japantown fillmore district community as well, we had a lot of great testimony from business leaders, not just from japantown, but also from the fillmore district as well. i think they also emphasized a lot of the points that ed reiskin from the mta did about the tremendous relationships that have been built up over the years and in some ways they quantified the economic benefits of having nonprofits run important institutions like the garage, especially in the japan center. so, i just wanted to thank the community reps and the business leaders for coming out to show why it's a real benefit for the city to support leases like this. >> supervisor breed. >> thank you. i am a strong supporter of the japantown center's garage new lease with mta. the garage is in district 5 and i know how valuable the nonprofit corporation is to the community. i served on the san francisco redevelopment agency commission and i grew up in the western addition. i know the tragic legacy of redevelopment all too well.

for years african americans and japanese americans property owners were pushed out of the western addition fillmore area and japantown neighborhoods. this corporation comprised of business owners and leaders in the community has served as a check against the injustice, a voice for the neighborhoods. that voice is far too important, too valuable to silence it now in the name of cost savings. more over, i am not convinced that eliminating the corporation would actually generate savings. the corporation acts as [speaker not understood] for the japantown and fillmore communities thus increasing the number of visitors to the area and paid customers to the garage. * the increases the garage -- the garage's top line revenue. and without the nonprofit corporation, the mta would have to manage the garage, which would certainly require some similar expenditures. so, any potential savings are, at best, ill-defined. i want to thank my good friend sandy maury for her hard work

in japantown overall and especially the japantown garage, but most of all i want to thank the members of the japantown center corporation who volunteer their time day in and day out to serve japantown and the fillmore communities. i ask my colleagues to please support this item and maintain the valuable voice for the japanese community in supporting this particular lease. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor breed. supervisor yee. >> yes, thank you. i'd have to say that not all nonprofit corporations that run these garages are created equally. and i would say that i would take it a case at a time and that some of these corporations that have been set up, i would vote against it. but in this benefit to the community such as the one in japantown, you cannot measure the value of that. * when this there are others that are in similar situations. so, therefore, i'll be

supporting the renewal. >> supervisor campos. >> thank you, mr. president. i'll be very brief. i appreciate all the comments, including some of the issues that were raised by some of my colleagues. for me, on something like this, i do give deference to the district supervisor and i know that a number of members of the community have come out in support of this. you know, i think ultimately the district supervisor has, you know, a better sense of the benefits that would come to the community for something like this. so, you know, out of that deference i will be supporting this item today. >> supervisor kim. >> thank you. and i appreciate all the comments that were made. i know that this has been a long-standing discussion at budget committee in terms of how we actually lease our parking garages here in the city and county of san francisco.

and we're always looking for as many savings as possible to go towards transit needs within the sfmta. so, i really appreciate that there has been such a robust discussion at the budget committee and i plan on supporting these items. i just had a quick question, and maybe this was answered already at budget committee. but i was curious about the difference and the cost of management between the two garages. and i only ask that because i know with sutter and stockton, they also seem to manage retail leases as well. and i'm not sure if the japantown garage does, but i notice that the japantown garage management cost is close to double the cost of the sutter stockton garage management. i'm not sure if that question was answered at committee. thank you. >> mr. reiskin? >> mr. president, members of the board, ed reiskin with the sfmta.

through the supervisor chair to supervisor kim's question, they manage two garageses so they're able to amortize their costs essentially over those two garages. the sutter stockton garage as well as the union square garage. so, they're able to spread those costs differently. that's the main difference between the two leases. >> and, so, the 154,000 is almost the 50% between the two garages because it's one management company? >> that's correct. >> that makes sense. and i just hope that as we continue this long-term discussion around our garages, i know that this initially came forward because we needed other entities to bond on behalf of sfmta. i'm happy to support this, this ten-year lease for both of the garages, but i hope we can keep having a continual discussion with our off-site operators to ensure they're running efficiently. i certainly know the benefits of the j town garage offers to its community and supervisor breed really articulated those needs very well.

