ending 2016 and revised amount of $16.9 million. >> same house, same call? this resolution is adapted. >> item 18 a resolution to approve a modification for the operator lease and agreement between signature flight in the city to extend the lease by 5 years for a new date of 20022 for approximately $70.6 million during the extension of the term. >> same house, same call? this resolution is adapted. >> item 19 authorizing the multiple single families needing for $49 million for a financing for multiple family urging known as the hunter view. >> this resolution is adapted. >> commissioner dooley's. >> sorry to interrupt i need to reaccepted the vote open item 14 i meant to continue

that item approximately we made an amendment and the language has not been developed so i want to continue it. >> supervisor avalos as made a motion to resend seconded by supervisor kim we'll take that without objection. this is the case and supervisor avalos as making a motion to continue. >> to december 9th. >> seconded by supervisor breed we'll take that without objection. this is continued to the ninth madam clerk call item 20. >> there's an item on the floor mr. president, item 19 you've approved it with an objection we're on item 20. >> if you could call it and to approve the issuance of tax

exempt for college of the arts needing 2 of million dollars. >> colleagues, same house, same call? item 21. >> the city manager to exclusive an agreement with the engineers for specialized engineering services for the proposed new head works facility at water floougs pollution control plant. >> same house, same call? we'll take that without objection. this resolution is adapted. >> next item. >> mr. president, 0 would you like me to read the historic property. >> those were recommendeds mills historic contracts with the city and he was the owners of the following property on peers street 563 water street and 621 water street. >> supervisor wiener. >> thank you, mr. president

colleagues today before us is 3 contracts under the millions act the state legislation that initiate advised improvements to in maintaining historic properties in historic districts two years ago as you recall i introduced legislation this board passed unanimously to reform our local process around the miles act i worked with the san francisco historic heritage and other advocates in drafting that long overdue legislation miles act for people to maintain their properties in a historic way the intent of this legislation that we passed a few years ago was to increase access to the miles act that helps homeowners

to make costly improvements to roars structures we prioritized the historic preservation around the architecture of the thought city we want our historic building to be maintained as costing hass as that would be the miles act provides for property tax credits for owners to restrict a 10 year maintenance for a deliciously in terms of what the owner has to do to the building the miles act applies to property that are contributing to a local state or historic building or landmarked we've put a lot of maintenance and want them to be done the miles act provides an incentive to maintain them in an appropriate

way in 2012 other communities for example, la had a robust miles program and oakland across the bay a smaller city than san francisco had a robust plan significantly bigger than san francisco over time there were few miles a acts in san francisco other than a larger properties almost no small homeowners that were participating because the process here was difficult and long and expensive and unpredictable legislation we adopted a few years ago has significantly improved that and made a streamlined and more predictability thanks to the planning department and the assessors office we've seen a bunch of miles act glutton and

last year, it was approved a series of small homes for miles act contracts 3 miles act contracts before his today are from the newest historic district in san francisco one that i authored and this board elective last day last year the historic district immediately north of delores park the all of a sudden dead end street pierce carmelita it's a behalf historic district and the earth is remarkable and those 3 contract were all recommended for approval by the historic preservation commission and in addition the 3 contracts have the support of the san francisco architecture heritage and we've described a letter

from the executive director of the heritage strongly supporting those krikts contracts so colleagues, i ask firing support and any questions about the process for the miles act the planning department is here to answer our questions. >> supervisor avalos. >> thank you president chiu so clooepgz colleagues which of those in committee last week, i was not ready to support it i'm kind of on the fence i actually feel the miles act works pest when it's looking at preserving the property in blighted areas of the city and this part of san francisco is definitely not an area that is blighted perhaps in 25 to thirty years ago it could have been but 40 years ago it was in that condition but right now not those property are

already in pretty good condition one of the projects where the building is looking for the miles act designation as accomplished much of the work that is done in terms of the renovation i know it covers maintenance a separate issue but i actually feel that the miles act is really geared towards looking at parts of neighborhoods that are more blighted where the tax break can actually help people who have less means to do do renovations on their homes to do them in this case, i building this landmark district is in pretty good condition and the buildings there are worth $1.7 million we the people are actually owning those buildings can actually do the renovation without the tax

break i'll rather we didn't unable to to happen i'll be voting against the miles act on those 3 items. >> supervisor wiener. >> thank you, mr. president i appreciate supervisor avalos remarks but i disagree first of all, it's an initial matter colleagues this particular area wasn't 25 or 20 years ago, it was a very challenged neighborhood until recently it was a point challenge due to the incredible work of the residents of that area this has been a drastically improved area the residents of that area deserve a lot of credit we shouldn't reward them but no longer going

