i had an opportunity to go on a tour with don flak so i'm happy to move this forward with a motion to approve and also as a committee report. >> we could take that without objection. also before we actually i gavel down, i would like to get a tour of the site to work that in the next month or so. it would be great and i know it's a great milestone for our city that this project is coming to fruition. so we'll approve that. send it forward as a committee report with recommendation. [ gavel ] thank you item no. 3, please. >> item no. 3, resolution retroactively authorizing the department of environment to

spend a grant in the amount of $2,977,000 from the california public utilities commission through pacific gas & electric company to continue with an energy use and demand reduction through energy-efficiency program in the city and county of san francisco for the period of october 15th, 2012 through december 31, 2012. >> mr. rodriguez, welcome. >> thank you, guillermo rodriguez, department of the environment. the department is requesting the committee's approval to accept and expend a grant in the amount of $2,977,000 from the california public utilities commission through pacific gas & electric company to continue an energy use and demand reduction through energy-efficiency program through the period of october 15 of this year through december 31 of this year. it working cooperatively with pg&e and additional funding is being allocated to the city to

accelerate approximately 450 businesses and multi-family projects totaling about 3 million megawatts in savings. the savings of the 450 projects is significant just to give you an example of what 3 megawatts of savings equivalent to running 3,000 san francisco homes for a year. so these 450 projects are important. a few examples of the project certainly include familiar places at&t park and the fresh fish market at geneva is one of our projects. pacific supermarket on 2900 almaine is a project.

the catholic charities building on 1948 ocean is a project. we have some large projects like the palace hotel. we just heard tenderloin housing clinic is one of our other projects and conrad house is a project. the examples of the type of work are really very individual to each site, but a lot of it is for commercial office laguardias, commercial overhead lighting and a lot of it is changing their lighting for a new led project. in addition, there is lots of several kind of therm projects or natural gas projects that are included. in this next round. the last time i came before this committee there was an interest in understanding better our geographic representation of where historically the department has

provided incentives and i provided the committee members -- and if i could have the overhead. this represents the example of the various programs that the department has had throughout the existence of these programs. the bulk of our programs are for commercial, and large multi-family housing units. and gives you just a sense of the projects and where they have been throughout san francisco. not only have businesses and residents saved money from these programs and we have had the positive benefits on the environment in terms of greenhouse gas reductions. but in some of the contractors performing the work, also employee local folks here in san francisco, are able to continue that program. we estimate about a little over $20 million that residents and businesses have saved. instead of writing a check out on a monthly basis they have been able to keep that here in san francisco.

and it's been a very positive aspect. the department wishes to recognize pg&e for their help in expediting this process, so that we can complete a lot of this work, this calendar year. i urge the committee's acceptance of the grant and my colleague ann kelly and myself are here to answer any questions. thank you. >> great. thank you for your presentation. this item does not have a budget analyst's report. so we can go on to public comment. and seeing no member of the public come forward for public comment. we will close public comment. thank you. and colleagues, can we have a motion to move this forward as a committee report to the november 6th board of supervisors' meeting with recommendation? we'll take that without objection [ gavel ] ment i. no. 4, please. >> i. no. 4, ordinance amending the san francisco business and tax regulation code article 12a by amending

section 906.5 to priest the payroll expense tax exclusion for small business net new payroll for years 2012 through 2015 from terminating in event that the voters of the city and county of san francisco pass a gross receipts tax. >> thank you victor. we have legislationoff aide to supervisor farrell, catheryn stephanie, welcome. >> good morning, supervisors, cathery stephanie, lengthiest aide to supervisor farrell. what have you before you is clean-up legislationings that follows our payroll tax exclusion legislation that was drafted before the gross receipts ballot language was finalized and submitted. so it was originally drafted and legislation will actually terminate upon passage of the gross receipts tax prior to the end of 2012. of course that is assuming that proposition e does pass on november 6th.

this legislation before you amends it, so it no it longer terminates november 6th and allows the exemption to remain in effect for tax years 2012-2015. if the gross receipts tax does pass, the city's payroll expense tax would phase out from tax years 2014 through 2018 and ted is here to explain how the facout is going to work with the exclusion. as you recall the purpose of the payroll tax exclusion for small businesss is to create and increase the number of jobs within the city and county of san francisco. by providing an incentive for small businesses to create new jobs. the legislation before you today will allow that to happen by keeping the exemption in place through 2015 as originally intended. there are two recommendations in the budget legislative analyst's report that supervisor farrell is fine with. we also have an additional amendment that ted egan is here

to explain, lines 14-16 and i have copies of that. again, mr. egan will explain that why it's necessary to calculate the base year payroll tax with the phase-in and exempting. so if i could give this to victor. with that i would either ask that you go to the budget legislative analyst or to ted egan. >> why don't we go to mr. egan first and then to the budget analyst. mr. egan. >> good morning, supervisors, ted egan, controller's office. the effect of this legislation will really be to bring the exclusion brand new in line with the way other payroll tax exclusions would be treated in the event that the gross receipts tax passes. effectively what that means is

