and moving it back, making it official. making it clear that it is official misconduct to circumvent the competitive solicitation process. created a policy position to give local preference to 1.25% for businesses located within the geographical boundaries of san francisco before there was a section at had complicated formula and whether or not to give a business local preference based on gross receipts tax or payroll tax. the smartest mines in the city could not figure out what that percentage would be. if you have a local business within san francisco, they get 1.25%. the prevailing wage sections,

who the non public works are in the middle of chapter 21 and we're moving them to that is very clear in the confined the prevailing wage sections. -- and you can find the prevailing wage sections. supervisor maxwell: any further presentations? why don't we open this up to public comment? items #3 and 4. >> my name is francisco decosta. one of the things that we need to know of a number of lb's and db's. i am not talking about the

southeast sector. we need to know their names and what type of training they have got. i am saying this because what i find again and again, i can mention a name and a business development, they seem to have a good relationship with some of the departments and that have been mentioned here. this good faith out reach. i did just a general review by taking some other huge projects , and they have got 3% or so of out reach money. the real out redone and the real progress from this area, the

same thing can happen in chinatown and some other areas. we might talk about jobs, but it is allowing disadvantaged communities to have their own businesses. we have an example of the library in the bayview, an ongoing confusion. let's not really talked the talk, but walk the walk. thank you very much. >> walter paulson. ♪ i don't know much about contracts but i like good services everybody tells me so.

i would sure like that ♪ ♪ i don't know much about contracts it will bring us the good things inside the city i do care for good services and we sure would like that everybody tells me so we sure like some now they don't want services with contracts i sure like it come on now. i sure like some good services and contracts ♪ ♪

supervisor maxwell: any further comments? seeing them, the comments are closed. supervisor chiu: i want to thank the different departments that had to do a lot of work to put this together. i am willing to support the changes proposed with a couple of caveat. this is a remarkably complicated field. i don't feel there has been a enough of reach to outside groups that will be affected by this. i know that 11 months ago, we went through this exercise and we received a lot of feedback. most of the contract in world is not aware of these changes that are coming true. if it turns out that there are specific suggestions to be made, i want to give the sponsor

of the legislation a heads up that we may have to have a conversation about some of this. i appreciate all of the information we received. the only thing that is important is not necessarily the absolute dollar of what we are contracting out, but what the percentages of the total amount awarded. what is important is that we are setting goals and understanding that whether it is 50%, 10%, we have an opportunity to use our city contracting dollars as a local stimulus. it has been very difficult to gather what those numbers are by department and how that has been changing over time. the last thing i will mention is, there are hundreds of pages of city law related to contract

thing. we are adding to that. we passed the six pieces of legislation earlier this year. the supervisors are pushing another to to amend on the edges, the contract. one of the biggest issues i have at this point, i think the system is overly complicated. for every dollar that we contract out, it is 15 or 20 cents on the dollar that we spend on city staff trying to understand and comply with the contrasting roles. i have asked our city comptroller to work with various departments to think about, are there ways for us to radically simplify the things we're doing and achieve the goals that we will have to make sure they go to local and beverage firms, to make sure that they comply with all of the values that we care about. and try to do this in a way that

does not involve dozens of city staffers reviewing and approving and arguing, and agents and private-sector folks trying to understand the contrasting roles. we have done a good job of -- who have to make sure how to make it easier for everyone. i want to thank the supervisor and her staff. supervisor maxwell: think you. colleagues, the amendments. and the amendments without objection, and the legislation as amended. without objection. this legislation will move forward. item #5.

