seeing no one at this time, public comment is close. colleagues? supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. i appreciate the robust discussion around this. before i forget, i have a number of amendments that have been circulated. i do not know if you want me to go into detail? >> i think that that would be helpful. many of these have been raised based on the initial proposal. supervisor mirkarimi: this ordinance was introduced in april, it was never tabled. it was in the legislation since the time of its introduction. we have taken into consideration a number of concerns that strengthen the ordinance from a retail, manufacturer perspective, making sure that this is lined up effectively. the first amendment, removing

the prohibition of selling of drugs in the city if the manufacturer was not in compliance with drug disposal programs. line 2323. removing from the ordinance the confusion, meaning only manufacturers and importers covered in the ordinance. however, if we find that this is not sufficient in time, reasserting drug wholesalers, illustrated in deletion on the following lines. page four, line 18 to 19, age 11, 19, 12, 5, and the term the elimination of " section. clarifying the definition of producer, manufacturers and importers, page five, line 17.

with page 893 and packaging separated from disposal, clarifying an existing, i would motion that we take those amendments. i very much appreciate the comments from the supervisors that want to strike cautioned with regards to was proceeding. when we brought forward the documents that provided the deliberations in other states in

the pharmaceutical industry asking for those states to not go forward, those arguments are incredibly similar to the arguments we have heard here. those of us waiting for state government to come forward with legislation that uniformly tries to to morton made municipalities throughout california, that would be like waiting for the gedout. it's not going happen. there may be some glimmer of hope, as i had opened in my remarks in the beginning of this deliberation, we were heartened to see the obama administration moving forward and advancing this level of interest. but that level of interest has not been assigned to state and local governments get. this is where the doors open to other levels of government to take up the initiative spirited

through the obama administration. there is nothing that says that any of those laws, federally speaking, the state to local governments are precluded from moving forward. san francisco is no stranger from initiating a law that is then followed by state and federal government. this is not something that we are stranger to. if we are able to investigate what i think would be seen as a pilot program for other municipalities, so be it. if the challenge is to align the municipalities, i see that as a welcome problem. but the absence of any law whatsoever in the state of california should be considered unacceptable. in the discussions with the city attorney during the orchestration of this particular law, there is no unintended consequence with regards to the concerns articulated by the representatives of the manufacturers.

lip balm and toothpaste would not be included in this particular law. there would be a more defined segregation to make sure that that would not be an unintended capture. with regards to take back programs, we hear very differently on mandatory take back programs in canada, as well as europe, completely. the 1998 study that was mentioned about germany, germany is actually one of the leaders in europe right now on the question of recapturing pharmaceuticals from getting into the waste stream. it has been well updated by the parliament of germany that focuses on manufacturer responsibility. the difference is that a lot of the same manufacturers that might come to the united states to debate at the level of the state or even local levels in preventing us from enacting such laws are being reined in in europe and other places for

compliance and enforcement. i think that this is the slow trend that will hopefully come to a head. we are a state government now sees the writing on the wall, having a law that is meaningful and shows efficacy for producer responsibility will alleviate local governments from having to go this direction. let's hope that they do. but it is not on the radar any time soon. i ask that we move forward in san francisco. supervisor chiu: from my perspective, i have been thinking about this for a bit. first, i would like to thank supervisor mirkarimi for accepting the riding of the amendments that he did that were proposed by the industry to make this legislation more effective. i do think that this is an issue that we have all known. the industry, the public has been aware that the lack of

places to dispose of medicine has engendered health and safety issues around the country, including here in san francisco. my understanding is that the city attorney does not opine that that is the case. localities have a constitutional right to address health and safety concerns within our borders. that is what i believe this legislation is doing. i do think, i do believe that the good faith efforts and comments made by the industry and business community that they wish to address this on a voluntary basis. that being said, that has not happened yet. if there are other, smarter ways to do this, now is the time to propose it. i think a number of us are open to hearing that, but it has not happened yet. i appreciate the fact that the

obama administration has addressed this general area and i have received a copy of this from industry representatives earlier today. interestingly, specifically they provide encourage the attorney general to promulgate regulations in this area that specifically states that such regulations may not require any entity to establish or operate a delivery program, which at the end of the day is why it is appropriate for us in san francisco to consider moving forward and proposing a program that hopefully will be efficient and respectful of the needs and issues within the pharmaceutical industry that accomplish the goals that we want to accomplish. i will be supporting this legislation today. that being said, i know that there are still questions and concerns. my office is absolutely willing to meet and hear from various representatives of various

stakeholders that need something address. but of the many amendments that have been adopted today, this goes a long way towards addressing those concerns. if there are any additional discussions? let's call the roll. can we adopted this? let's call a role. >> on the motion to refer this item to the full board? supervisor elsbernd? no. supervisor mirkarimi? aye. supervisor chiu? aye. two ayes, one no. supervisor chiu: with that, madam clerk, is there any more business in front of this board? >> no, supervisor chiu: mr. chairmanchiu thank you -- no, mr. chairman. supervisor chiu: thank you, at

this time this meeting is adjourned. >> i am at harrington, general manager of d puc. i'm so happy to be here today where we will be building a new building for the puc and contributing to the green movement in our state. it is a wonderful place to be. i will be introducing a number of folks, but i want to start with introducing my commissioners. as i mentioned, this is one of those things where the puc has trained about a new headquarters building for i do not know how many years. buying one or building one, but it was always sitting out there because we have people in different parts of san francisco renting space, and that is not a good thing for ratepayers ultimately.

