Volume 10, Number 4, May 27, 2004

This issue of the BOMA San Francisco Advocate is brought to you by

Township Building Services, Inc.

BOMA Endorses Supervisors Tony Hall and Michela Alioto-Pier for Re-election
Supervisors Tony Hall and Supervisor Michela Alioto-Pier won unanimous endorsements for re-election to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors from the BOMA SF Political Action Committee and the parent association’s Board of Directors earlier this month. Both Supervisors are business friendly, and have the best voting records on BOMA’s issues. They are unique on a Board not known for its love of downtown, the business community, or commercial real estate owners.

Supervisor Alioto-Pier was appointed to the Board by Mayor Newsom in January of this year, replacing Newsom in District 2, representing Pacific Heights and the Marina parts of town. She has already taken the initiative to promote true economic reform in the city by proposing a ballot measure to establish an office of economic analysis to assess the economic impacts of future ordinances before they are proposed for adoption. Prior to serving on the Board, Ms. Alioto-Pier served as a Port Commissioner, where she was active in port security matters. Ms. Alioto-Pier was the Democratic nominee for California Secretary of State in 1998 and for the U.S. House of Representatives in 1996 representing the First Congressional District. Prior to entering electoral politics, Supervisor Alioto-Pier worked for Vice President Al Gore, advising him on domestic policy matters and as a liaison to the Department of Health and Human Services. In 1984, at the age of 17, Ms. Alioto-Pier was appointed by President Reagan to his National Council on Disabilities Advisory Board. (Ms. Alioto-Pier was permanently injured in a skiing accident at age 12, and uses a wheelchair.)

Supervisor Alioto-Pier earned a degree in Anthropology from the University of California at Los Angeles, and spent a year studying abroad at Sophia University in Tokyo, Japan. She is married to Tom Pier, and has two sons, Nicolas, and Giovanni.

Supervisor Tony Hall, elected in 2000 from District 7, the west of Twin Peaks area of town, has been the most outspoken opponent of the “progressive” [read: leftist] agenda at City Hall of all members of that body over the past four years, even including now-Mayor Newsom, who was often precluded from voting on issues because he was a property owner and landlord. He has promoted more home ownership opportunities for San Franciscans, who now enjoy the nation’s lowest home ownership rate (30% owners, 70% renters), and has steadfastly opposed legislation that would further beat down the business community, such as restrictions on chain stores, large retailers, or the passage of new taxes on business, and has called for more accountability from city government departments for monies spent to provide services to the city’s residents.

BOMA Members are invited to help both Supervisor Michela Alioto-Pier and Tony Hall to get re-elected by making a contribution to their campaigns. Contributions are not tax deductible, and are limited to $500 per person or company. Send your checks t

Michela Alioto-Pier for Supervisor 
c/o Nichelle Lyons
Lyons & Associates
731-B Liggett Avenue
San Francisco, CA  94129
FPPC #1265030

Friends of Tony Hall
58 West Portal Avenue
POB 265
San Francisco, CA  94127
FPPC #1221830

Supervisors/Mayor Plan Large Number of City Ballot Measures in November
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors is considering an array of items to place on the November city ballot. Burdened by an overly restrictive and cumbersome City Charter, virtually every proposal to modify city employee union contracts or benefits must be approved by the city’s voters. Consequently, at least a dozen proposals have been floated that will need voter ratification. These changes run the gamut from replacing the City Attorney’s seat on the Health Service Board with an elected seat to adjusting the employers’ contribution for health benefits (a potentially big financial hit to the budget) or creating a special “anti-homicide” plan that would have dedicated funding for a DNA crime lab, survivor assistance, and violence prevention programs. Other measures will initiate a ban on residential demolitions of buildings with 20 or more units, re-assert direct authority for the Board over the city’s public transit system (reversing part of a previous city ballot measure which established an independent transit agency), and set up a Rent Board with appointments shared by both the Mayor and the Board (currently, all Rent Board members are appointed by the Mayor). There may also be several bond measures on the ballot including one for affordable/workforce housing, and one for the restoration/construction of a number of historic and/or cultural institutions. Incredibly, some Supervisors are even promoting a charter amendment to allow non-citizens to vote in San Francisco’s School Board races. And these local initiatives don’t even include any of the anticipated proposals seeking to raise local taxes on residents and businesses to cover city budget deficits. If you live in San Francisco, be prepared for a very long (and expensive) November ballot….!