that the incentive will remain in place, which is to say businesses will be able to exclude growth in their payroll expense up to $250,000. through 2015. however, because the payroll tax rate will decline, as the payroll tax is phased out, the value of this incentive to businesses will decline at the same time. the amendment that miss stephanie refers to is one that changes the language on lines 14-16 of page 2. that language really pre-dates the idea of the phase-out of the payroll tax and the gross receipts proposal and if it was not changed it would basically prevent many if not most small businesss from ever taking advantage of this exclusion. what it would really do is say that that in order for a business to take advantage of

the exclusion, their actual payroll tax liability would have to increase from one year to the next even though the rate was going down. so in 2014, that would mean that a business would have to grow its payroll by 10% before it could start to take dollar 1 of exclusion by 2015, that number is unknown. but it could be 25% before that number is -- before that threshold is reached and the business could take advantage of the exclusion. it's my understanding and this is not a recommendation from our office, but it's not my understanding that is not the supervisors' intent with the legislation. i was merely asked to draft alternative language, which you have before you. >> okay. thank you very much. we'll go to the budget am, analyst, mr. rose.

. >> [pwha-eus/]ed on the current payroll tax rate of 139 5% as you know the controller's office had previously estimated reduced payroll expense tax revenues at $2 million annually from the net new payroll tax exclusion. so that would be a total reduction in city revenues of about $8 million over the four-year period of the exclusion. under the proposed ordinance, the estimated reduction in city revenues would be $7.3 million over the four-year term of the exclusion. if the voters do approve the gross receipts tax proposed under proposition e. we also point out on page 7 of the report that the office of the treasurer and tax collector is working with the mayor and the controller's office to identity funds to pay for an estimated additional one-time programming and related costs, which are needed. they are estimated at $55,000.

we consider approval a policy matter of the two recommendations that we have is to amend the proposed ordinance and this is for clarification purposes as to the intent. if a person is exempt from filing a payroll tax, the regulations code 6.9-2 in the base year, the person's base year payroll tax shall be $150,000 and the purpose of calculating this exclusion. and with my recommend that you amend the proposed ordinance to require the issuance of a report to the [pwra-urpbgs/] committee of budget and finance committee of the board of supervisors and assessing the effect of the exclusion on job creation and payroll growth along small businesses that apply for the net new payroll tax exclusion. we consider it as amended as a policy matter for the board of

supervisors. >> i'm just wondering what supervisor farrell as position on the first recommendation, you are in accordance with that? >> is he fine with both of those. >> thank you. this item we can open up for public comment. and seeing no one here, but us chickens we'll close public comment. just some words on this. i actually did not support this ordinance as a stand-alone ordinance, looking at the exemption first of all for small businesses earlier this year. i know that that actual ordinance was anticipating a gross receipts tax that could go to the ballot. we hospital yet drafted that gross receipts tax. i did not approve -- i did not vote in favor of. it i think i was the one person for voting against it. my reasoning for doing that i didn't want to do one exception to our current business tax. i didn't want to do that, but i'm actually going to be

supporting this measure today, because i see in context of an actual gross receipts tax measure that is going to the ballot. that will be overall changes to the gross receipts tax if this measure actually now relates to that directly. and i can anticipate what the actual structure of the gross receipts tax is going to be in relation to this measure. so i will be supportive of this going forward. knowing that it's in relation to the whole business tax in general. since we are actually going to be ignoring, i guess prop e will pass or not we'll know next week and it makes sense to move this forward to the full board. so i can accept the moving this -- i was contemplating whether i was going to move it forward ways committee report or not. but i think that given certification of the election could happen sooner than later, i think it's important that we move it forward to the next board

meeting. so i will be okay with that, to doing that. we have recommendation from budget analyst can we get a motion to accept those. >> motion to accept amendments. and then motion to move forward as a committee report for the november 6th meeting of this item. >> so moved. >> we can take that without objection. [ gavel ] . >> did we also make the amendment that i put forward with ted egan, the language? did we also make that amendment or did you make that amendment, i should say? or you did just make the amendments from the budget analyst? >> we made the amendments from the budget analyst. the first one seems to be already in the ordinance or is not? >> that adds additional language. ted? >> i believe that the piece of

piece of paper replaces lines 14-16 on page 2 of the ordinance. >> okay, i'm just reviewing that right now. thank you. so let's rescind the vote. colleagues. >> motion to rescind. >> we'll rescind the vote. >> motion to amend the ordinance as articulated by miss stephanie. >> okay.

and we'll take that without objection. and on the underlying ordinance, moving forward as a committee report, to the november 6th meeting with recommendation, we can take that without objection: >> so moved. >> thank you. >> that completes the agenda. >> we are adjourned.