to give me miles act contracts i want to note that the miles act is not just for obligated properties but to give homeowners an incentive you can do work on historic building in a lot of different was and range of costs in terms of the care and you can go above and beyond to honor the district of those property or change of venues choose no to go above and beyond but entering into a contract you've gone beyond to honor the district of the property if we're going to get into a situation in a historic place not considered to be blighted whatever intense you use we're not going to have miles act

contracts in san francisco i can assure you that will be a long time before we see a historic district formed in san francisco when we went to the formation there was a lot of concern in the neighborhood you're putting extra obligations without benefit and the miles act is that benefit it's not a full benefit he in terms of counter balancing all the obligations but something i think it will send a powerful message that we start rejecting those contracts from people not to support of the creation of the historic district i hope we'll support those. >> at this time madam clerk. >> supervisor mar supervisor tang supervisor wiener supervisor yee supervisor avalos no supervisor breed supervisor campos

supervisor chiu supervisor farrell supervisor kim there are 9 i's. >> one no. >> the resolutions are adapted. >> item 25. >> is a resolution to authorize the use of city for the internal council for the san francisco anniversary on 15. >> on to a different kind of resolution today is a resolution declaring february 2015 internal 50th anniversary and 30 years the internal to use the san francisco additional seal next to that event we don't authorize the seal but the internal is a big deal with the lgbt so it's appropriate the yes, ma'am peril

is one of the older organization in the world next year is is silver bullet it's 50th year and supervisor campos had jose here in the board of supervisors chambers before he passed away and ran for the board of supervisors in 1962 as an openly gay man and became the first reigning empress the first one was core in an accident in 1972 each year they represent the empirical people and they raise charities in the landlord/tenant and hiv around domestic violence and so forth after the founding in san francisco other imperial courts were started in the u.s.

starting with portland and seattle in the early 70s and there was 60 imperial courts through canada and mexico arrest given the long leadership has retained it's leadership and so its appropriate to recognize this 50th anniversary of the you mean peril court and there is no them to use the seem like in essence with its 50th anniversary. >> thank you to the collect to put this resolution together colleagues thank you. >> supervisor wiener and with that, colleagues, can we take a

resolved supervisor mar. >> supervisor tang supervisor wiener supervisor yee supervisor avalos supervisor breed supervisor campos supervisor chiu supervisor farrell supervisor kim arrest there are 11 i's excuse me. there are 10 i's that resolution is adapted. >> item 26 an ordinance to addendum the alcohol district to allow the small beer manufacturers and making a requisite finding. >> colleagues, same house, same call? we'll take that without objection. this item is passed. >> item 27 an ordinance to amend the planning codes on the restrictions on criminal housing and employment. >> commenting.

>> thank you to colleagues for passing and voting unanimously for the fair chap act i've thofrd along with supervisor cohen that past february with a hard work a of a diverse group of stakeholders to the housing commending communicated and our business community we were able to craft the most probative reform in the state and leading the country to remove unnecessary barriers and create work and housing opportunity for people that have an arrest or conviction the fair chap has been in effect we've received additional recommendations from several city departments including the office of work 0 enforcement regarding clarifying the fair chance act this trailing legislation cleans up some of the language so the board understands what the clean

up looks like it allows the employers and city contractors to consider infractions for positions that primer involve driving this is a long this runs with the compliance normally we'll not want to look at infractions and employment record for positions where driving was the primary duty of the position it makes sense to look at it the record to pursuing our vision zero policy and second that allows the employers and city contractors to consider convictions more than 7 years old concerning the care of minors this is after the package of the department and after some months of looking at it we've decided to include this

allowance it also authorizes the city to bring the violation against people against violence with the definition of employment for the fair chance act it must be 8 hours per week and provided the restricts if this code prevails we've had a few ordinances where our office has need a discrepancy this will allow the fair chance had trumpet ero conflicting laws colleagues, i ask for your support in the fair chance. >> same house, same call? ? we'll take that without objection. this ordinance is passes as item 28 to allow the

eloquently bus rapt project >> colleagues can we take it we'll take that without objection. same house, same call? >> this ordinance is passed on the first reading and madam clerk could going to our committee report starting with item 45 were considered by the oversight committee and the committee forwarded the items to the board recommended as with the same title and 45 to amend the administrative code for the local business enterprise program. >> thank you president chiu. >> colleagues, i want to thank you for your consideration of this ordinance which is co-sponsors with mayor ed lee to reform chapter 14 b of our

administrative code also known as as the number one discretionary this has been in the works for the better part of the year i want to thank our mayor and naomi kelly and others who was involved in this complicated ordinance as well 0 many representatives of the local small business and contracting committee including the coalition of economic equality through 30 decades ago we recognized the goal of government and what was then sometimes active n and often passive discrimination we recognized the possibility of million dollars dollars that our city spent for goods and services for economic semilose we passed a law that represented

our city long-standing commitment to justice that foster a strong network of small businesses in san francisco as a local enterprise law now helps our small businesses offset higher costs of operating in or city when it works our city's contracting process keeps tax dollars at home for san franciscans the reformed package we have have flovenl you have you it helps to establish a no long run 40 percent san francisco's first program to make good faith effort from construction contract under $400,000 and professional contract under $100,000 before opening the process to non-lbe's and it at