>> supervisor chu. >> thank you very much. colleagues, i think this is one where we all appreciate how hard some time our votes are here at the board of supervisors, especially in light of all the relationships that we have built over time. this is one where i believe that i would be voting in the minority. i believe that the -- both leases will have the votes to pass today at the board. but i did want to explain why. i have a lot of respect for the people who are here today who showed up, who have worked on the japantown garage, but also the uptown folks who have done the work at union square. sandy maury, of course, [speaker not understood] i admire and have a lot of respect for. so, this is a hard vote for me. in thinking about this item when it first came to the budget and finance committee, it first came up and we continued this item to get more information about this item. i think the city -- we had gone through audits in the past

where the city has been advised perhaps they may want to move to a different structure that is managed or having more consistent management with the mta, for mta garageses. so, it's not very lightly that i sort of take this vote. the issues that we've seen in the audit have nothing to do with whether or not their garages are well managed. i believe that both of those garages actually are well managed. i think that there's a lot of benefits associated with it, but to this date we still haven't received, at least i have not received sort of the data that is behind what those benefits are. i know there is going to be a lot of arguments that some of the benefits and the history certainly are not things that could be measured. i very much appreciate that and understand that. but at this moment simply because of that information, knowing that we are trying to move in a direction where the mta essentially is managing our parking structures, that i would vote against this one. and, so, i just wanted to explain it. i do think it is important for

the city eventually to move to a place where we are seeing the parking, all parking garages be managed centrally by the mta. this may not be the time because there may not be another structure in which we are able to engage the community to be involved, but i do think that it's important at least to signal that. and, so, i just wanted to explain my vote. i hope that there will be some more information that is forthcoming that really proves and shows the benefit of both of the organizational structures. i believe that that information is out there. i just think that that probably has not been brought to light. and, so, without that information at this moment i'm not able to support it. so, just wanted to explain that. but thank you very much for reaching out and sharing with me your comments. i verb appreciate it. >> supervisor avalos. >> thank you. i will be pretty much echoing the comments of supervisor carmen chu. i do want to thank people for coming here and expressing their interest and keeping the

current structure for the garages. i just feel that i haven't really heard real tangible benefits that are quantifiable that i could really support. i think that there's ways of things have been done that we would like to continue, but i don't think it's necessarily the reason why i want to be able to support something going forward without looking at how we can actually create better structures for our garages overall under the mta. so, i will be voting no on this. i'm sure we'll be in the minority with supervisor carmen chu, which is a good day to be in the minority with you. [laughter] >> any further discussion? trowel call vote. >> on item 15, supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. supervisor kim? kim aye. supervisor mar? mar aye. supervisor wiener? wiener aye. supervisor yee?

yee aye. supervisor avalos? avalos no. supervisor breed? breed aye. supervisor cam pos? campos aye. president chiu? chiu aye. supervisor chu? chu no. there are nine ayes and two no's. >> the resolution is adopted. next item, please. >> item 16 is a resolution approving a lease agreement between the municipal transportation agency and the city of san francisco uptown parking corporation for the sutter stockton public parking garage with an initial term of 10 years for a base rent of $1 and two 5-year options for a base rent of $1 for each option. >> president chiu. >> thank you, mr. chair. colleagues, obviously given the vote that we just cast i was happy to support the japan center garage corporation for the reasons that were provided. and as the district supervisor for the uptown parking corporation parking garage that is in question, i'm also happy to support this particular item and i hope for those of you who supported the last item for consistency sake, we are able to move forward this item.

in addition to the fact that the sfmta has stated for both of these operations that while they could directly administer the different garages, that we have in front of us, they consider the fact that the added oversight and community relations provided by these organizations are in the best interest of the garage and the city. i think and heard and believe that many of you have heard from the leadership of the union square community about the impact that this organization has had in union square within a part of town that sees some of the most densely traveled and densely parking situations that we have in the city. so, with that, colleagues, ask for your support for this and we will proceed. >> great. i assume, colleagues, that we need a roll call on this. we can have a roll call, madam chair. >> on item 16, supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. supervisor kim? kim aye.

supervisor mar? mar aye. supervisor wiener? wiener aye. supervisor yee? yee aye. supervisor avalos? avalos no. supervisor breed? breed aye. supervisor campos? campos aye. president chiu? chiu aye. supervisor chu? chu no. there are 9 ayes and 2 no's. >> the resolution is adopted. item 17. >> item 17 is a resolution retroactively approving the boarding area "f" specialty store lease between avila retail development and management, llc, and the city and county of san francisco, acting by and through its airport commission with a minimum annual guarantee of $162,000 for a term from january 1, 2013, through december 31, 2019. >> roll call vote? >> on item 17, supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. supervisor kim? kim aye. supervisor mar? mar aye. supervisor wiener? wiener aye. supervisor yee? yee aye. supervisor avalos? avalos aye.