SF Building Department’s Disabled Access Compliance Status Documentation Permit Needs You!
Recently, the San Francisco Department of Building Inspections started a new program to document a building’s full or partial accessibility. With support from BOMA, design professionals, disabled advocates, and department staff, an innovative procedure was created to reduce the amount of duplicative drawings and documentation required for each tenant improvement. Having a building apply for this umbrella permit for designated common areas can save time and money, particularly if the building has a large and changing tenant base. A Draft #5 of the current application process for this permit is currently available for review and more changes are anticipated. However, the biggest problem is there are very few building owners or managers taking advantage of this new opportunity to basically “pre-approve” their building’s common areas for path of travel compliance for a period up to three years. (State code change cycles are three years.) DBI will charge a fee based on the time it takes to review/inspect the areas seeking the blanket coverage. BOMA members are encouraged to check out this new streamlined procedure and call Laurence Kornfield, the City’s Chief Building Inspector, for more information (415-558-6244), or the Chair of BOMA’s Codes Task Force, Gordon L’Estrange, with Ottolini, Booth & Associates, Architects (415-777-0768, ext. 272).

SF Building Department Brown Bag Meeting Topics Coming Up
June 17, 2004 Appeals of Permits and Decisions: A How, When and Why Briefing with Deputy City Attorney Judy Boyajian
July 15, 2004 Underground tanks and hazardous or contaminated soils and materials with Leslie Lum, Health Department, and Department of Building Inspection staff
August 19, 2004 Department of Building Inspection Emergency Plans with Zan Turner, Ron Tom, and Vern Takasuka, of DBI
September 16, 2004 Unreasonable Hardships, Exceptions and Equivalencies for Disabled Access with Rafael Torres-Gil, Disabled Access Division and other Department of Building Inspection staff
All meetings are free, at noon, and are held at 1660 Mission Street in their 2nd Floor Conference Room. Want more details? Contact Laurence Kornfield at 415-558-6244. 

Did You Know? Café Tables and Chairs on Streets and Sidewalks Need Permits
The City of San Francisco recently passed a new fee schedule for permitting outside tables and chairs. The new fee is a result of several meetings and input from the business community, including the Golden Gate Restaurant Association, Market Street Association, Union Square Association, and BOMA, and helped reduce the fees from the ones originally proposed. The new fee schedule, effective now, requires an annual processing fee of $106 for café tables and chairs and an annual inspection fee based on $3.11 per square foot up to a maximum of 500 square feet. (The DPW originally wanted to inspect the sites monthly.) For vendors displaying merchandise on sidewalks or streets, the annual fees shall be $106 for processing, and an inspection fee based on $6.88 per square foot of display area. Make sure your tenants who have such external operations are aware of their permit obligations!

Mayor’s Vocational Program (MVP) Runs June 15 – August 15, 2004: Can You Help?
In the midst of a $352 million budget deficit, Mayor Gavin Newsom is looking for creative solutions and private/public partnerships to provide employment opportunities and mentorship programs for San Francisco youth this summer. BOMA, the SF Chamber of Commerce, the Golden Gate Restaurant Association and others are working with the Mayor to implement this program to provide summer jobs to low income/underprivileged youth. Every employer is being requested to hire a youth between the ages of 14-18 for a two month period of time this summer (6/15 – 8/15). Each youth will be paid $1,000 a month and must have one member of the employer’s management team designated as the youth’s mentor to help him/her gain the maximum benefit from the summer job experience. The goal is to have at least 100 young people in jobs with BOMA members, their contractors, and suppliers. Interested? Contact Aaron Goldsmith in The Office of the Mayor at 554-6613.

E-FILING Now Available for San Francisco Business Property Tax Filings
The City Assessor Mabel Teng announced recently that her office is rapidly moving to leverage technology to better serve the public and to streamline City operations. To that end her office has launched an electronic filing service for the business community.  San Francisco is the fifth county in California to offer the ability to electronically file the 571-L business property tax statement. This service allows businesses to file their business property statement over the internet and provides a confirmation certificate once successfully submitted. This service was launched on March 22nd and within a week, over 100 businesses filed electronically.  Mabel recently met with a group of BOMA members to explain this program and other aspects of filing property taxes in San Francisco.

