Okay, uh good afternoon, everyone.

Welcome to the Environment Committee meeting of March 12th, 2026.

Our committee liaison, Sarah Jordan will provide information and instruction for the public to participate in today's meeting.

Sarah, please proceed.

Thank you, Chair Eliveira.

While members of the public are able to attend the meeting in person, this meeting is being televised and live streamed on the city's website, and council administration will continue to make arrangements for the public to comment using the Zoom webinar platform.

Members of the public who wish to provide testimony via a call-in or an internet based service option must enter the virtual speaking queue within five minutes after conclusion of in-person public testimony or before the virtual speaking queue is exhausted, whichever occurs first.

This will allow for better meeting management between the two platforms and ensure the committee is able to manage and conduct city business.

We appreciate the public's cooperation.

Chair.

All right, thank you.

With that, we'll call the environment committee meeting of March 12th, 2026 to order.

Sarah, if you'd please call the role.

Vice Chair Campbell.

Council President Lakava.

Chair Ela Rivera.

Also attending the meeting today is City Attorney Representative Dominic Guglimo, Mayoral Representative Randy Wilde, and IBA Representative Jordan Moore.

And if you're in person, please complete a speaker slip located at the entrance of chambers and place it in the speaker slip box at the table at the front of the room near the high lector and please do so in a timely manner to ensure proper meeting management.

Members of the public can join the webinar by computer tablet or smartphone by accessing the link, which is listed online in the preamble language of the agenda on the city's webpage.

To join the Zoom webinar by telephone, please dial 1669-2545252 and when prompted, input webinar ID 160-732-9638 pound.

This information is also available on the agenda and will appear on the screen during the public comment period for each agenda item.

Please note that if you're watching via City TV 24 online, there may be delay.

Please participate via the audio on your phone and mute your TV or computer when it's your turn to speak.

If you wish to speak to a particular item, please wait for that item to be called, then raise your hand to speak by tapping the raise your hand icon, or if you're calling participant, by selecting star nine on your phone.

If you raise your hand during a non-comment period, your hand will be lowered.

All right.

Thank you so much.

We've got a quorum.

Let's begin with non-agenda public comment.

Please proceed.

Thank you, Chair.

Per rule 2.7 on agenda public comment is an opportunity for members of the public to comment on items that are not on the agenda but are within the subject matter jurisdiction of this committee.

Each speaker will have two minutes, and we'll begin with in-person testimony.

Melanie Mendoza, we will begin with you.

If you could please approach the lector, and you will have two minutes, and you will be followed by Carlos Donati.

Tobacco product waste is one of the most littered forms of waste, often containing plastic materials that can persist in the environment for many years.

These products not only break down into microplastics, but also release harmful chemicals into soil and water and often travel through storm drains into creeks, bays, and the ocean.

The policy research center conducts research to better understand how tobacco product waste impacts of waterways and environment across San Diego County.

We're available to share resources and educational material or research data that may be helpful for this issue.

I am also a resident of District 9, where there is tobacco waste everywhere.

I take the bus to work and notice it inside the buses and along the sidewalk.

You can only imagine what our youth have to deal with first thing in the morning when they're on their way to school.

Thank you for your time and the opportunity to share the policy research center's work and to be a resource to a community.

Thank you for your testimony.

Our next speaker is Carlos.

Perfect.

Good afternoon, Council members.

My name is Carlos Donato, and I'm here on behalf of C Sandeo and the Policy Research Center for Tobacco in the environment.

Thank you for the opportunity to talk.

First, I want to share that the policy research center is excited to hear that the committee has identified tobacco waste as a priority concern in the work plan.

Addressing tobacco waste is an important step towards protecting both public health and the environment in our communities.

At the policy research center, we have been conducting research to better understand how tobacco product waste impact our environments and waterways across Indigo County.

These products can release harmful chemicals into soils and waters and often travel through storm drains into creeks, bays in the ocean.

As cigarette butts decompose, the chemicals they contain can leak into the ground, and their plastic filters break down over time in smaller and smaller pieces of plastic known as microplastics.

These microplastics can remain in the environment and contribute to pollution in our soil, waters, and our waterways.

Our team has been working to document these impacts and raise awareness about how tobacco product waste affects local ecosystems and community spaces.

We'll be more than glad to share any resources, educational materials, or research data that may be helpful in efforts around this issue as it continues.

As a personal note, before working at the center, I honestly did not think much about tobacco product waste.

Like many people, I would see tobacco product waste on the ground and not fully recognize the environment impact it carries.

But through the research and community works we have done, I have learned that just how widespread the harmful type of waste can be.

As a parent and resident of District 9, the issue has also become more meaningful to me.

I have personally seen tobacco product waste in public spaces like playgrounds where my kids play, inside public restrooms while taking a casual walk outside and leave it outside the daycare center where my kids attend.

Seeing tobacco product waste in places where children and families spend their time highlights how common the waste has become in the city.

Thank you for your time and for attention given to this issue.

We appreciate the opportunity to share our work and resources for the community.

I've also provided a briefing document for research to the research community members to respectfully request to be entered into the public record.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comment.

Our next speaker is Blair Beekman.

Hi, Blair Beekman.

Happy Thursday.

I am going to keep my my comments very very short today.

Um, what I've been discussing all week.

What we do at the international level, how it affects us at the local level.

I'm sure you've all seen the reports on the uh national security risk there is uh of Iran possibly uh attacking California with drones, specifically San Diego and working with some sort of agencies they have in Mexico.

Um I guess we're trying to uh mitigate that limited and not treated as so much of a threat, but it is there that we have to be considering.

I just started talking about our national security needs that we have to be addressing at this time at public comment yesterday at public safety.

I'm also trying really hard to describe the importance that we have to continue the efforts of best practices and the ideas of peace at the local level.

When projects come your way that just have that feeling of war, um, I hope we really question it.

That's all I'm gonna say today.

And I think I've offered good examples that we you guys already really know how to work towards best practices, and I hope we can continue those efforts, and I'll definitely be here here to help you guys out with that.

With that all said, uh, environmental concerns, uh, non-agenda public comment.

Uh at public safety yesterday you had uh e-bike things that um there's an interesting debate going on on the future of that issue.

Good luck how that can develop.

Full community community dialogue.

I was more interested in whatever the um you know, tech can be involved in the future of e-bikes.

Um, you know, uh geofencing, things like that.

Councilperson Lee about a year ago on scooter issues did a great job just to openly discuss what geofencing is about with scooter issues, how that can apply to bikes, if that can be an open conversation, the future of e-bikes.

So good luck.

We can make it an open conversation.

We don't fear that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That concludes public testimony here in chambers.

So I'll begin the five-minute timer for all those in the virtual queue to indicate if they wish to provide non-agenda public comment at this time.

Each speaker will have two minutes and we will begin testimony with Kathleen Lippitt.

Please unmute and begin.

Good afternoon, environmental committee.

I'd like to comment on the city's continued pursuit of a zero carbon agenda.

It's not only unscientific, but a policy that is not supported by geologists, astronomers, and other scientific people trained in first principles that warn that climate change is a complex phenomenon that is not solely driven by human activity.

Climate alarmists omitted significant drivers of the of the climate.

Far from a narrative that is consensus on this issue, citing consensus validate does not validate, but actually is the contrary of science because science is not consensus.

The consensus to which is being referred as political.

Politicians working toward a political agenda.

Science is always meant to evolve, and stopping at consensus would never have allowed Western civilizations to progress beyond a plethora of outdated and incorrect science.

And that's where the strategy of fear mongering can move the public from opposition to reluctant support.

And we have seen that time after time.

Climate alarmists goals of zero emissions are alarmingly ignorant of the critical and essential role that CO2 plays in the ability of humans and plants to survive and thrive.