>> here we are at the embarcadero. we are standing at one of locations for the street artists. can you tell me about this particular location, the program? >> this location is very significant. this was the very first and only location granted by the board of supervisors for the street artist when the program began in 1972. how does a person become a street artist? there are two major tenants.

you must make the work yourself and you must sell the work yourself. a street artist, the license, then submitting the work to a committee of artists. this committee actually watches them make the work in front of them so that we can verify that it is all their own work. >> what happened during the holiday to make this an exciting location? >> this would be a magic time of year. you would probably see this place is jammed with street artists. as the no, there is a lottery held at 6 in the morning. that is how sought after the spaces are. you might get as many as 150 street artists to show up for 50 spaces. >> what other areas can a licensed street artist go to? >> they can go to the fisherman's wharf area.

they can go in and around union square. we have space is now up in the castro, in fact. >> how many are there? >> we have about 420. >> are they here all year round? >> out of the 420, i know 150 to sell all year round. i mean like five-seven days a week. >> are they making their living of of this? >> this is their sole source of income for many. >> how long have you been with this program. how much has it changed? >> i have been with the program since it began 37 and a half years ago but i have seen changes in the trend. fashion comes and goes. >> i think that you can still find plenty of titis perhaps. >> this is because the 60's is

retro for a lot of people. i have seen that come back, yes. >> people still think of this city as the birth of that movement. great, thank you for talking about the background of the program. i'm excited to go shopping. >> i would like you to meet two street artists. this is linda and jeremy. >> night said to me to print them -- nice to meet you. >> can you talk to me about a variety of products that use cell? >> we have these lovely constructed platters.

we make these wonderful powder bowls. they can have a lot of color. >> york also using your license. -- you are also using your license. >> this means that i can register with the city. this makes sure that our family participated in making all of these. >> this comes by licensed artists. the person selling it is the person that made it. there is nothing better than the people that made it. >> i would like you to meet michael johnson. he has been in the program for over 8 years. >> nice to me you. what inspired your photography? >> i am inspired everything that i see.

the greatest thing about being a photographer is being able to show other people what i see. i have mostly worked in cuba and work that i shot here in san francisco. >> what is it about being a street artist that you particularly like? >> i liked it to the first day that i did it. i like talking to mentum people. talking about art or anything that comes to our minds. there is more visibility than i would see in any store front. this would cost us relatively very little. >> i am so happy to meet you. i wish you all of the best. >> you are the wonderful artist that makes these color coding. >> nice to me to.

>> i have been a street artist since 1976. >> how did you decide to be a street artist? >> i was working on union square. on lunch hours, i would be there visiting the artist. it was interesting, exciting, and i have a creative streak in me. it ranges from t-shirts, jackets, hats. what is the day of the life of a street artist? >> they have their 2536 in the morning. by the end of the day, the last people to pack the vehicle probably get on their own at 7:30 at night. >> nice to me to condemn the -- nice to meet you. >> it was a pleasure to share

this with you. i hope that the bay area will descend upon the plaza and go through these arts and crafts and by some holiday gifts. >> that would be amazing. thank you so much for the hard work that you do. impossible. announcer: when you open a book, you can explore new lands... [bird screeches] meet new friends, and discover new adventures. there are amazing possibilities

when you open your mind to reading. [roar] you can log onto he library of congress website and let the journey begin. >> the meeting will come to order. this is the monday, october 29th, 2012 meeting of the land use and economic development committee of the san francisco board of supervisors. i feel a lot of giants fever still in the air here. over here with the giants colors on. we have three items on the agenda today, but let me first say that our clerk is ms. andrea ausbery. i'm the chair of the committee, eric mar.

to my right is vice-chair supervisor malia cohen. we're expecting supervisor scott wiener any moment. could you please give us our announcements? >> yes. please make sure the sounds on all cell phones, electronic devices, speaker cards and comies of documents are included as part of the file to submit to the clerk. items on the november 6 board agenda unless otherwise stated. >> thank you. i'd like to also thank sfgtv for televising us today, especially our staff greg burk and john ross. we have three items on the agenda today. ms. ausbery please call item number 1. >> item number 1, administrative code - port prepayment of jobs-housing linkage program obligations, ordinance amending the san francisco administrative code, by adding section 61.12, to authorize pre-payment of jobs-housing linkage program obligations for developments on certain port lands; and adopting environmental findings. >> and from supervisor jane kim's office it is giants colors as well, mattias aremo. >> good afternoon. i'm here because the supervisor

could not be here with us, but our office has been working with the port on this legislation to create a mechanism that would allow the port and the mayor's office of housing to work collaboratively to develop affordable housing on port property for the public trust has been listed. this orbtionv would authorize the port to enter into an m-o-u, memorandum of understanding, providing for the port to receive credits for the value of port below market rate leases to mo and it's on a fair market value. the port would authorize this to use this credit to prepay job housing linkage program obligation for future and private development on portland and by enacting this ordinance the city would create an opportunity to see affordable housing development on the waterfront which is something that we've been working really hard on, and give the port at the same time the flexibility in structuring job housing linkage via obligation. *

i wanted to also say very quickly that the approval of any project that in this legislation would not be changed by this legislation. so, we have the mayor's office of housing and the port here to present. [inaudible]. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisor, [speaker not understood] from the mayor's office of housing. we'll provide a brief powerpoint presentation to go along with our presentation. i will be speaking at the beginning of the presentation and [speaker not understood] from the court will continue and i will close. so, powerpoint. >> so, can we get -- there it goes. >> great, thank you.