Bold Housing Plan Would Boost Mid-Market
Special Opinion Piece By: Mike Sullivan, Founder, PLAN C Citizens Group

San Francisco has an opportunity for a major improvement in the seedy mid-Market Street area: a bold proposal by Trinity Properties for 1,410 apartments and 20,000 square feet of ground-level retail on four acres surrounded by Market, 8th and Mission Streets. The new Trinity Plaza development would replace an existing rental building containing 377 units, most of which are rent-controlled. The existing building, built in 1959 as a motel, has been described by the San Francisco Chronicle’s architecture critic John King as “a drab motor lodge converted to apartments” that “look like something washed in from the suburbs”.

The new development will involve five buildings, ranging from 12 stories on Market Street to 24 stories on Mission Street, surrounding a courtyard of open space. A total of 1,350 parking spaces will be contained in a four-level garage that will be primarily underground. The project would inject life into what is now a dilapidated stretch of Market Street, with adult theaters and drug activity the every day norm.

This is an excellent location for dense housing – on the major Market Street transit corridor, and within walking distance to Civic Center and Union Square. The housing addresses an underserved portion of the San Francisco housing market – the low end of market rate housing. Using no government subsidies, this project will be comprised of mostly studio apartments at $1,200/month, with some one and two-bedroom apartments. As required by law, the project will include a set aside of 12% of the housing units as “affordable”.

The Trinity Plaza re-development has generated positive reviews from architecture critic John King, who said the project “makes perfect sense for the location” and provides a “needed jolt for this troubled stretch of San Francisco’s most prominent street.”

Supervisor Chris Daly has vowed to fight the proposal, citing the elimination of rent-controlled units. However, Trinity Properties has recently announced a relocation assistance program for the existing tenants of Trinity Plaza. The relocation assistance program would provide rent subsidies to residents to ensure that they could obtain comparable units elsewhere in the City at comparable rent – and the subsidy would last for as long as the tenant had been at Trinity Plaza. (In other words, a 15 year tenant would receive the subsidy for 15 years!) Even better, the owners have decided to offer to begin the project on the Mission Street side to avoid displacement of existing tenants until they can move directly into a new unit! Such a deal!

There will be many political fights before this project can be built, but it is a project that the City desperately needs. Let’s hope that reason prevails over hysteria and these new towers will eventually get built.  

Sacramento Update for BOMA Members
Here are a few of the bills being tracked by BOMA California on behalf of our membership:

PROPERTY TAX LAWS
SB 17 (Escutia) – This bill has been revived by its sponsor, and would require all publicly traded corporations to file a real property statement with the State Board of Equalization, listing all real property by county the company owns or leases in California, identified by assessor parcel number. Subsequent statements would be limited to a listing of real property transfers made by the company over the previous 12 months. However, the bill would severely increase the penalties for failure to file a change of ownership statement to the greater of $10,000 or 10 per cent of the current year’s taxes on all property owned by the company in the state. This legislation could be disastrous for any publicly traded real estate investment trusts or corporation with multiple properties in California. It passed the Senate 23 – 14 last year, and has been on the inactive list in the Assembly until recently. Unfortunately, all Bay Area Senators supported it when it was first presented including Burton, Sher, Speier, and Perata, but BOMA is hopeful that any changes will necessitate a second look, and less enthusiasm for this punitive legislation. Organizations that are supporting this legislation include: California Federation of Teachers, California Labor Federation, CA Association of Counties, and the Service Employees International Union. Organizations that have joined BOMA in opposition are: California Association of Realtors, IREM, the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Manufacturers and Technology Association and the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group.

LABOR RELATIONS
AB 2213 (Goldberg) Regulates the janitorial service industry by providing specific record keeping and registration requirements. BOMA Position: OPPOSE [BOMA has made recent attempts to link a change in last year’s passed SB 179 to dropping our opposition to this bill. SB 179 holds building owners liable for the labor code violations “they knew or should have known about” which were committed by their non-union contractors. BOMA wants to change the language to only cover those violations where the building owner knew about the violation(s) but did nothing about them.]