Countries that have transitioned to eliminating CO2 with green energy strategies have devastated their economies.

The average individual among the public has no awareness of how CO2 levels have changed over millennia.

Green energy strategies adopted to reduce CO2 have been enormously expensive, ineffective, and economically devastating.

Please take a look at your policies and how they impact the public.

That should be your first priority.

Not these strategies that overwinch the city.

Thank you.

And this does conclude your time.

Thank you for your comment.

Our next speaker is Madison.

Please unmute and begin.

Hi, thank you.

Good afternoon.

Um I'd like to speak about a source of environmental pollution, which was actually mentioned in chambers today, tobacco and also e-cigarette waste.

Cigarette butts are the number one littered item worldwide.

And they are also commonly found across our communities here in San Diego.

They wash into storm drains, end up along our beaches, and ultimately make their way into our bays and ocean.

What many people think is cotton in cigarette filters is actually plastic.

These filters do not truly biodegrade.

Instead, they slowly break apart while leaching toxic chemicals such as arsenic, lead, and nicotine.

Research has shown that a single cigarette butt can contain up to 50 liters of water, posing a threat to fish, birds, and the marine ecosystems.

We work so hard to protect.

E-cigarette, e-cigarettes, and vape products add another layer of environmental concern.

These devices often contain single-use plastics, heavy metals, and lithium batteries.

When they are discarded in trash cans on sidewalks or in parks, they can leak hazardous chemicals into the environment.

And lithium batteries can even create fire risks in waste systems.

Unlike bottles or aluminum cans, there is currently no widespread or convenient recycling system for these products.

So most end up in landfills or as later in public spaces.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Terry Ann Skelly.

Please unmute and begin.

Good afternoon, environment committee.

My name is Terry Ann Scaly.

I'm a community volunteer with youth mentoring programs, and I attend my local planning group.

As you know, cigarette butts are the single most littered item here in San Diego across the United States and worldwide.

I wanted to highlight for you the work of the Policy Research Center for Tobacco and the Environment located at San Diego State University.

I would like to respectfully recommend a presentation from them for this committee.

They are doing a study regarding how tobacco product butts and waste littered on streets and sidewalks with toxic tobacco chemicals and microplastics that find their way into our storm water systems and end up in estuaries, coastal salt, marsh habitats, and our beaches.

Consider the marsh reserve, which protects a valuable remnant of coastal marsh habitats once common throughout Southern California's estuaries with its own spectrum of vegetation and invertebrates.

These thousands of these shorebirds visit the marsh and mudflats during annual migrations.

At least two endangered bird species rely entirely on the marsh.

There is a public health policy that improves the quality of our precious marsh reserves.

Thank you for hearing me this afternoon.

Thank you for your testimony.

And the five-minute timer has expired.

We have two hands remaining in the queue, and we will take no other callers beyond these remaining two individuals.

Peggy Walker, please unmute and begin.

Good afternoon, and thank you for making tobacco waste a priority.

As you know, California law regulates the manufacture sale and disposable disposal of various single-use products, including single-use foodware condiments and carry-out bags.

Now, disposable e-cigarettes are vapes are the latest single-use product in focus for causing havoc to the environment, to waste management, and to public health.

So there's a new bill in the state legislature, AB 762 Irwin that would ban the import manufacture, sale, and distribution of disposable battery-embedded single-use vapes containing nicotine beginning January 1, 2027.

That bill would authorize city and county jurisdictions to enforce prohibition and impose violation penalties.

I'm here to ask this committee to support AB 762 because of the threat of single-use vapes to our local environment.

Lithium batteries in these products pose fire risks and disrupt recycling.

Manufacture usurps valuable raw materials like lithium, cobalt, nickel, and copper that are needed elsewhere.

Unrecyclable plastic and chemical waste threatens waterways and local environments, and it overburdens waste management.

The Financial Times found that 90 90 plus tons of lithium were used in the production of single vapes, single-use vapes globally in 2022 alone.

That's enough to supply over 11,000 electric vehicle batteries.

Unfortunately, single-use vapes have made manufacturers rich while addicting youth and causing well-documented health, environmental.

Thank you.

This does conclude your time.

Thank you for your comment.

And the final speaker in our queue is phone number ending in 8700.

You can unmute by pressing star six, and you will have two minutes.

Joy Sanyata, I quote, Mexico is heavily involved in the Colorado River Water Deal through a 1944 treaty with the United States, which entitles them to 1.5 million acre feet of water annually.

The Colorado River Deal is a binational agreement managed by the International Boundary and Water Commission that affects border cities like Tijuana and Mexico.

End of quote from me.

This is all about sharing water that nature gives us through snowmelt in the mountains.

I quote Mexico is currently in the water debt to the United States regarding deliveries from the Rio Grande.

Mexico and the United States frequently negotiate minutes, also known as amendments to the treaty, such as a minute 330 in 2024, which created a 65 million dollar water conservation program to manage shortages.

The agreements allow for reduced deliveries to Mexico during severe droughts, end of quote.

All the partners in this water deal that share nature's snowmelt have a deadline of October 1st, 2026 to agree on sharing terms.

They have missed multiple deadlines to reach a consensus.

A question for all of you.

Thank you for your testimony.

And Chair, this concludes non-agenda public comment.

All right, thank you so much.

Do we have any committee mayor, city attorney, or IBA comments?

All right, hearing none.

Any requests for continuance?

Hearing none there.

Let's move to our agenda and begin with our consent agenda.

Any requests to pull items off the consent agenda?

All right.

Then let's hear public comment, please, sir.

Thank you, Chair.

The public comment period for the consent agenda is now open.

And the consent agenda includes items one through three.

Item number one, approval of the committee minutes from February 12th, 2026.

Item number two, authorization to execute the final two option years of an existing contract with Badger Meter Incorporated to purchase water meters.

And item number three, water district boundary annexation agreement with Santa Fe Irrigation District for Highland Court Properties.

Each speaker will have one minute per item.

We'll begin with in-person testimony.

Blair Beekman, you have submitted speaker slips for items one, two, and three on the consent agenda.

So I will place three minutes on the clock in front for you to manage.

Hi, thank you.

Um I think it's important.

I was gonna pass, uh, but I think it is important just uh for a good reminder that um in the purchase uh the water meter issue over the past few years.

Uh Councilperson Wilbert and uh Campbell have done a really nice job in making sure that whole uh the public utilities department with water meter issues is cleaning itself up.

It was really disorganized a few years ago, and they've been really trying to um bring it together, uh, working you know internally and then with community.

And I think they're having good success.

And it's just in um, you know, I can always be concerned about smart water meters for the future and and what that actually entails.

But if they're doing an organized good job of it and and community is connecting with uh city government, that's man, that's three-quarters of really good work.

So thank you for your efforts.

Thank you.

I'll begin the five-minute timer for all those in the virtual queue to indicate if they wish to provide comment on any of the consent agenda items one through three.

We'll begin with phone number ending in 870.

You can unmute by pressing star six.

And if you could please indicate which item or items you'll be speaking to.

Uh, thank you, Sarah.

Just number two.

All right, one minute, please begin.

From the workforce report, workforce report, these are my this is my focus.

486 employees of that, 208 are white male, 109 are white female, 30 are disabled, and 19 are disabled of that they match the white white male and white female categories.

Underrepresentation is big.

So I again I sort of edited it down.

Uh 10 work categories, including African American, Latino, and females.

Staff will continue to monitor the firms' efforts to implement their EEO plan.

I'll say this for me.

Who monitors the staff?

Thank you, Badger.

You eliminated 20,000 plus water meter backlog.

Love to all.

Thank you for your testimony.

And Chair, this concludes comment on the consent agenda.

All right.

Um, with that, turn to the committee, beginning with Council President Lakaba.

