ACTION ALERTS
 

 

 
IN THIS ISSUE
 

BOMA Awaits Final Approval on Rate Parity for Commercial Energy Users

First Year of Care Not Cash a Great Success

Fees and City Charges Expected to Go Up in 2005-6 City Budget

San Francisco Civil Service Reforms Badly Needed

Anti-Graffiti Reward Proposed By San Francisco Supervisor Fiona Ma

High Rise Regulations Reviewed

Supervisor Aaron Peskin Meets with BOMA Board of Directors/BOMA-SF-PAC

Centennial of 1906 Earthquake and Fire Approaching: Temporary Space Needed

Sidewalk Elevators: Are You Keeping Yours Legal'

Energy Aggregation Task Force Holds First Meeting

City Planning Department Considers Adopting Better Neighborhoods Plans ' Impacts Developments 40 Acres and Up

Interpretation of Air Replenishment Systems Requirement Issued

Energy Update: Have you done these things to reduce your consumption'

Steve Hutchison Moving On at PG & E

Scrap House Opens for Inspection June 1st!

BOMA Buildings Shine at 5th Annual Commercial Recycling Awards

Two Recycling Seminars Offered in June

 
 

Direct all inquiries regarding
The BOMA San Francisco
ADVOCATE to

Government and Public Affairs
Director
Ken Cleaveland, CAE
415/362-2662 x11
kenc@boma.com


May 26, 2005, Volume 11, Number 4 

This issue of the BOMA SF Advocate is Brought To You By
Unico
Properties, Inc.

Ken Cleaveland
Director of Government & Public Affairs

BOMA Awaits Final Approval on Rate Parity for Commercial Energy Users
A historic all-parties settlement on energy rates for PG & E territory customers is headed to the CPUC for ultimate action and expected approval. The issue of rate parity has been a bone of contention for BOMA members for many years, but especially so since the CA energy crisis of 2001, when all the increases in costs due to power contracts negotiated by then-Governor Davis were passed onto commercial/industrial customers, but not residential. Recently, in the PG & E Phase 2 Rate Case, BOMA San Francisco and BOMA California filed petitions to lower commercial user rates, and helped craft an agreement among nearly 20 different parties that should lead to immediate energy rate reductions (effective June 1) for BOMA members. The estimated savings will be over $6 million for BOMA San Francisco buildings, and almost $12 million for Bay Area BOMA building members. Further reductions in January, 2006, are also part of the settlement. Taken together, these energy cost reductions will mean approximately a 13% total bill reduction for A10 schedule buildings, and an 11% reduction for E19and E20 schedule buildings. Based on BOMA San Francisco office building membership comprised of 71,297,670 feet, that will mean a total savings over the next year and a half of nearly $34 million. Bay Area-wise, based on approximately 133 million square feet of office space, and the average consumption patterns associated with office buildings, our industry will save nearly $63 million. BOMA continues to challenge the assumption that office buildings contribute inordinately to power peaks, and is having its consultant, Bill Roberts (Economic Sciences Corporation) study and prepare a report on marginal cost methodologies. (Marginal costs are those associated with producing one more kW of power above baseline requirements.) Defeating the imposition of critical peak pricing rates on commercial office buildings again next year (the issue comes up before the CPUC again in August of this year for 2006 summer rates) will be a priority for BOMA, and having a fairer, more up-to-date way in which to assess the marginal costs of power will be central to preparing our case.

First year of 'Care Not Cash' a Great Success
Gavin Newsom's Care Not Cash initiative was passed by the city's voters in 2002. At that time, the cost of homeless services was over $100 million in direct costs, and the number of homeless, then over 6,000 ' but probably double that official number ' was growing. However, due to legal challenges and opposition from a majority of the Board of Supervisors* (see below), it wasn't until May, 2004, that the law actually went into effect. The good news is that in just one year, with the cash spigot turned off, the number of people receiving general assistance has declined 73%. As importantly, with the cash no longer going into paying for people's drug and alcohol dependencies, nearly 800 people have been taken off the streets and given supportive housing with those funds ' the real answer to ending homelessness.  Despite the howls of sanctimonious protest from the ranks of the Homeless-Industrial-Complex that received the $100 million every year, Mayor Newsom's Care Not Cash program is actually working to help reduce the problem and actually help people clean up their lives.