we are one of the leaders in green technology and water and energy conservation, and we should showcase that in our new building, and this building will give us a chance to do that. one of the proponents of this building since day one who was very excited to be here was a major gap in -- mayor gavin newsom, and i will turn it over to the mayor. [applause] >> the spirit of this announcement is the creation of literally hundreds of jobs over the next several years because of this kickoff of sorts on this project. this is a project, that is well over a decade in the making. you could say quite formally about nine years in the making since we acquired the site from the state, took an old dilapidated building that was identified as such after the 1989 earthquake when candidly

this process and formally began, and we decided to mark a process to consider design and orienting this building, but we never have the money, and we never had a framework to actually get the financing until about two years ago when we were at a point of absolute frustration. a lot of money have been spent on the design. i was looking back and choking off about some of my old files and various incarnations of ugly, ugly year, less ugly, dealers, an unbelievably expensive, never going to happen designs. nonetheless, we found some middle ground in one of the areas that i think was most important not to argue away or rather, i guess, value engineering away in the language of our time, some of the green components that had just spoken. it is appropriate when you have a public utilities commission that really is a leader in

terms of water conservation, and is a leader in terms of environmental stewardship that is in the process of becoming a steward and -- in a broader sense of the entire system, a $4.4 billion regional of great, that we would have a headquarters that represented those values not just figuratively but literally and substantively. two components that are probably most exciting -- i think that is why you see this modest wind component that will be hardly modest when it is incorporated in a larger scale into this building, is some of these innovative building construction strategies around incorporating not just traditional affordable pecs and not traditional strategy for waste water and rain water retention and recycling and the like, but also taking advantage of new technology are around wind and wind turbines. this may not generate as much energy as i think it generates interest, and let's be candid about that. it is as much a demonstration of the future as it is the

actualization of the same, but it is important, and there will be two big wind components on this project site that i think will truly get a lot of people excited and motivated and interested in doing similar things, even at their own residential homes or in any new construction, commercial and industrial projects in the city's future, so that is a component i am enthusiastic about. $170 million project. it is going to be financed with one of the lowest 4.17%. look at how proud they are. only bond people can even appreciate that. but 30-year fixed -- 4.17%, which is saving us a ton of money, money that we did not actually budgets as savings, so that we are now absolutely confident that we can meet our commitment in terms of the overall project. that being said, it gives webcor

no -- [laughter] -- you get my point. does not mean they can go over budget. i am confident with the outstanding leadership. 2012, they cannot get it done any sooner, but 2012, this project will be done. 1000 employees will come here on site, and finally, this is part of, for me, and anchor project to this larger civic center effort where we are working with the clinton foundation to incorporate some of the latest technologies in terms of environmental sustainability and creating a system. i guess that is the point. not just projects in isolation, but a system that connects our city projects with state and federal buildings, so this is a really big part of that promise that we made a year or so ago.

600 permanent jobs. 1300 advertised. mike from building construction trades -- i think he can appreciate as much or more than anyone else the importance of this project. mike was in with my friend in the construction trade, say in what is the latest on this for about three years. here we are, finally, and real folks being put to work, and that is a wonderful thing. that is again i think the real excitement and enthusiasm that brings us here today. thank you all for coming out. [applause] >> thank you, mr. mayor. thank you for your support. sometimes, you hear things about the best, the most efficient, all that stuff. to give you a few examples, example number one, energy use in this building compared to a building of this size in san francisco, we will be saving 2.1 million kilowatt hours a year. that is the equivalent of all the power used in half the fire stations in san francisco pier

will be saved in this one building. one reason we are able to do that is because of one of our partners doing this. also, the project director. [applause] >> thank you. we are so excited to be here today at this point in time in this whole -- because i love holes. particularly when we are going to pour some concrete, but in some foundations, and go up. i want to recognize jeff and had to put in some time working as number down. i think we have already saved about $40 million since we got involved in this project. mr. mayor was already working to save the city money. as far as the completion date, go back to with this arts and golden gate park where the mayor that me $1 -- one whole dollar -- and i am going to plant that

dollar on a wall in a picture frame, and he lost that one, and i intend for him to lose another because we are going to be the schedule we have out here. it is exciting to work with the puc on this wonderful building. not just the micro windmill that you see here, which a lot of people thought was a model of a building. it is a micro wind turbine. one of many features. photovoltaic panels. we have a concrete frame. there is a waste water treatment -- rainwater capture, utilizing a great water for flushing the toilet, so there is a lot of great features in this building. i am wearing my pink and tied today commemorating the california academy of sciences, -- i am wearing my penguin tie today. we just love working with the

department of public works. edgar is in the audience. wonderful partners. we are very excited to repeat the success we had two years ago. this is going to be in the platinum. it is going to be even better. there is going to be a monument not only for a san francisco, but the entire united states as an example of what government buildings should be and how much energy can be saved. thank you for making as part of this. [applause] >> thank you. one of the partners that has been here long as on this project are the architects. they started working on this many years ago. we have the principal director of kmz architects, and with him are two project architects. [applause] >> after nine years, you would think i would not have to put up with the abuse about what this building looks like. i have to pinch myself.