supervisor breed? breed aye. supervisor campos? campos aye. president chiu? chiu aye. supervisor chu? chu aye. there are 11 ayes. >> the resolution is adopted. next item. >> item 18 is a resolution authorizing the office of contract administration to enter into the seventh amendment between the city and xtech (part of the technology store procurement vehicle) in which the amendment shall increase the contract amount from $60,490,000 to $90,580,000 for the period january 1, 2009, through december 31, 2013. >> supervisor campos. >> thank you, mr. president. and you know, i don't have any specific issue, per se, with the amounts that we are talking about here, but this is the seventh amendment to an original contract for 12 million. and right now, if this amendment is approved, which is an amendment for $30 million, that means that by the time the item is completed, we will have

spent $90 million up from the original 12 million. so, i'm just wondering if someone from staff could just explain why the seventh amendment, how it is that we got to this point. thank you. >> if we could hear from city staff. >> good afternoon, supervisors. bill jones, office of contract administration, purchasing. the original technology store consisted of four category 1 contracts. and it was based on an estimated value of about 121 million over the three-year period. there were additionally three contracts for products only. so, a total of seven contracts for an estimated 120 million over three years. when we awarded the contracts,

we wanted to apportion them in a reasonably, what we considered fair way that we would give equal contracts amount to each of the contractors. so, each of the four got 12 million each and each of the three got 24 million. over time, the transactions that occur against the store, they are generally competitive within the store. and, so, the vendors compete for business and they receive different amounts of awards for projects on which they actually track the money for the value of the contract. over the years, the xtech contract or the contractor has been successful in acquiring the city's business and, therefore, the need over time

to raise the contract amount by varying amendments over the years is why it has raised to 7. >> and there a reason why the original contract did not allow for a larger amount so that you didn't have to keep going back and continuing to amend it? >> we at the time estimated the amount to be 120 million over three years, as i said, and we apportioned it equally. i guess in going forward when we come back to the board of supervisors toward the end of this year with a replacement of these contracts, we can go back and look and see if there is a way for us to create a formula to try to estimate amounts going forward where we would not have to come back more often. >> you know, and i'm happy to support this item today, but i do think that whenever you have this number of amendments, you always wonder if you could have gotten a better deal if you had thought about what the totality

of the amount should be at the outset. so, that's always a question that comes up, you know. but i know that the budget and legislative analyst reviewed this and also recommended approval. so, i just wanted to get clarification on that. thank you. >> colleagues, any further questions? can we take this item same house same call or do we need a roll call? okay, without objection, this resolution is adopted. item 19. >> item 19 is resolution adopting findings under the california environmental quality act related to modifications to the san francisco public utilities commission water system improvement program calaveras dam replacement project, located in alameda and santa clara counties, including the adoption of a mitigation monitoring and reporting program and a statement of overriding considerations; and directing the clerk of the board of supervisors to notify the controller of this action. >> same house same call? this resolution is adopted. item 20. >> item 20 is a resolution authorizing the police department to retroactively accept and expend a grant in the amount of $200,000 from the california emergency management agency for the anti-human trafficking task force program for the period of october 1, 2012, through september 30, 2013.

>> same house same call? this resolution is adopted. item 21. >> item 21 is a resolution authorizing the general manager of the public utilities commission to execute a 20-year lease, for $52,324 annually with an annual increase of four percent, with los altos hotel associates, llc, for approximately 47,916 square feet of land known as bay division pipelines 3 and 4, parcel no. 232a, located in the city of los altos, santa clara county, california, for hotel parking and recreation purposes. for 52 million. >> i think it's 52,000. >> you are correct. >> colleague, same house same call? this item is adopted. item 22. >> item 22 is resolution determining that the issuance of a type 42 on-sale beer and wine license to angel davis and nguey lay for 7682, llc, d/b/a fig and thistle, located at 313 ivy street (district 5), will serve the public convenience and necessity of the city and county of san francisco, in accordance with business and professions code, section 23958.4, with conditions. >> supervisor breed. >> thank you. i want to ask my colleagues to support this. angela davis, who is the owner, has done a great job with outreach and she is supported by the hayes valley merchant