* Current Supervisors Who Opposed Newsom's Care Not Cash Proposition in 2002: Tom Ammiano(Dist. 9); Chris Daly (6); Ross Mirkarimi (5);  Sophie Maxwell (10);  Jake McGoldrick (1);  Aaron Peskin (3);  Gerardo Sandoval (11)

Fees and City Charges Expected to Go Up in 2005-6 City Budget
At a recent meeting of the Chamber of Commerce's Public Policy Committee, Ben Rosenfield, the City's Budget Director, predicted that city fees and charges for services would go up an estimated 2% in the next budget year (July 2005 ' June 2006). Although the recent receipts from the city's real estate transfer tax have spiked due to the heavy commercial office building sales, and have added an unexpected $43 million into the city's coffers, for a total to date this fiscal year of $106 million, he said he (and the Mayor) hopes to use this money to improve parks, streets, and other physical aspects of the city, rather than spend it for social programs, where there is a planned $30 ' 40 million service cuts reduction. A recent SPUR study pointed out the city actually has an estimated $4 billion in deferred maintenance needs that must be addressed sooner rather than later. One small step toward addressing this problem may be a $120 million street repair bond next year. Rosenfield said the city's planning fees may go up more than 2% if the consultant study underway recommends such action. The budget director was generally upbeat in his remarks that other revenues were up from the city's sales taxes, hotel occupancy taxes, and business taxes, and he hoped that this will be the last 'bad' budget year for some time. He stated the city needed to create a real capital planning process with a 10-year plan that would be updated annually. The city currently does not have such a plan, nor does it have more formalized financial policies that dictate such things as budget reserves, and how surpluses are treated. The budget director acknowledged the city's 'rich' retirement benefits for employees, currently running about $70 million a year, but stated they were, for the most part, passed by the city's voters. For comparison purposes, he stated that that same amount ($70 million) is the entire current annual budget for streets and parks maintenance. Rosenfield stated his (and the administration's) preference for the city to move away from a payroll tax, and toward a gross receipts tax of some kind. However, the Mayor and Board of Supervisors need to make such a change 'very carefully', and need good reliable data on how to structure such a new tax, much of which isn't being collected currently. To top it off, what info is being reported, he said, often has 'accuracy issues'.

San Francisco Civil Service Reforms Badly Needed
The effort to reform city government and in particular, the Civil Service system, which covers 98% of the city's workforce, is gaining steam, and urgency, with several new developments driving the issue, and the Mayor making it a priority in his administration. SPUR recently issued a review of the hiring/firing practices at City Hall and made a number of very positive suggestions. The Mayor's Director of Human Resources, Phil Ginsburg, released a study of the city's civil service system in which he had compared ten other jurisdictions of similar size with San Francisco. His study found that San Francisco's system is far more antiquated, complicated and slow in processing personnel matters than any of the other ten cities surveyed. (Those cities were: Los Angeles, San Diego, Oakland, San Jose, San Rafael, Baltimore, Denver, Indianapolis, Milwaukee, and Philadelphia.) Ginsburg stated the city negotiates 48 different labor contracts, with 130 different bargaining units, and consequently, work rules are not uniform for all city employees. Further, he found, there is virtually no 'at will' employment within city government, so firing a city employee for poor performance can take up to 3 years! His report showed tenure trumped performance, while employees who performed in an exemplary manner could not be rewarded. Ginsburg's report recommended the city reduce the number of job classifications, currently about 1,100 (!), eliminate the use of provisional employees ('either you are a city employee or you aren't'), increase the resources used for employee training, implement best practices in every city department, and tie promotions to performance, and not just seniority. Ginsburg added that the city's  liberal 'leave' policy needed to be changed to more effectively encourage employees to return to work following an illness or accident. The sensitive issues surrounding disciplining employees must also be looked at and must include shortening the appeal process, plus changing the rules regarding 'bumping rights'. Currently, because tenure is the only thing considered when employees are 'bumped', due to budget cuts or re-organizations of city departments, the employee with the greatest skills or best performance on the job could be laid off. This must change, he said. Mayor Newsom stated at the press conference where Ginsburg's report was released, 'We're attacking a system, not individuals. It's not an attack on labor.'  For more information on this issue, and to join a coalition of city residents who are promoting civil service reforms, please check out: www.fixcityhall.com. For a complete copy of Ginsburg's report, visit www.sfgov.org/site/dhr_index.asp.