Um, thank you, Chair.

Um, I'll move the consent items and just a couple of quick items on item three.

Uh I want to thank uh public utility staff for working with the Santa Fe Irrigation District and the District 1 residents.

Um thank you for going through the extra step for the annexation.

It's one X annexation or change of boundary that I can actually support.

Uh and uh I appreciate uh their service over the years uh getting it right, and maybe you ought to think about actually just moving the entire neighborhood over to Solana Beach given its unique location in that little corner of Via de la Valle in I5.

Um it looks like the an item uh to the water meters may be a quick question.

Uh this would take us through August 2028, so we have a bit of a runway to think about what comes next, and if you could just briefly comment on that, Lisa.

Lisa Slay, Executive Assistant Director of Public Utilities, yes, that would, and we would obviously start the RFP for a new firm well in advance of that, so we do not let that expire.

Yes.

Yeah, you got a long runway there, a couple years, so you're in good shape.

All right, again, Chair, I'll be moving the consent items.

All right, thank you, Council President.

Vice Chair Campbell.

Thank you.

I'd like to second the motion.

All right, thank you.

We've got a motion, we have a second.

All those in favor of uh approving the consent agenda, please say aye.

Aye.

Uh that passes unanimously three to zero and brings us to our next item.

Uh if you'd please introduce that for us.

Thank you, Chair.

Item number four is the approval of updated UUP master plan.

And if you're watching on City TV or the live stream online and you'd like to dial in to speak, please call 1669-2545252.

And when prompted, input webinar ID 160 732 9638 pound.

Chair.

All right.

Um, once our presenters are ready, please introduce yourselves for the record and let us know how much time you'd like for the presentation.

Good afternoon, Chelsea Clacius, Deputy Director in the Transportation Department.

With me is Jenny Reynolds, program manager in UUP.

We need seven minutes for this presentation.

Thank you.

Please proceed.

Thank you.

Before we dive into the details of the master plan, a quick introduction of the utilities undergrounding program.

The program was launched in 1970 to relocate overhead utility lines underground.

Our program is managed by the city's transportation department with construction of undergrounding projects primarily being performed by SDGE.

Our partnership with SDGE operates under a 2022 memorandum of understanding, which establishes accountability, ways to maintain efficiency, and clarity between our teams.

Now a little background.

Rule 28 projects were chosen if they met specific public criteria, such as located in high traffic volume areas, scenic value, or public, excuse me, significant public use.

So that created one funding source.

Then in 2002, the California Public Utility Commission approved a resolution that allowed for additional funding for the city of San Diego only, which was the surcharge program that we know today.

That allowed for our second funding source.

However, the landscaping changed again when the PUC ended authorization of the Rule 28 work credits in December of 2022, effectively ending Rule 28 program, leaving us with one funding source again.

This leads me to the purpose of why we are here to perform an update to the master plan.

The master plan was last updated in 2018.

In that version, there were both surcharge and rule 28 projects.

As I mentioned, since Rule 28 programs have effectively ended, we now have to merge unfunded Rule 28 projects into surcharge projects or develop new standalone surcharge projects from former Rule 28.

It's important to note the scope of this update.

Also, transmission lines were not included.

Underground work focuses on the public right away.

And finally, unlike last time when we had a five year implementation plan was developed for this master plan on a fixed schedule.

This time instead, we're using a year-by-year selection process based on the availability of surcharge funds.

How was this done?

First, the consultant engineering team started with an inventory analysis.

They reviewed all the overhead facilities, which included power poles, guide polls, and distribution lines.

The inventory data was obtained through SDGE's GIS database.

Then these facilities were verified using aerial and street visual imagery.

Next, the consultant team created an online GIS platform that allowed the electrical team communicate effectively with the GIS team by using blue arrows as you've seen in this photo, giving directions.

So all reconfigurations could be completed.

The reason behind each boundary revision was then recorded.

Some goals when determining block size included setting boundaries in a way that facilitated project construction and maintaining comparable project costs.

Twenty-eight projects were either absorbed directly into the surcharge projects or converted into standalone projects.

There were three primary documents created during this process.

The first was updating the master plan document.

This is where the team refreshed process and updated the governing policies.

The second document was the project maps, and finally, a new technical supplement was provided, which lists all projects in the table along with the respective attributes.

To give you a quick overview summary of the numbers, we started with 132 Rule 28 projects that needed to be converted to surcharge.

Of these, 126 were absorbed into existing surcharge projects.

The remaining six were not combined with surcharge projects, but instead became two independent surcharge projects.

And with that, we will take any questions that you might have.

All right, thank you so much.

Let's uh hear public comment, please.

Thank you, Chair.

We've got one speaker slip here in chamber, so we'll begin in-person testimony with Blair Beekman.

You will have two minutes to provide your comment on item four.

Hi, uh Blair Beekman.

Undergrounding uh future electrical things is really uh an important good concept.

But thank you that you're working on it.

I'm wondering how this will uh underground things will connect to the um you have a project that was at city council this week on uh consent on uh East Village.

Uh there's a parking structure.

It's a whole park system that you're developing for the East Village area that um I it's got a lot, it'll have a lot of feature of smart tech also that I I hope I wanted to bring out again that I hope can be discussed as a smart tech future place.

And I think it should be highlighted instead of uh it's being kind of uh not talked about.

How underground wiring will work in that area, I think will be an important part of that uh development.

Um yeah, how we how we work um underground wiring with our tech future and working those things together.

Good luck in those efforts.

Um thank you.

Thank you.

And I'll begin the five-minute timer for all those in the virtual queue to indicate if they wish to provide comment on item four.

As a reminder, each speaker will have two minutes.

We will begin testimony with phone number ending in 870.

You can unmute by pressing star six.

Thank you, Sarah.

Uh Joy Sonnyata C D3.

Wow, this was fairly new to me, yet uh I felt comfortable reading it.

Thank you for the excellent presentation and the excellent staff report.

I was blown away by 1967 as the date that the uh that agreement uh and the CPUC had terminated it.

Um I think it's called 28.

But that that just really was amazing to me and involved credits.

So um thank you, FCG and E for all the work you do on this uh this uh these projects.

Uh a question for us.

Uh how would we rate uh S C G and E uh regarding uh being a cooperative partner?

So uh again, I I was just I read this, I was really kind of mesmerized going underground uh with the truth being shared with other utilities.

That really amazed me.

And how complicated the project prioritization is the inclusion of equity components.

Um they're in including in the master plan.

And a question on that has director Desmond of race and equity been involved.

Uh I think that would be great.

So here are the components I really love.

Uh great to move the wires underground, tree canopies, fire prevention, aesthetics, foster community relations, um, improve sidewalks, curbs, and so forth.

What a list.

So thank you, everybody.

Um it's just wonderful to move these wires underground.

It just creates a more natural environment, and we need more of that.

So thank you for listening and love to all.

Thank you for your testimony.

Our next speaker is phone number ending in 8813.

You can unmute by pressing star six, and you will have two minutes.

Okay.

Excuse me, from solo here.

Okay, so uh yeah.

Talk about the monopoly we all know as S D G and E.

Um, let's see.

When you control electricity, an entire region, the people don't really have a choice, do they?

So, yeah.

Forced customers.

And now we're being told that the underground wiring is the solution.

Okay, so let's talk about that.

Underground power line costs tens of millions of dollars for single projects.

Um let's see, I research one audit showed project uh ballooning over 44 million.

And um gosh.

Yep, we uh we end up paying for all this.

We are the ones who end up paying for all of this, the taxpayers, the people sitting in the room, and we're told it's about safety and we're told it's about reliability, but the underground systems come with their own risk.

Um, when something fails, underground crews don't just climb a pole, they have to dig up streets, sidewalks, neighborhoods to find the problem.