and neighborhood association and i think this would be great for the community. so, i'm hoping that my colleagues would support this. thank you. >> colleagues, any further discussion? same house, same call? this resolution is adopted. item 23. >> item 23 is a resolution determining that the issuance of a type 42 on-sale beer and wine public premises license to lynne carmichael for eno st. francis, llc, d/b/a eno, located at 310-320 geary street (district 3), will serve the public convenience and necessity of the city and county of san francisco, in accordance with business and professions code, section 23958.4, with conditions. >> same house same call? this resolution is adopted. item 24. >> item 24 was referred from the land use economic development committee without recommendation. resolution granting revocable permission to aquilina family 2001 revocable trust to occupy a portion of the public right-of-way to remove and reconstruct a portion of a city-owned and maintained retaining wall to construct a concrete driveway ramp, with accessible transition slopes to conform to the existing sidewalk grade, that will provide vehicular access to a proposed new residence with a garage at 54 peralta avenue. >> colleagues, this is from public works. i'd like to acknowledge the district supervisor, supervisor campos. >> thank you, mr. president. colleagues, i want to say today we have been working with not only the parties, but also the residents in trying to resolve

some of the issues here and so with that in mind i here by move for a two week continuance to march 12. >> supervisor campos has asked for a two week continuance. is there a second to that? seconded by supervisor avalos. colleagues, any objection, with a motion to continue? this item will be continued to two weeks. why don't we move to the rules committee recommendations. item 25. >> item 25 is a motion reappointing supervisor david campos, term ending january 31, 25 20* 15 to the golden gate bridge highway and transportation district board of directors. >> colleagues, we have a motion to excuse supervisor campos, excused -- motion by supervisor avalos, seconded by supervisor mar without objection. supervisor campos is excused. roll call vote on the motion to approve. >> on item 25, supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. supervisor kim? kim aye. supervisor mar? mar aye. supervisor weaner? wiener aye.

supervisor yee? yee aye. supervisor avalos? avalos aye. supervisor breed? breed aye. president chiu? chiu aye. supervisor chu? chu aye. there are 10 ayes. >> the motion is approved. next item. >> item 26 is a motion is pointing supervisor scott wiener term ending january 31, 2015, to the golden gate bridge highway transportation district board of directors. >> motion to excuse supervisor wiener. he shall be excused. roll call vote. >> on item 26, cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. supervisor kim? kim aye. supervisor mar? mar aye. supervisor yee? yee aye. supervisor avalos? avalos aye. supervisor breed? breed aye. supervisor campos? campos aye. president chiu? chiu aye. supervisor chu? chu aye. there are 10 ayes. >> the motion is approved.

item 27. >> item 27 is a motion appointing supervisor norman yee, term ending january 31st, 2015 to the golden gate bridge highway and transportation district board of directors. >> colleagues, can we have a motion to excuse supervisor yee? motion by supervisor farrell, seconded by supervisor cohen, without objection. he shall be excused. and we can take a roll call vote on the motion to approve. >> on item 27, supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. supervisor kim? kim aye. supervisor marv? mar aye. supervisor wiener? wiener aye. supervisor avalos? avalos aye. supervisor breed? breed aye. supervisor campos? campos aye. president chiu. chiu aye. supervisor chu. chu aye. there are 10 ayes. >> the motion is approved. next item. >> item 28 is a motion reappointing supervisor malia cohen, term ending june 20th, 2014 to the association of bay

area government's executive board. >> colleagues, can we have a notion to excuse supervisor cohen? motion by supervisor campos, seconded by supervisor mar, without objection she shall be excused. roll call vote on the motion. >> on item 28, supervisor farrell? >> aye. >> farrell aye. supervisor kim? kim aye. supervisor mar? mar aye. supervisor wiener? wiener aye. supervisor yee? yee aye. supervisor avalos. avalos aye. supervisor breed. breed aye. supervisor campos. campos aye. president chiu. chiu aye. supervisor chu. chu aye. there are 10 ayes. >> the motion is approved. next item. >> item 29 is a motion reappointing eric mar term ending february 1st, 2017 to the bay area air quality management district board of directors. >> colleagues, can we have a motion to excuse supervisor mar in motion by supervisor campos, seconded by supervisor yee. without objection, supervisor marsh be excused. roll call vote on the motion. >> on item 29, supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye.