>> amending the environment code to adopt existing commercial buildings. supervisor maxwell: someone from the mayor's office or however you choose to do it. >> the city of san francisco has set one of the most aggressive carbon goals in the country to achieve 20% below the 1990 levels. buildings make up 21%, and they comprise 27% of the goal. in fact, we have more lead certified buildings in the city of new york and the city of los angeles. these impact only new construction and large-scale

retrofit. last year, then they are pulled together a task force comprised of green building leaders, sustainability leaders, building owners, who divides the city on how to achieve energy efficiency gains in carbon emission reductions in the commercial building sector. in december of last year, the task force came back to the city with a number of recommendations. the primary ones being that the city required all commercial buildings to conduct an energy audit. in to report back to the city and make public data on their energy usage. as we have seen in a number of programs that the city currently has in place to promote energy efficiency, once a building owner who identifies -- we have

seen that between 40% and 70 percent of those buildings actually do the upgrades. we think this is really key. these recommendations that came out of the task force are key to helping the city meet its carbon emissions targets as well as significant energy gains. out of those recommendations, the mayor directed the department to implement those recommendations, and it has resulted in the legislation the have before you today. i like to say thank you so much to the department of the environment. to the task force that came up with the recommendations and the public utilities commission from working through the missile requirements of this. of like to invite the director to walk you through the

legislation. >> i am the director of the san francisco department of the environment. i am here today to speak on behalf of the commercial building ordinance that you see today. energy efficiency is a critical component to me in san francisco's greenhouse gas production goals. it also saves people money on their utility bills and promote development of the green job sector. san francisco adopted the highest standards which requires all new commercial construction to be qualified by 2012. the ordinance did result from a wide group of individuals, building owners, managers, architects, finances, and builders that were tasked with developing green building measures and timeline is to put

these aggressive measures in place. the energy performance for existing commercial ordinance before today it was developed with the employer from a similar working group. and was convened to look at existing commercial buildings. this task force was comprised of about 19 members, building members. representatives from the epa and the california energy commission. the ordinance has to requirements. the first is that each year, the building owner must benchmark high energy usage and make that information publicly available. the second requirement is that the building owner must perform

and energy efficiency audit that will tell them which are most cost-effective. our staff is going to come up in order to walk you through a power point presentation that documents the implementation of this measure. we wanted to highlight a couple of things that we're sure you are aware of. we know from the energy watch program that when building owners realize the savings potential associated with energy efficiency, 60% will undertake comprehensive retrofits. we have produced energy in san francisco by 32 megawatts, enough to power 32,000 residences. we expect energy used to drop 50% as a result of this ordinance if enacted. i just wanted to mention that with the passage of this ordinance, san francisco will leave the way for cities.

new york is the only other city to have passed such a comprehensive ordinance. the ordinance before you today is much more comprehensive, requiring energy audits at 10,000 square feet and above as opposed to 25,000 square feet every 10 years. i would also like to think the mayor's office for all of their work on drafting this ordinance and of like to bring up our commercial building coordinator could give you an overview of how it will work. >> one more moment. pardon me.

thank you for your time this afternoon. i wanted to walk you through some of the details of the ordinance. as the director just explained, benchmarking all commercial buildings in the city -- supervisor maxwell: one or the other. >> is that better? i like to talk about benchmarking first and how it will be a practical way for the department to implement it. by providing a reading labels for all buildings in disclosing that to the market, they will be able to compare individual buildings to one another. that provides an incentive for market actors to factor energy efficiency.

and overall, the decision to improve the performance of the stock as a whole. the tool being referenced is the energy star portfolio that is a free on-line portfolio. it is the same piece of software that is required by california which will require parties and the commercial property transaction to benchmark and disclose a lot of detail about buildings whenever they are sold, least, or refinanced. it is simple and understandable. it is a leveraging of an existing resources. the building owner would be required a benchmark with educational support provided by the environmental department and other organizations.

they would receive a hyperlink. clicking on that blanket would require a request. by clicking on the report, they would fill in information and submit it directly to us. and it is a process meant to be as efficient as possible. the timeline for implementation would start with the largest buildings first. approximately 620 buildings will be affected in 2011 and we would be working directly with them to confirm that the information they submit is valid. and it would be in the following years. similarly, the same thing would go on the following year and stretching down to 10,000 square feet.