Repairs take longer, costs go up, and guess what happens next?

Another rate increase.

Yay.

This isn't just about infrastructure, it's about accountability.

When a single utility company has a monopoly, there's very little incentive to control costs because the public is always the one putting the bill.

We know this.

So before we celebrate more underground projects, maybe we should ask a simple question.

Is it really about safety?

Or is it about expanding expensive infrastructure projects that the public has no choice but to pay for?

Because from where many of us are sitting, it feels like the same pattern we see over and over again.

The people are told it's for their benefits, but the bill always lands on our lap.

Thank you for your comment.

Your time has concluded, and this concludes public comment for item number four.

All right, thank you.

Let's begin our committee discussion with Council President Logata.

Uh thank you, Chair.

Uh thank you for the presentation and the work and bringing the master plan update here, and thank you for the briefing the other day on this.

Uh I want to start out by saying having watched the utility undergrounding and even done a working group or two back in the day.

Um, the energy that I've seen in really revitalizing the whole utility undergrounding process in the past five years has been a welcome relief.

Uh it doesn't make anything move faster, but at least it is much more thoughtful.

Um it is much more transparent.

Uh and the additional work that you all went through to not just simply accept the boundaries of the past, but actually say we've learned a lot over the years.

Let's see where there's opportunities to tweak and refine them so that uh when those utility undergrounding districts actually do get funded, that they're much more efficient uh and much more predictable in terms of the outcome, as we'll see in the next item, right?

simply accept the boundaries of the past but actually say we've learned a lot over the years let's see where there's opportunities to tweak and refine them so that uh when those utility underground and districts actually do get funded that they're much more efficient uh and much more predictable in terms of the outcome as we'll see in the next item right um and also the um the other thing that was imposed on you which is the abandonment by the CPUC of Rule 20A and then trying to figure out um how do we fit that in uh because the average resident or the average business doesn't care what rule is being followed they just care that there are these overhead lines on that and it you know I know at least in my district it is one of the biggest things that the public is demanding when is my uh one of those lines in front of my house or behind my house are going to be undergrounded there so it is something that I hear not as much as potholes but it's uh a close second and it you know it didn't occur to me when we were doing the briefing but I just realized we often get a lot of complaints that the city is not moving the utility undergrounding process fast enough and I just realized SDG and E had 55 years to take care of all the 28 projects and they left us with 132.

So maybe we ain't doing so bad in managing our project um especially in light of the fact that the cost of the underground is is increasing much faster than the revenue to support that so I appreciate um I appreciate that.

So a couple of questions uh past master plans I can remember I think the original master plan where we laid out a schedule a calendar for every district across the city and immediately fell behind uh but I think the 2018 master plan we actually did a five year projection on districts and this new one in front of us actually has no projection simply said here is the districts that haven't been done yet um and that if I understood correctly from the briefing you will now identify how much revenue do we have what projects project or project should be funded next how will council uh learn about which projects are now going to be become eligible for funding and undergrounding sure thanks for the question council member um what we'll do is at our yearly annual update we will have all of that information so we owe SDGE an update on what projects that we ask them to do by June and July of this same year.

So when our project or when our program comes to committee in like May or June we'll have a list of the projects that we plan on building for that next year and that's when the committee would become familiar with what our projects are for that year.

Okay.

And then um it didn't occur to me yesterday but the we've changed the utility underground in MOU with S D G and E.

And we made one change where we actually started prioritizing which districts would be moved first fire safety equity et cetera have we spent enough years to actually figure out how that is working how much it affects which ones we prioritize I would say we haven't had enough time to figure out the implications of what that prioritization has been but we do have a a tool now that is automation as I've been added to it so it will be easier for us to look historically at the trends of that prioritization model.

Okay yeah you have you make that kind of pivot you've got to give a little bit of time uh to do that so um I'll close with my favorite yearly question uh project one M1 uh which has been a bit of a dispute between the city and SDGE about whether they can finish that project or not do we have any update sure yeah so for project one M1 that's in permitting so or did you mean one M job two which is the soil the soil's I'm sorry the job two M job two just wanted to make sure um yeah we actually have a uh uh uh an account of what's going on so it's in pre-design um right now and it's going um it's been there since December of 2025 and then it will be uh included our geotech recommendations will be included in the the design work in July of 2026 when it will be ready for permitting by December of 2027.

So it's making its headway slowly but surely okay that's like front page news of the La Hoya light so if you could no so I I'm gonna be careful about how I I mentioned that but so the problems with or the conflict with SCG about soils conditions has been resolved and the project will now get back in the queue and move forward.

Yes yes that's correct yeah um I think obviously taking a year to do the geotechnical study was not welcome to news but it was definitely necessary from an engineering standpoint we were very relieved to know that the engineering study um did show uh that we were gonna be it was going to become feasible um with some redesign so that will get started.

That is and I'll have to think of something else to bug you with on a yearly basis.

But thank you for your go ahead and like I said it's just the new energy and the new approach is very much appreciated um going forward so thank you for that.

Was there a motion?

Sorry.

I moved the adoption of the master plan of staff recommendation.

A little sloppy here in committees.

All good.

All good.

Doing the cheap seats right now.

All right.

I think I think we we do pretty well considering all the things that we're going.

This is a very complicated process.

And for you to be able to uh coordinate all everything you have to coordinate before we get even underground is pretty amazing because we now don't do it one on top of the other on top of the other on top of the other, messing the streets up a hundred times.

Everything is coordinated, so hopefully we can do our cross curb to curb uh paving at the end once.

And it makes a nice smooth street and everything works well.

I really appreciate how much this takes away fire danger.

That is so important, and I'm so glad that you've included the high fire areas in the priority list.

Um I think that's a big boon, and uh let's pray that we don't have any horrible drought situations coming up, but as the planet warms, I wouldn't be surprised.

So this is really a good preventive thing that you're doing for all the citizens, and we really appreciate it.

So I will second the motion.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Vice Chair.

Um appreciate the questions by colleagues.

Thank you for the presentation here.

I this is important in a number of ways.

The work is important, the planning's important, etc.

So I think there's a there was a public comment, and there was in the public comment, there was like a fair concern expressed that SDGE builds it more than they need to, that there's more investment in infrastructure than they need because they get a guaranteed rate of return.

Can you help the public understand why they shouldn't be concerned that under underground utility projects are um an unnecessary expense that is leading to unnecessary costs in their lives?

Sure, council member, thanks for that question.

I think it's first it's important to note that SDEGE does not get a rate of return on any of these projects.

So unlike some other undergrounding efforts in the wildfire areas where they do get a rate of return on that, they do not get a rate of return on ours.

There's also our team, right?

We're here to make sure that costs are coming in on time and on scope and the projects being done on time and on scope.

And so there is a little bit of accountability where SDG doesn't have an individual team that is managing each of their projects on other different projects that they have.

There's a city component behind it that manages those funds and manages that schedule to make sure that they are coming in.

We also have an MOU that keeps them accountable, and we actually are just got a recommendation to reopen that MOU that will give hopefully the framework a little bit more teeth so we can bite into them a little bit harder in the future.

If I may add to that, um the surcharge program that we're referencing, um that was uh something that the city of San Diego in collaboration with the utility um got passed at the CPUC in 2002.

Um so there is a um a slight percentage uh on on electrical bills.

Um we do believe that it's in the best interest um of the public to continue undergrounding for reliability as well as as as fire safety.

Um but uh if that was you know to be looked at you know deeper, this is a it's it's it's via the public utilities commission.

Understood.

Thank you for that.

Um how do we determine success?

When you all are looking back at at this in a few years, what are you gonna be looking at to say we're we're aim we're hitting where we uh hitting the marks we aimed to hit?