Anti-Graffiti Reward Proposed By San Francisco Supervisor Fiona Ma
Supervisor Fiona Ma (District 4, Sunset) has introduced an ordinance (050434) establishing a reward fund for persons providing information that leads to the arrest and conviction of persons committing acts of graffiti vandalism. This fund would be managed by the Director of Public Works, and would give out rewards in the amount of $500, if the person applies for the reward within 90 days of the arrest and/or conviction of the graffiti perpetrator. The reward fund proposal awaits approval by the full Board of Supervisors. Currently, the most 'graffiti-ed' parts of town are South of Market, North Beach, Haight-Ashbury, and Bernal Heights.  Since the recently passed anti-graffiti ordinance went into effect, over 500 buildings have been cited for graffiti, 32% residential and 68% commercial. To report graffiti vandalism, call 28-CLEAN (415-282-5326).

High Rise Regulations Reviewed
At a recent briefing at the Department of Building Inspection, Laurence Kornfield, Chief Building Inspector, Barbara Schultheis, San Francisco Fire Department's High-Rise Inspector, and Simon Tam, a Building department high-rise inspector, gave an excellent summary of the requirements high-rise office buildings must comply with in the City. Many of the conditions are state-mandated, but others, like the sprinkler retrofit ordinance, effective February 15, 2006, were locally enacted.  Skip Soskin (Huntsman Architectural Group) wrote up a terrific summary of the details, which can be accessed here.

Ed Lee, New San Francisco City Administrator, Meets with BOMA
BOMA had the privilege of being one of the first groups to meet with Ed Lee, following his appointment as City Administrator by Mayor Newsom. Mr. Lee met with BOMA's Government and Public Affairs Committee late last month. In his new job, Lee will continue to oversee the Department of Public Works (his previous position was Director of that city department), but will now also oversee the city's real estate holdings, garbage services, elections, animal control, the arts and the convention center. The infrastructure problems in the city will remain his top concern. Ed Lee mentioned the need for a new $200 - $300 million roads improvement bond because simply 'filling potholes won't really help the life of the city's roads' and more basic re-construction is needed on many of them. He was happy to announce the restoration of United Nations Plaza was being done in preparation of World Environment Day (June 1) and was being funded primarily through Federal grants and a grant from the Richard Goldman Fund.  Mr. Lee also mentioned that the pedestal newsrack program was making progress, and that BOMA members should start seeing more of the very attractive, dark green multi-publication newspaper dispensers in the downtown area soon. These pedestal newsracks will replace the multitude of single publication racks that litter the sidewalks now. Lee mentioned the city's stepped-up anti-graffiti program, and the expectation the City will soon have a reward fund for persons who provide information that helps catch and convict graffiti vandals.  Lee also mentioned the fact that the City Controller has recently issued new performance standards for what constitutes 'clean streets', clean garbage receptacles, functioning parks and recreation areas, and the like, which includes pictures, to help educate the city staff on what is 'passing' and what is 'failing'.  Lee stated that 'communication with employees is key to gaining their cooperation', and that he believes everyone should be held accountable for their performance, from the director of the department on down. On the issue of his stepped-up anti-graffiti program, Lee stated he has urged the local courts to not grant 'civil compromise' in graffiti cases, because doing so does not adequately punish those who commit these crimes. Lee stated 90% of the graffiti in San Francisco was not gang-related, but the work of tagging 'artists', many of them young men in the 20s from out of town.  