20 to $40 million and expands the projects that require a agreement to be approved by the board of supervisors and in certain industries that allows small businesses to participate in the lbe program to foster partnerships between established contractor and local businesses thank to the many actors it took a lot of effort from the departments as well as small businesses and i want to take a moment and thank our geocommittee for their support. >> thank you supervisor avalos. >> thank you just a question that was raised recently by some contractors with the city as related to architect addressed engineers i think they were looking for language it would be in here for contractors that get

a better shot inclusion in this legislation and i wanted to ask the author what the discussion has been if there's a possibility for that inclusion and some other version that can come forward at a at a later date. >> your leafing us has there been anyone in legislation to bring up that issue. >> first of all, i appreciate that question in the final dies to the full board i want to say a few things there was a contention to consider braegd architects from the category of architects i'll say at this point, i'm not adverse interests not an analysis or data to understand how seriously problems there are although we've heard anecdotal evidence of issues we've decided to ask

the city administered to convene a working group to work together a gadget data specifically to look at the situation is of architects versus engineers and at the end of that time period the zoning administrator low provide an analysis and make recommendations open whether there should be additional categories for example, to cart out architect and set that aside as a specific category in indicating committee no one said they're interested but if you're interested i'm sure that our zoning administrator naomi kelly will be taking recommendations that come out a month from now to potentially turn that into chapter 14. >> i'll foul. >> thank you, colleagues take this item same house, same call?

passed on 7 first reading. >> madam clerk. >> item 46 was recommended a resolution to approve a contract between the city golden gate and sunset for refuge collection needing $40 million for the term of november 30th through 2020. >> colleagues, same house, same call? this resolution is adapted. >> next item. >> item 47 and 48 were considered by this land use committee on monday november 24th they've forwarded those items and 47 was recommended as the same title to have the city provide electrical service to new developments. >> supervisor wiener. >> thank you, mr. president. >> colleagues this legislation provides san francisco public

utilities power enterprise with the first right of refusal to provide clean hetch hetchy power to new private and public developments in san francisco i'm pleased the sierra club and the league of conservation voters have enforced the legislation i want to thank supervisor breed for co-chairing the legislation and supervisor kim so far adding her name and supervisor yee has stone shown an interest it provides the puc with the authority to be the power provider when it makes economic and environmental sense to do so for nearly a century or century the public utilities commission has provided clean power such as the muni and san francisco international airport ate the hospital and police and fire stations our jails and city

hall etc. the power that the puc provides is clean and one hundred percent green house gases free in a place where global warming is looming so we need to move towards a clean energy future it's not enough to talk about it we have to do it we can do it here with this legislation there are many benefits to electrical service including local control and lower rates and promotion of renewable and clean energy and greater transparency and accountability expanding the point of interest enterprises retail customer base instead of selling it we'll provide much needed revenue for the puc's

system and our street light system that's a huge deferred infrastructure needs and the retail power is sold at three to four times as wholesale puc estimates 10 meg wauts was the it residence the net revenue so if the puc were able to increase the retail sales of electricity by one hundred megawatts that will generate $40 million in new revenue that could be reinvested in the system including our street light system puc's power enterprise facilities currently have massive deferred maintenance in the hundreds of dollars of thousand of maintenance in hetch hetchy and locally in our street light system we've seen the result off our deteriorated street light system where is the puc didn't have the revenues to modernize the system if we want

to keep this amazing unique asset and clean energy as well as our street light system the puc needs morality customers currently the puc sells a huge amount of electricity into the wholesale market anothers dromoreduced watts rates we should be selling that this provides the puc with the first right of refusal to be the power provider by selling hetch hetchy ohio power to public and private promotions to the city entitlement it provide puc with the authority to first conduct the study and where it deems it arena or large housing project or a large project etc. so by doing this we'll stimulate the generation of more clean

energy because the incurring energy that is currently purchasing the hydro electrical power will have to find other sources to that meet their stating portfolio and move san francisco towards our stated goal for the board of supervisors on having a purely renewalable system by 2030 >> colleagues i've received a number of communications and meetings with groups and the chamber of commerce that are concerned about the ability to choose a power provider and, of course, this board strongly supports this unanimously the power sf program a choice and competition are good things i