Sure, that's a really big question, and I'm gonna try to answer it as succinct as possible.

Success looks like a couple of different ways.

First, there's the the customer satisfaction, right?

Do we are we meeting the needs of customers that are looking to have their utility lines underground?

Are they doing it on time?

Are we doing it in a way that they find is efficient and not as disruptive to their day-to-day lives?

There's also just holding SDGing accountable for cost and schedule.

So are we doing these projects right now?

We average about 10 million a mile.

Are we doing these projects on average at the same cost point?

Are we keeping SDGing accountable to that cost point?

And are we doing it on schedule or their schedule overruns?

And so success looks like having our mission statement, which is eventually having all the utility lines overhead underground, where we have unblocked viewways, we have better fire safety, and we've serviced communities that have historically been underserved.

So I think that in a succinct way is probably one of the answers that I would give to that question.

I will add to that, and I appreciate the comments from from Council President Lacava about you know the last couple of years seeing some changes in the team and and of the delivery of the of the program.

And so I just I I want to reiterate also that we're constantly we we are actively and and iteratively trying to find more and better ways to to run these programs, and a lot of that comes down to the data that we have, right?

And so whether it's improving um like Jenny mentioned, if it's improving um customer communications, understandability, um, satisfaction from our uh from from residents and constituents, um, along with both having to have a working relationship with SDG and E to get this done at the same time holding them accountable, and then having the data to be able to back that up and support it.

Um Jenny also mentioned um that there is a recommendation that will be coming forward from the franchise um audit review committee, specifically to our MOU about looking at openers uh of the MOU, also looking at how ways that we can um have have better oversight of invoicing and things like that, and we welcome all of those comments, and then we turn I hope that what you have seen over the last several years is when we do get those that type of feedback, you see us um uh making those changes actively and reporting back on that.

Thank you.

And then the last question like kind of big picture, where do you think we're at in terms of our evolution in integrating undergrounding work with stormwater, complete streets projects, streetlight upgrades, like like we're doing better than before?

Are we doing everything you think we can do and what's necessary to do that integration integration as well as possible?

Um so I'll start with the sort of lowest common denominator, which has historically been um the one dig policy that we have enacted with undergrounding.

I think it's one of the main infrastructure projects that actually delivers on that promise, where SDGE as well as all the telecoms are using one single trench versus using up a lot of the the real estate underneath our street asset.

That's one.

The second uh that I think we deliver really well on, um, though it may elongate a the final restoration of a street is the collaboration and cost share and coordination that we do with stormwater and public utility projects where we um if we do have to, if there is um coordination necessary, that we are coming back to only pave the street one time.

So those are places that I think we are currently demonstrating success.

Um something that we are looking forward to and that we've incorporated into the master plan, and I will just reference.

I know that um uh one of the public comments uh did ask about equity.

I think it was from Joyce and Yatta, asked if we had uh worked with Office of Race and Equity, all of our prioritization, all of the equity components.

We have had many meetings with um uh uh uh Kim Desmond and her team, and they've done a lot of evaluations on these things.

So one thing that we are incorporating into prioritization that hadn't been done before is the multi-asset benefit.

So looking at ways that we can, you know, um uh for street lights, right?

Can we prioritize areas that have series circuits, right?

The oldest circuits that need to be upgraded.

Um, what is the PCI of the streets and um how much how many CIP dollars have historically been invested in neighborhoods versus not?

And those are all now things that we are looking at from a prioritization to try to make it more holistic to make our dollars go farther for the community.

That's great.

Just one follow-up to that.

What I'm hearing is that there's a lot of thought being put into it.

Where do you feel like we are in terms of like turning that thought into the action that you're hoping to see and tangible uh changes that you could point to to our constituent and say, you know, five years ago this wouldn't have looked like it looks like today, and here's how it's different.

Um so some of the stuff that we have brought forward in the last year is really future focused.

So when we came and we brought updates to the council policy 600-8 to rules, we got rid of the allocation process.

So historically speaking, when we brought forward any new projects for district creation, it had to be a uh a project block that was already on that allocated list.

Anyone who was not allocated or uh kind of that gray, you know, the gray on our map, they were not even being considered.

So one thing that we did was we took that out uh when we came in this past year.

Um we did that, and then the second component is updated our prioritization to include multi-asset benefit, all of the other equity components.

Those changes are going to be seen in the subsequent projects that we move forward.

That being said, I think some of the ways in which we've improved uh at least from a constituent or resident standpoint, there has been so much historical frustration around you know being being promised that their neighborhood was going to get undergrounded years ago and it never was.

Um we have taken all of that to heart, and we've spent a lot of time the last several years to improve our maps to simplify nomenclature.

Um we did a customer journey um uh evaluation this past year, identifying all of the points of the projects where we have not historically had any contact with customers and have now created collateral and mechanisms to to have more touch points.

Um so I think it's and and uh like council president Lakaba said for this master plan update.

We also, you know, we're not we're not moving forward with an implementation plan.

I think that sort of hindered us more than it helped us, especially once we updated it and then we went to a franchise renegotiation and all that went out the window.

So I I think something that I I in closing, um, we are trying to do good by the resident.

We're trying to improve communications, we're trying to listen to the feedback that we've received and then deliver on that feedback.

So I think we've done a lot better in that area, and as far as equity and and other components uh for improving communities, we're gonna be seeing that um in the near future.

Great, thank you so much.

All right, we have a motion from Council President.

We have a uh second from our vice chair.

Uh all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

That passes unanimously and brings us to our next item.

Sarah.

Thank you, Chair.

Item number five is utilities undergrounding program utility poll and overhead line exception requests.

And if you're watching on City TV or the live stream online and you'd like to dial in to speak, please call 1669-2545252.

Inputting webinar ID 160732 9638 pound.

Chair.

All right.

Uh go ahead and introduce yourself for the record again, please, and then proceed when you're ready.

Thank you very much.

Chelsea Clacius, Deputy Director in the Transportation Department.

With me is Jenny Reynolds, program manager in the utility undergrounding program.

We need seven minutes for our presentation.

Thank you.

As way of background, it's important to remember before we dive into this conversation today that statute 61.0508 gives city council the authority to create an undergrounding district, much like the one pictured in this screen.

It is this authority that allows the UUP team to work with utility owners and ask them to underground all polls and wires in this area.

Every single poll under this authority is required to be removed.

Given this authority, there are two ways to grant poll or line exceptions.

One is under statute 61.0505, which allows some polls for streetlighting, signalization, transmission line and guy wires to be accepted without council approval.

The other authority is statute 61.0512, which allows city council to grant exceptions when an unusual circumstance exists, as long as it's not detrimental to public health or general welfare.

And that's the reason we're here today.

Let's go into both in detail.

Those are the polls and lines in question.

Block 1J phase one is in construction phase when SDG asked for the poll and four overhead lines to stay due to serving overhead distribution lines outside the undergrounding district.

You can see this denoted at the top photo.

This poll serves as a transition point from the underground to the overhead.

Our recommendation is to grant SD genies exception and allow the poll and lines to be picked up with the Hoy-S1 and keep the project on schedule.

For residential block one Y, you can see the red dot at the far west of the project map.

This is the poll in question.

This project is currently in design phase, and SDG asked for the poll to remain because the poll represents the only viable location to establish a primary cable connection since the next nearest poll is restricted from trenching through the marshland areas that lies between the two locations.

Our recommendation is to grant this SDG in the exception and allow the poll to be picked up with the adjacent project boundary and keep the project on schedule.

Next steps.

First, we're incorporating additional checks during boundary walks to capture as many serving outside the boundaries as we can get ahead of time.

Two, we're working develop an SOP that so that this process will be understood by all stakeholders.

And three, we're doing our due diligence now by reviewing all current and recent construction projects to ensure that they have proper exception status.