the san francisco public utilities commission has contributed to similar efforts. we really appreciate their leadership on that issue. the expected outcome as represented by this example graph which is providing information about specific buildings and is able to provide an additional impetus to perform better and recognize exemplary performance to target services to those. in terms of evidence that this type of approach works, the best available label has been energy star itself which can be achieved by buildings which can demonstrate they are in the top 25% compared to similar climates.

numerous separate studies have looked at the leasing rates and occupancy rates. after factoring in location which will be the most important factor in all of those issues and other considerations that are critical, we have demonstrated significant benefits in terms of improved occupancy rate in sales prices. the market has been acting on this limited set of information. if we are going to move on to the thought process, only once every few years with an audit be due. if there is exemplary performance, regular recognition with energy star, or they are in a position where they are unlikely to make additional improvements or they are in financial distress or it

is occupied, they will be exempted for that year. if an audit is required, it would be the size and complexity of buildings. they are much larger, but they tend to have more complicated systems. it would not be required to be a level to energy audit. a much simpler walk through it would be what is required. the building owner will review the contents of that audit and send a combination -- a confirmation that they have completed that are that along with a summary of the cost- effective measures. we would be real initiating every year thereafter. a dependable industry for this commercial energy efficiency services market, which is

approximately a doubling. that mechanism of providing for home and ought to be redone, about every five years, buildings are more likely to have gone out of tune and there is a technological change identifying cost-effective measures, there is a utility to reviewing every five years. it was the judgment of the task force that a longer time with mr. that significant amount of energy savings, and a shorter time would involve expenditures home and diminishing returns. supervisor maxwell: you mentioned a monitoring. and somebody going over -- that means money.

how will that be dealt with? how does that work? >> they specialize in dealing with homeowners. the quality assurance you're asking about is twofold. that would be reviewing some metals -- submittals. supervisor maxwell: excuse me. does the department of the environment do that with any other program? the department of the environment, do they do this in any other way? do they monitor programs like this?

>> [inaudible] it is an existing program that we will integrate. it would be the existing resources that we have. supervisor maxwell: there are no fees or money to offset this cost? you are doing commercial building, and there are thousands of commercial buildings. you don't need any news that time, there is nothing else? -- new staff time? >> it allows us to have that implementation. we have a green building, and we have climate management staff

that we will be leveraging to do this. we are not hiring a staff and we are not getting an additional funds. >> all those funds that we managed, we must provide quality assurance on top of that. in a law-enforcement sense, we don't. supervisor maxwell: i was just asking if you do this kind of work in some form or another. supervisor chiu: it is my understanding that building owners will be using private sector to be doing a lot of this work, but it will be quality assured? >> eys. -- yes. >> private-sector people will be

giving advice and you will be overseeing the entire program to make sure that the benchmark is there and there is a little bit to ensure that there are good audits to be going on. the other thing i would point out, the department of the environment has done a great job of setting standards for which there is enforcement. your department does not go around restaurant and indicate who is complying? the regulations you have had has led to -- >> we go out to restaurants to see who is using styrofoam or not. supervisor chiu: most of the

time, the idea is that the industry will address the environmental issue. >> same with mandatory composting and recycling. things get reported back to us and we address is case by case. >> we don't have the resources to verify every single thing. supervisor mar: in elaborate on the free energy star tool that is used and what type of audit companies will be using it? can you talk about who would do those audits? >> i might have misspoke. energy star is a free tool to track information, but is not

for private audit. to obtain an audit, they would have to engage an entity and that would be the pathway the ordinance recognizes to do that to include directly contacting with an engineering firm. it might be more common for certain smaller buildings. the san francisco energy watch program expect to remain in operation. even in limited cases, exceptionally well qualified building operators, and would also be empowered to of ululate their own facilities -- to evaluate their run facilities. and where they can use a little bit more capital.

the building owner provides a mechanism for them to make that case. that is really basically what i have for you. why does this particular legislation recommend a five- year implementation time line? the three elements of that hard to establish a continuously operating market so the buildings would receive this review and that is the judgment of the task force. that is a reasonable balance between the need for technology to change in the industry to provide those services. the department of the environment is going to need significanti