AB 2850 (Ridley-Thomas) Requires a new security contractor to retain for 90 days the employees of the previous contractor. BOMA Position: OPPOSE

SB 1521 (Alarcon) Increases the period for retaining janitorial workers after a new contract from 60 to 90 days. BOMA Position: OPPOSE

DISABLED ACCESS
AB 1707 (Assembly Judiciary Committee) Quadruples the fine for "interfering with the rights of an individual with a disability." BOMA Position: OPPOSE.

SB 1775 (Ortiz) Requires building standards to be consistent with "the latest edition of the model code" and could be a way to lock in the use of the NFPA codes. BOMA Position: WATCH.

THE ENVIRONMENT
SB 1722 (Ducheny) Prohibits the filing of a Prop. 65 action in the public interest if a settlement was entered on the same facts. BOMA Position: SUPPORT.

ENERGY LEGISLATION
Legislators and constituents agree that the current energy regulatory system is not working and must be structurally revamped. Several bills have been introduced to address this problem, as well as deal with specific areas such as onsite generation.

AB 428 (Richman) Relates to non-core customers electing whether to obtain electricity from companies other than investor-owned utilities. BOMA Position: SUPPORT

AB 2006 (Nunez) Sponsored by So. Cal Edison, the bill would reassert control of investor-owned utilities over the state energy system. BOMA Position: OPPOSE

AB 2484 (Ridley-Thomas) This bill would establish a streamlined system of energy coordination. BOMA Position: SUPPORT IN CONCEPT

SB 1398 (Morrow) Reduces regulatory requirements to encourage the use of on-site generation. BOMA Position: SUPPORT

SB 1565 (Bowen) Requires the adoption of a strategic energy plan. BOMA Position: SUPPORT

GOVERNOR Issues Executive Order Outlining Asset Management Strategy
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger issued an Executive Order earlier this month directing his administration to implement a statewide asset management strategy.  Under the Executive Order S-10-04 (order), the California Performance Review, in conjunction with the State and Consumer Services Agency and the Department of General Services, will develop specific reform proposals to efficiently manage California’s core real property assets. State agencies within the Executive Branch will be required to catalogue their real property holdings and evaluate their nexus to service delivery.  "This is a strategy that will lead to the effective tracking and management of California's assets," said State and Consumer Services Agency Secretary Fred Aguiar. "Without this first step of mandatory data collection, we are only guessing about the state's holdings - whether it's property that is essential to state operations or simply property that has been held without critical analysis since its acquisition."  The California Performance Review will have the immediate task of identifying potentially high-value, urban properties which may be underutilized or not reflect their highest/best use. 

CA Chamber of Commerce Supported Tort Reform Initiative on November State Ballot
The initiative to stop shakedown lawsuits, backed by a California Chamber co-chaired campaign, has qualified for the November ballot. The initiative will close a legal loophole in state Business and Professions Code Section 17200 by requiring that a private attorney have a client who has been harmed in order to file a lawsuit. Under current law, personal injury attorneys are permitted to file lawsuits on behalf of the general public even though they have no client and no evidence of harm.

 “We look forward to voter approval of our initiative in November and the enactment of these very reasonable and responsible reforms that will stop shakedown artists in their tracks, while protecting the right of every consumer to file a lawsuit if they have been harmed,” said Chamber President Allan Zaremberg, co-chair of the coalition that gathered signatures to take the reform initiative to voters.

The broad-based coalition, called Californians to Stop Shakedown Lawsuits, is made up of business organizations, taxpayer groups, consumers, and large and small companies from across the state that are trying to do something about the threat of frivolous lawsuits.
The initiative will actually enhance enforcement of California’s consumer and environmental laws. Instead of fines and settlements on behalf of the public going into the pockets of unscrupulous trial lawyers, the measure will require these funds to be used by district attorneys and the attorney general for further enforcement of the laws. For more information on the initiative, visit www.calchamber.com or www.stopshakedownlawsuits.com.

Are You Ready with your BORP?
If your building isn’t on this pre-approved list, you haven’t created a BUILDING OCCUPANCY RESUMPTION PROGRAM to be used in the event of an earthquake to certify and re-open your property, instead of waiting for the overloaded county inspectors to do it for you. Being pre-qualified to call your private structural engineer in to get your building back online asap will be extremely valuable to your tenants and your bottom line, and very worth the investment made today to file the BORP. For details on how to apply, contact Zan Turner at 415-558-6104.