Since this is the first time we're here asking for exceptions, there are about 22 older projects and 200 lines of data that will be coming back to council to ask for exceptions later on this year.

And with that, are there any questions?

Thank you so much.

Do we have any public comments?

Thank you, Jerry.

Yes, we've received one speaker slip here in chambers.

Blair Beekman, you will have two minutes to provide your comment on item five.

Hi, thank you, Blair Beekman.

Thank you for this item and the previous item.

Um I don't know where exactly it is, but the work I do with tech accountability, the way it can help make for a more efficient practice of streetlight repair and replacement.

Um, where that connects.

I wish I knew it better, but I know there's a really good connection in there between doing open good practices and policies with the tech that can make it easier for people to call in and ask for replacements and those replacements to happen.

Um all of it being done as a shared open accountable process uh to make sure that the tech going into the new street lights is is past muster, it's safe and it's good.

Um, and yet can still be eventually be light can be replaced.

Um good luck how we work on that item.

I thank you immensely how you talked about equity for the previous item.

Uh and and I guess it can apply for this one too.

Really good meetings, uh meetings uh this week uh with agenda items uh about the new equity uh department within IPA.

Um they sound like they're on a really good path and doing good work.

And um what you're doing with um how equity can be applied to uh underground issues.

Uh really nice suggestion by Joyce Sanana and how street light repair works into all of those questions of equity and and the and the tech involved and the accountability.

Um you're trying to ask those questions at this time, and um I hope this can be a more regular uh thought process in how we consider this item.

Thank you.

Thank you for your testimony and beginning the five-minute timer for all those in the virtual queue to indicate if they wish to provide comment on item five.

Each speaker will have two minutes.

We'll begin testimony with phone number ending in 8700.

You can unmute by pressing star six.

Uh thank you, Sarah.

Uh, Joey Signata C D three.

Uh, first of all, uh the you know, last item and this item are intricately related.

Uh committee.

You were you get a five-star award for that last item.

And the presenters, the two of you, you get a five-star award.

That's what the public loves.

And I'll include the public speakers too, of course.

That was really perfect.

It was robust, it was informative, it was it felt you know sincere.

I I just really, really appreciated it.

So on this item, what was except?

Well, first of all, uh, I love the word city council authority.

Um, those are good words.

Uh, but it took me into the trenches because on that last item when I researched it and I went into the trenches in my imagination.

You know, I I and and I realized there were shared utilities under there.

I thought, oh my goodness, who gets to go in there and who doesn't?

I thought, oh my goodness, who gets to go in there and who doesn't, and how when does it get overfilled and does it get, you know, uh, do we dig it up again and have to put somebody else that wants to get in there?

So this was very informative to me to find out how complicated it is to negotiate to you know work with you know this space, which I guess is finite.

Uh so uh it was it was just a great connection, these two, and their connection was just a wonderful thing uh for my work and and for the public to get the information that they need for transparency and accountability, and to trust that you're serving the public in a way that's good for all people that sit at this table.

So one people, one San Diego, uh, and I'm you know, one family.

So love to all.

Thank you for your concluding remark.

Our next speaker is phone number ending in 8813.

You can unmute by pressing star six.

Okay, uh Clinton Solo here.

So, yeah, um, so no one's really talking about the actual environmental and infrastructure risks.

So, again, underground electrical systems are not immune to problems.

And what happens during flooding?

Flood water and rising groundwater can submerge underground cables, damage insulation, and cause electrical failures.

Uh salt water intrusion near coastal areas can even corrode buried infrastructure.

And uh fail, just like I mentioned before, crews can't just climb down a pole.

You know, you got a tear up street, sidewalks, neighborhood.

So uh now let's talk about earthquake because we're in San Diego, we're in California.

Soil movement, um slides, all these things can shift or break underground infrastructure.

Unlike overhead lines where damage is visible, underground failures are harder to locate and slower to repair.

There's environmental disruption during construction.

Installing underground wiring requires major trenching projects, heavy machinery.

Um that I think about it.

Sorry, this just popped in my head.

During the whole lockdown, there was so much underground work.

Perhaps that's the reason why uh they had us in our houses.

Well, not me.

But anyways, okay, so all of this costs enormous amounts of money.

And that money doesn't come from nowhere, it comes from we, the taxpayers.

So now today we're hearing that the uh presenters are asking for exceptions and that they'll come back later.

So okay, let me get this straight.

You're asking for exceptions now, and we'll deal with the consequences later or what?

Because yeah, I I don't, yeah, it doesn't look efficient to me.

And it looks reckless.

Our money again.

Thank you for your concluding remark.

This does conclude your time.

And with no other hands up in the queue, this concludes public comment for item five.

All right, thank you so much.

Let's begin the conversation with Council President McCullough.

Really not trying to dominate.

So the public always should be excited to buy this one because we're leaving the facilities above ground, right?

Um we actually are.

Um, I you know, this is the first time that staff or operations has brought to us.

I always want to check my memory about these kinds of things.

Uh both these items are in district one, uh, which is why I jumped on the lights.

Um both of these, uh I looked at both of them.

Uh they both make a lot of sense.

I understand why within those respective undergrounding districts, those two poles are uh will be set aside for a future consideration.

Um I asked a question yesterday, I just want to ask it again in case anybody who lives in those areas are listening.

So on the La Jolla one, that is both for the pole to remain and for the four wires that cross La Jolla Shores Drive and go up the open space towards UCSD.

I understand that.

For the one in Delmar Heights, Delmar Terrace, I think it's called Delmar Terrace.

That one, all the lines that come out of the residential neighborhood and attach to that pole, those will be undergrounded.

The pole will be left, and then the wires that go across the the marsh, the Piñasquitas Lagoon that will remain for future consideration.

Okay, just wanted to make sure those lines that come out of the residential area will be removed.

So thank you for that.

Uh and then I look forward for the additional cleanup.

Again, I mentioned earlier about the new energy and new approach.

I appreciate your your willingness to go back and do the exceptions and clean up work for those so that all the I's are dotted and T's are crossed.

So again, thank you.

With that, I will make the motion to move the staff recommendation.

Thank you, Council President.

We've got a motion, Vice Chair Campbell.

Thank you.

I'm happy to second the motion, and I want to thank you for thinking about this.

This is it makes perfect efficiency sense that when a wire, okay, so it starts in La Jolla, but it's going through the air over to the next district over, then the next district over's uh workload will be with that.

And uh everything just makes such so much more efficiency.

I really appreciate you thinking of everything in that way.

And there are some things that we have to make exceptions, like street lights, you know, traffic lights and street lights and anchor wires and huge metal poles that have transmission wires, things like that may not have to be undergrounded, but most of the items will be, which which makes everyone uh so much safer.

And I really appreciate all the all the good thoughts you put into this.

I will second the motion.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, we've got a motion and a second.

Um just go ahead and do a voice vote again.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

That two passes unanimous unanimously uh three to zero and brings us to our next item, item six.

Sarah?

Thank you, Chair Lorivera.

Item number six is approved the second amended and restated regional wastewater disposal agreement between the City of San Diego and the participating agencies in the Metropolitan Sewage System.

And if you're watching on City TV and you'd like to dial in to speak, please call 1669-2545252.

Inputting webinar ID 1607329638 pound.

Chair.

Thank you.

All right, once our presenters are ready, please introduce yourselves for the record and let us know how much time you'd like for this item.

Good afternoon.

Lisa Salaya, executive assistant director, and with me is Adam Jones, Finance Deputy Director, and we should need no more than 10 minutes.

All right, please proceed.

So good afternoon, committee chair Ilo Rivera and members of the environment committee.

Today, public utilities is before you to discuss an amendment to the foundational agreement to operate and manage the region's wastewater system.