Supervisor Aaron Peskin Meets with BOMA Board of Directors/BOMA-SF-PAC
The President of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, Aaron Peskin, met with the BOMA Board of Directors and members of the BOMA-SF-PAC Board on April 7th at the City Club. In a frank and candid discussion, the Supervisor chided 'downtown' for 'abdicating its responsibility' to protest waste and cronyism at City Hall during the Willie Brown Administration years, when we allowed the former Mayor 'to spend money like a drunken sailor'. He stated that City Government can always be more efficient, but government is always going to be more inefficient than the private sector. 'Fortunately', he said, 'the patronage of the past Administration is largely gone now.' On the issue of taxes, Peskin stated that he would give any new idea for more taxes 'serious consideration', although he stated he knew new taxes were hard to get passed by the voters.  On Mayor Newsom Peskin stated there was a sea change at City Hall when he took over on January 8, 2004, and many of the progressive changes stemming from the November, 2000 district supervisor elections have been stalled or reversed. He did, however, praise the Mayor for appointing Wade Crowfoot as his liaison to the Board of Supervisors. Crowfoot was a former aide to Supervisor Peskin, and, according to Peskin, has been very effective at helping to craft a number of compromises on various issues between the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors. Peskin slammed the Transbay terminal redevelopment stating it only made sense if the Agency and City get the $2 billion needed for high speed rail into downtown. Peskin said 'we won't know that until 2008, so why spend hundreds of millions of dollars in advance of that unknown fact'' Peskin also took credit for helping to stop the runway expansion project at SFO, and stated that the airport is now going to be able to deal with bad weather delays using a $24 million high tech solution rather than building a new runway, saving the taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars in the process, while not further degrading the environment in the San Francisco Bay.  He stated that he has asked the city attorney's office to study the idea of a new transit-based fee for downtown, but that it would not be a tax on property owners. Lastly, he touched on the topic of limiting rent control, and stated that 'Residential rent control is a fundamental reality in San Francisco, and is a very popular social policy. I don't see that changing or there even being enough support on the Board for the city to study using a 'means test' to qualify for rent-controlled units. The rent control activists know that the power to protect the poor through rent control also benefits many in the middle and upper classes, but they don't want to mess with it, and neither do I.'

Centennial of 1906 Earthquake and Fire Approaching: Temporary Space Needed
Jim Lazarus is coordinating the efforts of the San Francisco Historical Society's commemoration of the 1906 earthquake and fire through a series of events that will lead up to the fateful day (5:12 a.m., April 18th), and will continue through the year in recognition of the massive rebuilding effort that followed the catastrophe. In preparation for this event, the organizing committee needs 8-10,000 square feet of donated office and exhibit preparation space from now through Spring 2007. The space will be used for offices for 4-6 people and will provide a place for display of Gladys Hansen's earthquake materials as well as give volunteers space to prepare special exhibits. The space can be anywhere in the City, not necessarily in the financial district. The space donor would be considered a major sponsor of all centennial events; the April 17 dinner, April 18 commemoration, earthquake preparedness programs, educational activities, exhibits, walking trails, etc. The fiscal agent for all activities is the San Francisco Museum and Historical Society.

Any BOMA members wishing to help, or has space (or know of space) which might be available, should contact Jim Lazarus directly at jim_lazarus@sbcglobal.net. Anything contributed would be greatly appreciated.

Sidewalk Elevators: Are You Keeping Yours Legal'
A recent inquiry from a BOMA member led me to contact Barbara Moy, Director of Streets and Mapping within the City's Public Works Department, to get the rules governing the use of sidewalk freight elevators. If you have one, you might want to read this!