Security Alert! Potential civic disruption in San Francisco June 3 - 10 
BOMA is asking members to take whatever precautions they think may be necessary, including alerting tenants to possible traffic disruption during this period, especially in the area surrounding Moscone Center and Union Square areas.

A major Bio-Industry Conference is coming to the Moscone Center, and because many of delegates are expected to be from leading biotechnology firms, a number of activists are planning to use the opportunity to demonstrate.  Some of the activists who would ordinarily protest at the G8 conference will be directing their energies to San Francisco, as the G8 meetings the same week are being held on an island off the coast of Georgia with very restricted access.  One of the protesters' messages: "We call for a U.S. West Coast Regional Mobilization against the G8 in San Francisco, lasting from June 3 until June 10, to overlap with protests which will be occurring here against the biotechnology annual industry conference. We will converge in our city and fight on our own terms!" 

That message came from this site: Also see http://www.westcoastg8.net/who/  As you can see from the above, there appear to be a couple of protests brewing: one directed against the G8, and one directed against the bio-tech industry.

What might we expect?  It may be entirely peaceful.  However, similar past protests in other cities have seen pockets of anarchy and unrest.  Demonstrations are planned here throughout the June 3 - 10 period, with daily protests outside and around Moscone Center, a rally June 6th at Union Square, and a plan to attempt to shut down Mocsone Center on June 8.  

Some words of caution for BOMA Members:
* Watch / secure dumpsters and the like, in order to guard against trash fires.  Have portable extinguishers accessible.
* Remove / relocate items such as cigarette ash cans that could be picked up and hurled through glass windows.
* Closely monitor unfamiliar characters with backpacks attempting to gain access to your facility; hanging signs and banners from rooftops and construction cranes has been a tactic employed at past protests, with protestors succeeding in gaining rooftop access in buildings previously thought to be secure.  Perhaps during this period, you may wish to have tenants meet delivery people in your lobby, rather than providing internal building access to bicycle messengers and the like.  Review your roof access security protocols.
* Watch for graffiti; tagging is a favorite activity some activists.
* Consider your tenants, and which businesses may tend to attract unwanted attention.  Speak to them in advance, ask them what messages they might have received, and encourage them to be prepared for disruption as well.
* Rolling smoke bombs into office building lobbies is a tactic some animal rights protesters have used in the past.

Our local public safety professionals will be closely monitoring the Bio-Industry Conference and possible related activities, and they're prepared to address any disruptions which may occur.  However, we must also take some measure of personal responsibility to be prepared.  Again, the situation could be entirely peaceful, with no disruption at all.  However, reading some of the internet messages from groups planning to use the Conference to get their message out would indicate the potential for problems.

Neither BOMA San Francisco, nor its officers, directors, employees, agents or affiliates assume any responsibility for consequences resulting from or in connection with any security alert statements or information provided.  BOMA expressly disclaims all liability for claims, losses and damages of any kind arising out of use, reference to, reliance on, or performance based on such information. This information is provided by BOMA as a matter of information.  While we attempt to provide accurate and timely security alert information, BOMA does not warrant the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of such information.  You should verify all information provided and act in your own best independent judgment to protect your designated properties. 

San Francisco’s Anti-Panhandling Law Goes Into Effect
San Francisco’s new Mayor Newsom supported anti-panhandling law which was passed by the voters passed last November became effective on May 26th. Call the SFPD non-emergency # to report violations – 415-553-0123

What's prohibited?

Aggressive panhandling in public places;
Panhandling within 20 feet of an ATM machine or check-cashing business;
Panhandling anyone in vehicles on a street or highway on-ramp or off-ramp;
Panhandling in a parking lot or on public transportation.

Aggressive panhandling is defined as:

Causing fear in a person being solicited or using violent or threatening gestures;
Persisting once a person has refused, or following a person while panhandling;
Purposely blocking a vehicle or person.

Punishment for violating the law:

Referral to a drug-rehabilitation or mental health counseling program;
Three months' community service or jail time if cited three times in a year.

More info http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/05/25/MNGC06R5RL1.DTL