To begin, I want to provide an overview of the governance structure to ensure wastewater for the region's 2.3 million customers is managed in an environmentally friendly manner and in compliance with all regulations.

The City of San Diego owns and operates the regional wastewater system, but in partnership with the Metropolitan Wastewater JPA, who shares in cost and oversight, and is represented by 12 individual participating agencies and represents the region from as far north as Poway, as far east as Alpine, and all the way down to the border.

The purpose of the second amended and resated agreement, commonly referred to as SARA, not a who, but a what.

The purpose of it is to modernize our regional wastewater agreement, resolve remaining issues from the last time it was amended in 2021, update our cost allocation and billing structure, and establishes a 40-year regional governance framework.

Key policy and financial updates that have been included include cost-sharing approach for not only pure water phases one, but also phase two.

It should be noted.

It took us four years to process and negotiate the second amendment.

We would choose not to spend that many resources doing that and have identified other paths to be able to update as laws change or anything changes as it relates to having a 40-year agreement.

That would improve our flexibility to address regional operational issues, but does maintain the city's ownership and operational responsibilities.

I'd like to spend a little bit of time on the improved billing methodology.

Currently, our billing methodology is based on average flows in the strength of the wastewater being treated.

That has been problematic in regards to looking for the future as we have these average flows that are actually declining, not only because of water conservation, but also because of advanced purification projects coming online in the next few years and any other ones that may come on in the next 40 years.

And then we also have the issue with peak wet weather events that can more than double the amount of our average flows.

We need to ensure our regional wastewater system is prepared and resilient, which requires necessary funding for the future.

So if they only use us every once in a while, they're only going to pay for those fixed charges.

But if they pay it every day, they'll have both averages and fixed charges.

This does result in approximately 25% of our revenue being fixed.

This slide, as small as it is, because we have 12 different participating agencies, plus the city of San Diego, is in our information and does depict the positive impacts on the city of San Diego in the by changing the billing structure.

It has been our intent to be very purposeful in communicating the impact from any of the changes that we're doing.

We have been wanting to be transparent to all entities so that way everybody can plan for any changes from these revised billing methodology.

One of the ways that we've addressed ensuring that we do not have to go back and do amendments, is we've introduced this concept in regards to having administrative agreement.

An example of our first administrative agreement for pre-treatment is included in our item.

These administrative agreements will allow for targeted operational or programmatic updates.

They are specified within the document.

It avoids reopening the full regional agreement.

It does require the City of San Diego support first before consideration.

And the key thing that we are very supportive of it replaces a unanimous requirement of having every single participating agency approve an amendment and goes to more of a two-thirds approval to replace.

I will note it has been unanimously approved at each and every participating agency that is considered it to date, showing the regional support that we have.

Um approve it, plus the city and the city council approves this.

We are looking at potentially having a July 1st of 2026 fiscal year 27 for implementation.

But again, it must have all participating agencies' approval to go into effect.

That concludes our presentation.

Thank you so much.

Do we have public comment on this item?

Thank you.

My name is Jerry Jones, and I am the chair of the Metro Wastewater JPA.

You know, 24 years ago, as a newly elected council member in Lemon Grove, my mayor told me uh don't talk to your colleagues about wastewater, you bore them.

So here I am all these years later talking to two-thirds of the cities in the county selling a new wastewater agreement.

I gotta start by saying thank you to Lisa and Adam.

Uh the process has been very collaborative and uh collegial, and uh it's created a really good product here.

Um this item before you is significant and it's generational.

It it protects the environment, it protects water reliability, and it protects our ratepayers, all of them including yours.

So I guess I have to say I'm I'm proud to have been part of the process, and I would urge you uh to approve it and uh bring us into the 21st century.

Thank you.

And I'm having I'm here for any questions you may have.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Blair Beekman.

Hi, Blair Beakman.

I wish I had a bit more knowledge on the subject.

I do not to try to offer my two cents, uh, what a little I can understand.

Um, the water uh meter uh items uh billing, I think it's billing over an app issue.

Uh you've just it was on the consent item today on the meeting minutes and that you've been talking about for the past month or so.

Um can does that connect to this item at all?

Can that be of help to this item at all?

Um water meter issues on your on an appropriate.

Um how to pay bills.

Another uh consideration.

Um I wish I read more into this item that um is was there a good public process for all of these decision making going on?

Uh does there need to be?

Will there continue to be uh a good public uh healthy public input uh to understand these billing changes uh just to be clear, nothing else at this point.

I hope there's been a whole a good whole community process in doing this.

Um quickly add uh I hope it can be relevant.

Uh thank you for the words of council person Campbell this week on um wanting to address stormwater issues and the overall issues and needs of revenue.

And I think we have a great system of such a low uh fee for so stormwater issues that I don't want to raise all that much, but from one dollar to two dollars, that's twice as much.

Would that be considered uh uh budgetarily uh uh proportional and helpful?

Um hopefully it can be in small increments uh the future of stormwater issues that can still cover a lot of ground.

Uh good luck how to figure out those kind of formulas that takes work.

Thank you.

Oh, good luck too.

Uh talking about revenue, we talked clearly together about revenue.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That concludes public testimony here in chambers.

So I'll begin the five-minute timer for all those in the virtual queue to indicate if they wish to provide comment on item six at this time.

We currently have three hands raised, and we will begin testimony with phone number ending in 8700.

You can unmute by pressing star six.

You will have two minutes.

Thank you, Sarah.

Uh Joyce and yeah the CD3.

Uh, thank you, Blair.

Uh, I did I too did not have a chance to uh really look at this thoroughly.

I just ran out of steam, and it's such an important area.

I I'm hopefully gonna be able to fit it in over the weekend.

Uh yet uh so Blair, you did that question about outreach uh was important.

Uh I I hope that they did uh you did do that.

So uh wastewater system, this is the big one.

And uh I loved coming out of the gate and using the word environmental friendly.

Aren't those just absolutely wonderful words?

I need more understanding, and perhaps I just need to review the backup on cost-sharing approach for pure water phase one and two.

Now, here's something I want to tell you that is just blew me away.

I think it was a couple of years ago when we had an agenda item creating relating water.

Wastewater, well, in fact, they mentioned briefly today, wastewater decrease due to water conservation.

Now, way back about two years ago, somebody said in a presentation here that the public, because they have conserved so beautifully, they have changed their lives.

It is a paradigm shift, and I'll give a personal testimonial to that.

You know how I've been ranting and raving about what happened with the conservation and how it impacted our water rates going up.

I can't give up water conservation.

I'm back on board.

That's a paradigm shift that won't go away for me too.

So kudos to the public.

And I'm still not sure how this is positively impacting our water rate, but I hope that you're on top of it.

I don't understand the context.

Thank you.

This does conclude your time.

Thank you for your comment.

Our next speaker is phone number ending in 8813.

You can unmute by pressing star six.

Okay.

Well, let me break it down a little bit.

Gonzalo here.

So now we're talking about wastewater management, uh, which essentially means recycling sewage water and presenting it as a future drinking supply.

Correct.

Let's call it what it is.

So we're being asked to accept the idea that water, the water we flushed on the toilet, should eventually come back through the top for drinking, cooking, bathing.

And we're told this is necessary because of scarcity.

But here's the problem.

We do not live on a planet of water scarcity.

We live on a planet of water abundance.

Oceans, rainfall, groundwater, rivers, aquifers, water exists everywhere in the natural system.

You breathe it.

We we literally are water.

Yeah, government messaging constantly tells the people that we are running out, that we must accept more centralized systems, more treatment plans, and more expensive infrastructure.

Why?

Because scarcity creates compliance.

When people are convinced they can't survive without government managing every drop, they stop questioning the system, pun intended.

But there are many alternatives, and uh they deserve attention.