Freight elevators placed within the Public Right of Way are permitted under the Public Works Code as a revocable encroachment.  The Director of Public Works has the authority to grant this encroachment to a fronting property owner for the "use and enjoyment of their property."  In addition, the encroachment shall also be evaluated based upon "the safety, convenience and comfort of the public using the sidewalk."

In the matter of use of a sidewalk freight elevator, the Department policy has been to issue the freight elevator encroachment with the understanding that the elevator doors are to be deployed during the hours stated on the permit and only during the time necessary for the active conveyance of freight to or from the business establishment.    Thus, the encroachment is allowed based upon minimal interruption or obstruction of the sidewalk to the public.  Also, it is the sole responsibility of the fronting owner to safeguard the public when the doors are deployed.    Public safety can be best accomplished through the use of a human being to guide persons around the obstruction.  Signs, cones, etc. are helpful, but do not satisfy the standard of safety presented by a large opening in the sidewalk.  Freight doors should be attended at all times for all persons, especially the sight impaired.

The enforcement of sidewalk encroachments is initiated predominately through public feedback.  Where doors are opened for extended periods of time as reported to the Department, and that information is confirmed through site inspection, revocation of the encroachment permit is the ultimate resolution.  Businesses that routinely maintain freight elevator doors open on a daily basis or for extended periods of time exceed the intent for the duration of the encroachment.  Such business should employ alternatives means within private property to convey their business deliveries.  DPW may continue to allow freight doors for businesses contingent upon the concept that these encroachments may not outweigh the public's preeminent right to safe and unobstructed use of the sidewalk.

Energy Aggregation Task Force Holds First Meeting
The first meeting of the newly-appointed members of the Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Task Force met on Monday, May 9th, at City Hall. This task force is charged with making recommendations to the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors on how the city may move forward with creating and administering a power pool for its residents and businesses. Currently, only four of the seven members have been appointed. They are: Cal Broomhead (a city employee with the Department of the Environment), Ron Dicks (a Local 21 city union official), Paul Fenn (Executive Director of a non-profit organization entitled Local Power, which promotes community aggregation programs, and Barbara Hale (Assistant General Manager for San Francisco's Public Utilities Commission). The Task Force is facing some tough choices, according to Barbara Hale, as the issues of cost of power and reliability must be weighed against the desires for more local control and use of renewable energy sources. Two basic approaches are being considered: one that has been crafted by the SFPUC staff, the other provided by Paul Fenn. Both plans involve the city selling revenue bonds that would be used to develop renewable (clean) energy sources. Both plans would require all citizens and businesses to participate unless they 'opt out'. The city's plan would establish its own rate board to set electricity rates for all customers, while Local Power's proposal would set all rates at the time the energy service provider (ESP) contract is signed. State Senator Carole Migden got legislation (AB 117) passed several years ago that allows local governments to consider aggregating their citizens' power purchases from utility companies, while the legislation preserves the utility companies' control over transmission and distribution of power.  Approximately 20% of San Francisco's power is consumed by downtown office buildings. BOMA San Francisco had a power pool for several years, until the ability to buy power directly from energy service providers was prohibited by the Legislature and the CPUC effective September 20, 2001. During its initial two years, the BOMA power pool saved its members several millions of dollars, through a guaranteed discount off the daily posted wholesale energy prices. Copies of the two different power pool programs being considered by the CCA are available online at www.sfpuc.org/lafco. The next meeting of the Task Force will be Tuesday, June 7th, at 5 p.m. at City Hall.