this has been a good chunk of my life, and i would like to acknowledge a couple of people. edgar lopez has been with me. bruck has been working as a project manager. my grisette, the project architect, and we have tom checking to back their, and brian stevens, lead designer. our partner in the architecture firm is miles stevens back there. so thank you all for all the work you have done over these many years. this building did not start out exactly like this. we started out with what we felt was a beautiful building, but it was not a building that was really trying to change the world. with the puc the building has been read up to a goal of being the greatest urban building in the united states, and i would like to remind everyone that that is the goal of this

project, to create a platform for new sustainable designs and a demonstration to the country that san francisco is at the cutting edge of sustainability. i think we will achieve that. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you very much. one of the ways we will be doing that again, is at an average building, the use in that building is about 12 gallons per water per day per resident. this building will be using 5 gallons a day per person in the building, and that is because we will be taking tap water, recycling of on site, using it for toilets. we will have low flow toilets, waterless urinals, all the things you should be doing in buildings today. one of our partners in doing all of this -- and without this group, we would not be here at all -- the labor people in san francisco, and with us today, the secretary-treasurer of the labor council. causin>> tim paulson, who is the

secretary-treasurer of the labor council would not appreciate that. the longer the gestation of this one, you would think it would not be timely are arriving at a moment like this, but no project could be timely. right now, the kids are facing their highest unemployment that i know of since the 1970's and perhaps since the great depression. a project like this -- the big infrastructure project will put some of the trades back to work, but there are no carpets that will be laid on doral drive. there are no waterless urinal that will be installed. no high-volume air-conditioning systems. nothing of the sort. a project like this will put trades back to work that otherwise would be close to starting. this project really could not be

more timely in that regard. and followed by some of general hospital. it would be absolutely critical. but it is time it in another way as well. local government here, city government, and the federal government have talked about the future of work in this country being closely tied to green jobs. the building trades are among those occupations that are most heavily involved in grain jobs, and the public utilities commission should be the organization central to the great majority of green jobs in the city, and it is absolutely appropriate that that organization, the public utilities commission, should meet not just -- lead not just by mandate, but by example. which we will do with this building. we want to thank the board, the commission, and webcor for its

assistance in getting this project off the ground. thank you. >> speaking of banking folks, there are a number of people here from the public utilities commission. i would like to recognize them. and shelby campbell, who just joined us, but shelby is our new key person who is our project director. we keep talking about this thing over here, and i should mention that this is from blue-green pacific wind turbine manufacturers, and they are in

the bayview district of san francisco, and we hope to be using their wind turbines on this project, so we wanted them to be here today and there went turbines, so you could look and talk to them if you want to during the last speaker today as our other partners in this city from the department of public works, and he is also joined by edgar lopez. [applause] >> thanks. we are really excited and honored to be working with our partner on this project. the department of public works has been delivering capital projects to the people of san francisco for over 100 years from small 10 and improvements to large projects such as the academy of sciences, the renovation of city hall. we are particularly excited about this one because, first of all, we have been involved with this project since for a much today 19 years ago in getting the design moving, getting the environmental clearance through, but we are also excited because

the building sits so well with the mission of the puc, and it really will be an exemplary building, so we have got a great design team, great construction team, a great clients, great labor support, and we are certainly putting our a team on this project. though they have already been reference a few times. it is their job, along with mine, to make sure that this project is delivered to meet the operational and environmental very high standards that the puc has said and to make sure it comes in on time and on budget -- or i guess we are now hearing at a time and under budget -- so that is our commitment to you. we want to thank the commission

and the mayor for their leadership to get us to this point. we are excited to hit the ground. thank you. [applause] >> before we have the official ceremonial backhoe, are there any questions on this topic that you would like to ask? we will be are around and available for any types of comments or questions anybody has. >> in a traditional building, you are paying a lot more towards the operations. in a building of this magnitude, we will be spending -- and this is verifiable -- over the course of its life, 75 years, $118 million last in terms of the operation of this building. that is why green buildings make economic sense. this is not just making an % aesthetic point for a point about the environment, it is also making a strong dollar arguments, and that is exactly

the direction we need to continue to go in. we have a certified requirement in san francisco, not for public but also private buildings, but we have never done platinum for an urban commercial project of this type, so that is exciting and complement's the project. this will be an extraordinary model building but just for the state but for the country, so it is a very exciting project in that respect. >> the mayor will be joining tim from local 3.