less than PG&E … why wouldn’t we try to do that for the city?” (See full article at http://www.sfbg.com/politics/2010/03/29/deadline-looms-san-francisco%E2%80%… ) To watch the LAFCo/SFPUC hearing video go to: http://sanfrancisco.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=16 and click on the 4/23/10 hearing link. The CleanPowerSF presentation and Q&A makes up the first hour and a half of the hearing with Harrington's comments near the beginning. Please contact me with any questions. peace Eric Brooks 415-756-8844

1 0