So before we normalize turning sewage into drinking water, we could expand on um how about stormwater capture, how about rainwater harvesting instead of penalizing people for harvesting their own freaking water?

I mean, I don't think we do that here in California, or do we?

No, we don't.

Um, we can have that.

We have um we could focus on protecting groundwater basins and uh natural aquifer recharge, working with nature instead of constantly building more industrial infrastructure, all of these options concludes your time.

Thank you for your comment.

Our next speaker is the original.

Please unmute and begin.

Yeah, this is not gonna stop our water rates from going up.

In fact, they're gonna continue to go up all while you are recycling our own sewage and giving it back to us, and amen.

So that can swalo.

It is so sad because it's like you're sitting here and acting like that is what the will of the people wants.

That did you ever ask the people if this is what we should do, especially when it's known that data centers for AI are taking fresh water and going along with lithium mining, it's taking up our fresh water.

So there's not enough for the people, but there seems to be enough for those types of things, and that is detrimental to humanity.

When you guys are sitting here, it's all about controlling resources because you can't control the people without doing that.

And the fact that you are wrapping this up in a package like this is going to be better for people, it's gonna be even any kind of healthy, especially when you're putting toxic chemicals into this water that then we are going to consume.

It's like all of the things that you guys should be concerned about.

If you were worried about the planet and preserving it and people's public health and safety, you would be ensuring that that fresh water that is even being diverted much of the time or being put into the ocean, um, and or used for this type of infrastructure and materials, you know, isn't happening.

You would also make sure that when they're spraying toxic chemicals, nanoparticulates in the sky above us, and also geo-engineering the weather, that that would bother you because that is detrimental to us as a race and to the whole planet.

But instead, you guys are more concerned about making money, all while professing that this is going to, you know, save us money.

Nothing you do saves us money ever.

You guys waste our money.

And it's just very sad that you don't concentrate and and focus on the things that are actually doing what you are claiming.

It's it's ridiculous.

Thank you for your concluding remark.

And with the five-minute tire timer expired and no hands in the queue.

This concludes testimony on item six.

All right, thank you.

Begin with Vice Chair Campbell.

Uh, thank you so much, Chair.

Uh, this is a wonderful um example of communities working with each other, cities working with each other.

Uh this has to do with the uh metropolitan sewage system of many entities.

We have 12 uh cities uh that are that are involved with this, and the Padre water system as well.

I might have said the name of them incorrectly, but at any rate, that's close.

You know who I mean.

So it's really 13 entities, and what happens is they send their wastewater to the city of San Diego, and the city of San Diego is much bigger than they are, and so our wastewater amount is bigger than theirs put together, but nevertheless, all 13 of us are working together for this problem.

And uh just just wondering in terms of pure water, if anybody's ever been to Las Vegas, uh for years they have used um recycling of sewage water in order to make potable water that is good to drink.

Uh their water's fine in Las Vegas.

I had it a few times myself, and I and it's just fine.

So uh this you know, this is a uh not a brand new technology by any means.

However, doing it on the scale that we will be doing it and and are starting to do it now, uh, is just fantastic, and we are the first in the nation.

Again, we're leading the nation uh with this good new technology.

Uh unfortunately, San Diego doesn't sit on an aquifer.

It's like the people in Israel say if there was any place that God could have given the people of Israel land, it had to be a place with no oil.

And this is true also of San Diego, and so what do we do?

Well, many years ago, the city uh PUD made a system whereby we could collect rainwater and uh also get uh kudos for uh saving uh using water in our homes.

And uh those have been wonderful things that have helped tremendously uh to make our water use in the city go down in terms of amounts.

So we've been working on this for many years.

This particular agreement has been in the works for four years, and I think every which way has been looked at and thought about, and I would like to make the motion that uh the city of San Diego join those ten other cities, and I'm sure the other two will come on board as well.

And thank you for being here, sir, and thank you for chairing that organization.

Uh wow, it's probably a lot like herding cats, but to get all those cities together and working together, it's just fabulous, and and that's the way things should be.

So I can't thank all of you enough for the work on this, and uh I would like to move that we accept the agreement.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Vice Chair.

We've got a motion, and we'll move to Council President Lakabov.

All right, uh, thank you, Chair.

Um by thanking you, sir, for your service over the years, that institutional knowledge, uh knowing the behaviors of the individual members is so important.

So thank you for your your leadership and your public service.

Uh thank you, Lisa and Adam and everybody at PUD for the good work um in navigating these kinds of agreement for wastewater disposal.

Um the um these are not easy things to do.

We've got independent cities, different thinkers, and so trying to bring them all together uh is uh tough job.

And it sounds like from every way to look at it, this is good.

For those who are listening, it uh maybe it might be helpful in case you might be confused.

This is not about water meters, it's not about conservation of drinking water.

It's not even about pure water.

Uh it's about disposing of wastewater.

Sewage.

Right.

So we can either go back to the day where we say, Hey, Del Mar or Imperial Beach or Coronado, just dump your sewage into the ocean, or La Matha, or um let me get my geography right.

Lemon Grove, dump it into the or dam, just dump your raw sewage into the San Diego River, uh, Spring Valley, uh, you might be far enough south to dump it into the sweetwater river.

I don't think that's a good idea.

I think the whole metro uh sewer idea, and the people that years before us came up with that idea uh to have a singular system that all goes and flows down to the Point Loma treatment plant was exactly what this region needed uh for live building.

And so the work that has been done that's behind the scenes, we just don't we don't even pay attention to it.

You everybody just does their job, keeps everything up and running, cooperative is just a huge thing that makes our region a special place to live and work.

It's other problems we need to tackle, but that's not this one.

So with that, I'm happy to second the motion.

All right, thank you, Council President.

Uh as always, thank you for writing that additional context.

Uh I agree that that is not a good idea.

It would be a bad idea to go back to doing that.

Um thank you for um all your work on this.

Thank you for for being here and your participation, sir.

Um the one question I I do have, you know Joy was um enthusiastic, but also it's like I don't really understand how this affects rates.

I the one question I I do have, you know, Joy was enthusiastic, but also just like I don't really understand how this affects rates.

How for someone who's first and foremost thinking about cost, why is this a good thing for us to do?

So first off, two things is that this doesn't directly impact rates right now.

So what this does is it kind of sends a bill, sends a bill to the city of San Diego, sends a bill to each of these individuals, and then they must incorporate it into their rate structure.

So that's one thing I wanted to clarify with that.

Um but what this does is because we're addressing peak weather vets.

There's two things that this benefits from.

Um there is a slight reduction in regards to this revised allocation methodology, billing methodology for the city of San Diego.

We're projected in 2027 or right now that we'd be about 67% of the bill will be about 66%.

Um but that's really important is it's when you look at these peak weather events, and anybody who's gonna take their average flows off, they wouldn't be paying for this system.

And if we have people not paying for the system, the system itself may not have its investments, and we'll have to spend even more money.

Um we need this system working, pump station two, pump station one, point loma.

We need those backbones of our systems working each and every day.

And this ensures that we have the funding and that fixed funding every year to make sure that those investments do occur so we don't have to pay more expenses later on when they do fail, if they were to fail.

So from a cost perspective, you would tell a resident this is a way of protecting from steep increases in the future.

Is that correct?

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um I just want to make sure that we're able to explain in the in the most concise terms the ways that we're trying to either save folks save folks' money either now or in the future, and that we're at a bare minimum uh having cost front and center as we make our decisions.

Um so we've got a motion and a second on the floor.

Um, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

That uh passes unanimously.

And that brings us to the end of our agenda.

Thank you.

And we'll adjourn this meeting of the environment committee to the next regular scheduled meeting on Thursday, April 16th, 2026 at 1 p.m.

Thank you, everyone.

We're adjourned.