City Planning Department Considers Adopting Better Neighborhoods Plans ' Impacts Developments 40 Acres and Up
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors is considering adopting a new ordinance that would affect all new developments (unless specifically exempted) of 40 acres or above, and would require the development to be approved through a new 'Better Neighborhoods Planning and Implementation Process'. This process will create a defined public input procedure, a planning management and accountability process, a requirement for the preparation of a neighborhood conditions and needs analysis, and other recommendations that are appropriate to the General Plan, Planning Code, or Zoning Map. If passed, it would mandate the Planning Department provide sufficient staff and resources to prepare this Better Neighborhoods Plan and be able to implement it within 24 months. The Planning Commission will have sole authority to interpret and enforce the Plan, once adopted. The first parts of town to be addressed with this plan will be the Mission, Lower Potrero Hill/Showplace Square, and the East South of Market areas. Although lengthy in its requirements, the intent of the proposal is to speed development within specified areas, once the BNP is adopted. Annual updates on the BNPs would also be required.

Interpretation of Air Replenishment Systems Requirement Issued
Last year the San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed a requirement affecting new high rise office buildings (over 75 feet high) constructed in the City. That measure, also passed by the Fire Commission, now requires a special air replenishment system be installed in the emergency stairwell used by firefighters in an emergency. This air duct system would allow firefighters to refill air tanks without having to bring up new ones from the ground floor through special connections built into the stairwell wall on every third floor. However, there has been some confusion regarding just how the ordinance will be applied. Consequently, Laurence Kornfield, Chief Building Inspector for the City, recently issued an advisory memorandum explaining the new ordinance. In it, he stated, the Fire Department, not the Department of Building Inspection, is the agency that enforces this ordinance. He also stated the ordinance contains no retroactive provisions. Buildings with permit applications submitted before March 30, 2004 (the effective date of the ordinance) are not covered, nor are they affected as a result of addenda changes to the permit, despite suggestions to the contrary by the vendor for the air replenishment systems, and their advocates, who have urged the Mayor and Planning Director to apply this ordinance to new buildings permitted before March 30, 2004, if addenda have been submitted, or an existing building is undergoing a large renovation or change of use. The Fire Department has issues an advisory concerning what technical standards are required to maintain the air replenishment system in good operating condition, but the Fire Department is responsible for providing the air compressor to actually make the system functional in an emergency.

Energy Update: Have you done these things to reduce your consumption'
Want to know the secret to increasing the comfort level of your tenants and reducing your energy bills at the same time'  The answer is energy efficiency, and it's not really a secret anymore.  Today's new energy-efficient solutions are easy to install, and they can add to real energy savings.  PG&E (a BOMA member) has provided thousands of financial incentives to San Francisco office-building owners who have replaced old equipment with new energy-efficient products.  For example, some popular products for which customers have received financial incentives are:

  • Stairwell lighting with occupancy sensors - Part of a building lighting load goes to illuminate unoccupied stairwells around the clock, 365 days a year.  You can comply with building safety codes and reduce your lighting load at the same time by installing lighting fixtures with T8 or compact fluorescent lamp technology combined with built-in occupancy sensors.  These fixtures are always on stand-by, offering a low level of lighting for safety and security.  When someone enters a stairwell, lighting levels will instantly switch from stand-by to full output.
  • Reflective Window Film - Control heat and glare by installing reflective window film on all south, west, and east facing exposure windows.  Reflective window film is known for reducing HVAC load and increasing tenant comfort.
  • High-performance T8 Fluorescent lamps and Occupancy Sensors - Replace your T12 fluorescent lamps and magnetic ballasts with T8 lamps and electronic ballasts for improved light output and significant energy savings.  Combine lamps with ceiling or wall-box occupancy sensors, and you can realize even greater savings! 

For more information on rebates and incentives on these products please visit www.pge.com/business or contact the Business Customer Center at 1.800.468.4743.

Steve Hutchison Moving On at PG & E
After 23 years and 10 months as a Senior Commercial Accounts Manager for PG & E, Steve Hutchison changed career tracks at the utility firm. As of May 9th, Steve moved over to manage the Standard Performance Contract (SPC) financial incentive program.  Sharon Harris ' who has over 30 years with the company - and first trained Hutchison, will become the new Sr. Account Manager. In an email to BOMA, Steve lauded the BOMA members, and stated he 'never ceases to be amazed at the creativity that comes from the commercial office sector and the operations people' with whom he has had the privilege to work.  Hutchison also mentioned that he looked forward to continuing to work with BOMA members as the SPC coordinator as he will be getting involved with BOMA buildings which have been approved for energy upgrade funding of specific projects.  Congratulations, Steve! 