supervisor kim? kim aye. supervisor wiener. wiener aye. supervisor yee. yee aye. supervisor avalos. avalos aye. supervisor breed. breed aye. supervisor campos. campos aye. president chiu. chiu aye. supervisor chu? chu aye. there are 10 ayes. >> motion is approved. item 30. >> item 30 is a motion reappointing supervisor john avalos, term ending february 1st, 2017 to the bay area air quality management district board of directors. >> colleagues, motion to excuse supervisor avalos. by supervisor chu, seconded by supervisor campos without objection he shall be excused. roll call vote on the motion to approve. >> on item 30, supervisor cohen. cohen aye. supervisor farrell. farrell aye. supervisor kim. kim aye. supervisor mar. mar aye. supervisor wiener. wiener aye. supervisor yee. yee aye. supervisor breed. breed aye. supervisor campos. campos aye. president chiu.

chiu aye. supervisor chu. chu aye. there are 10 ayes. >> motion to approve. colleagues as we wrap up that round of appointments and re-appointments to various bodies i just want to mention something particularly to our newer colleagues. this board used to have a tradition of report backs from different colleagues on the various bodies that we each serve on to members of the public. we have been for the last few minutes appointing different members to serve as san francisco's representatives in a variety of local regional and state bodies. i'm not suggesting that we do sort of mandatory report backs but i would suggest during roll call if there are issues either at bay area air quality management district, bcdc golden gate bridge district, abag, et cetera, there are appropriate things we need to be apprised of, report backs to happen at that time. with that why don't we go to item 30. >> item 31, mr. president, is a motion approving the mayor's nomination of appointment for

aaron highland for the historic preservation commission for a term ending december 21st, 2016. >> supervisor wiener. >> thank you, mr. president. i'm strongly supportive of this nomination. mr. highland, i think, brings an incredible depth of experience in historic preservation and also a complementary understanding of good urban planning. he has very broad support including some very, very ardent preservationist. ranging across the spectrum i think he will be a supportive commissioner and i support the nomination. >> any further discussion? roll call vote. >> on item 31, supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. supervisor kim. kim aye. supervisor mar. mar aye. supervisor wiener. wiener aye. supervisor yee. yee aye. supervisor avalos. avalos aye. supervisor breed.

breed aye. supervisor campos. campos aye. president chiu. chiu aye. supervisor chu. chu aye. there are 11 ayes. >> the motion is approved. next item. >> item 32 is a motion approving the mayor's nomination for re-appointment of dianne matsuda to the historic preservation commission for a term ending december 31st, 2016. >> colleagues, can we do this same house same call? without objection, this motion is approved. colleagues, why don't we go to item 33, the committee report. >> item 33 was considered by the land use and economic development committee at a rescheduled meeting on monday, february 25th, 2013 and forwarded to the board as a committee report. it's an ordinance amending the planning code to create the sen central subway tunnel boring machine extraction site special use district for the property located at 1731 through 17 41 powell street, also amending

the sectional zoning map to reflect the central subway tunnel boring machine extraction site special use district. >> thank you very much. president chiu has asked me to come up here since this is my last board meeting. so, one last time. >> thank you, madam chair. colleagues, first of all, i want to thank the land use committee for their support of this item as well as for the many unanimous votes from this board of supervisors over the year -- over the years to move the central subway project forward. this is legislation to further the mta's effort which is supported by my office, the mayor's office and many merchants and residents of the north beach area to relocate the extraction of the central subway's tunnel boring machine from the middle of columbus avenue to a less disruptive location on the private property of the so-called pagoda theater which has been a blighted graffitied property for almost two decades. where have we got? the reason we got here started in 2008 with the board of

supervisors before i think any of us were on the board. in 2008 the board of supervisors at that time approved the plan to extract the tunnel boring machines in north beach in the middle of columbus avenue at union street. and an appeal of that e-i-r was unanimously rejected by that board. four years later the mta came back to the community and my office in the middle of last year with details around that plan that frankly were quite disruptive and my constituents and i opposed the plan that was brought to light last summer and we asked the mta to consider a number of different options. the option that we as a community, many of us thought was the best way to move forward is what i have described as a real win/win/win for the community. it's an option that is far less disruptive to the community because it pulls out the tunnel boring machine at a private property as opposed into the middle of a very busy thoroughfare in the middle of north beach.