'Scrap House' Opens for Inspection June 1st!
Ever wonder what a house would look like, constructed entirely from scrap materials' Well, wonder no more! Just such a home is being built for temporary exhibition at 41 Federal Street, in San Francisco. To view the structure, and learn more about this collaborative effort of many companies and the City of San Francisco's Department of Building Inspection and Department of the Environment, go to www.scraphouse.org.  Their project director, Rachel Weidinger, would be happy to take you on a tour! Her email address is Rachel@scraphouse.org. The house will be open to the public from June 2 ' June 5, 2005 from 10 a.m. ' 8 p.m. A number of generous contributions have been made by BOMA members. Check it out!

BOMA Buildings Shine at 5th Annual Commercial Recycling Awards
This year marks the 5th anniversary of BOMA San Francisco's commercial recycler of the year awards program, and saw a total of 28 office buildings entered; 13 hotels and 11 restaurants also competed for the recognition and 'golden dumpsters' given the top winners in each category. The Metreon, Anchor Brewing and Project Open Hand were also recognized for their special emphasis on recycling under unique circumstances. The BOMA winners were:

Large Buildings (over 450,000 square feet) ' Post Montgomery Center (1st Place); 77 Beale Street, PG & E Headquarters (2nd Place); and 450 Golden Gate Avenue, the CA State Office Building (3rd Place). 525 Market Street received recognition for 'most improved' recycling program, and the Embarcadero Center West building received an honorable mention.

Medium-sized Buildings (270,000 ' 450,000 square feet) ' 101 Second Street (1st Place); 455 Market Street (2nd Place); and 100 Pine Street (3rd Place). With this award, 100 Pine Street has won recognition for its recycling program four out of the past five years (2000, 2001, and 2002), more than any other building in San Francisco. 

Small Buildings (under 270,000 square feet) ' 1014 Torney Avenue, The Thoreau Center for Sustainability at the Presidio (1st Place); 685 Market Street (2nd Place); and 260 Townsend Street, Swinerton Builders (3rd Place). Swinerton's headquarters building has also received numerous other awards for its green building/sustainable design features.

Two Recycling Seminars Offered in June
As part of World Environment Day, a commercial recycling workshop will be offered on June 2 (Thursday) from 2:30 ' 5:30 p.m. at the Metreon (4th Floor, Room #1) on Innovative Recycling and Diversion Programs. Moderated by Rosario Marin, Chair of California's Integrated Waste Management Board, the program will feature a panel of speakers from San Francisco, Berkeley, Redondo Beach and Alameda on how their local recycling programs have significantly increased diversion rates. Also, after a short break, the last hour will focus on European and Asian efforts to create more sustainable development through recycling, and reuse of existing materials. To attend, sign up at www.wed2005.org. Cost: $10.

BOMA Oakland/East Bay will host a seminar on June 7th from 8:30 ' 11:30 a.m. at the Davis Street Transfer Station (2615 Davis Street, San Leandro) on how commercial property managers can positively impact their bottom line with the introduction of an in-building recycling program. Topics to be covered: Tools necessary for a program, what can be recycled ' both common and unusual items, where to find technical assistance or financial incentives for recycling programs, and details on the East Bay Conservation Corps services. The seminar will also include a tour of the Davis Street Transfer station!

Cost: $30 members/$55 non-members. Register online at www.bomaoeb.org.  

 

'What's the meaning of life' You can't win.  You can't tie.  And, you can't quit.  All you can hope for is to be the last to lose.' H. Brown.

 

 

233 Sansome Street, 8th Floor, San Francisco, CA, 94104