November 19, 2014, city of San Francisco Historic Preservation committee please stand by. San francisco Architectural Heritage was present and expressed heritage report on three contracts and planning staff gave a short presentation. Committee member supervisor avalos did have some comments about San Franciscos program in relationship to other programs throughout the state of california and the types of properties that took advantage of the program as compared to cities and San Francisco and did comment as to whether or not the properties applying for the mills act this year were in truly need of a property tax break. As a result of those comments, the committee deciding to forward the contracts to the full board without recommendation which was disappointing for us but we believe well be able to demonstrate to the full board that the Mills Act Program is in fact a really important viable financial incentive for Landmark Properties in San Francisco. Sew so well keep you posted on that.
Assembly of the current board president. And, madam clerk, could you please describe the rules of this election . There are no absent abstention or passes. All supervisors must vote when a question is posed. The lowest vote getter is not obligated to withdraw their name and they will be included on subsequent ballots unless the nominee chooses to withdraw their own name. At any time a nominee may withdraw their own name, the board can adopt a motion to reopen nomination with a majority vote as the president stated. In the event that no nominee receives a majority vote there shall be an additional roll call until a nominee receives a majority vote. And then the supervisors who have been nominated for the election to the office of board president is supervisor tang. So, when your name is called, please indicate your preference from among the nominees stated. In this case there is only one. Again, if no supervisors received a majority of the votes well proceed to the next round until a no
San francisco Architectural Heritage was present and expressed heritage report on three contracts and planning staff gave a short presentation. Committee member supervisor avalos did have some comments about San Franciscos program in relationship to other programs throughout the state of california and the types of properties that took advantage of the program as compared to cities and San Francisco and did comment as to whether or not the properties applying for the mills act this year were in truly need of a property tax break. As a result of those comments, the committee deciding to forward the contracts to the full board without recommendation which was disappointing for us but we believe well be able to demonstrate to the full board that the Mills Act Program is in fact a really important viable financial incentive for Landmark Properties in San Francisco. Sew so well keep you posted on that. The second item i wanted to share with you was an item heard at the Planning Commission.
I dont think if it doesnt fall on the day that we meet we shouldnt take it off with the exception of the first day of chanukkah was on the five of december and i think we would have that off because i think the holiday is celebrated over a period of days but the first day is the most important and that is up to the discretion of the commissioners and im not sure where we could add anything back because we have the holiday at the end of december and early january, so we might only have two hearings in december of this year. Commissioner board. Yeah, i think we want to be. Respectful of the holidays that fall within that window. I would say we meet more often than the board of supervisors in terms they have weekly meetings and the last meeting is the 11 and we have a meeting of the week of the 20. No, we dont. Oh we dont . Okay. Even as it pertains to the september meeting i dont think the board comes become from the recess the following week and they start their recess before we do so i
The spur report, the spur Heritage Task report has a lot of great recommendations that we all agree with can help improve the historic citys Preservation Program and take those into consideration when we are considering these policies. This is just a refresher. This is part of sues presentation just to give you some context of the general planning. We have about 10 different elements. The preservation element will be one of those. Once its adopted and as you know these elements are high level visionary best practices sort of document where every decision the department or commissions make or any part of the city of the family makes has to refer back to the general plan and weigh and balance all the priorities and objectives of this plan with every decision they make. So the goal would be to take some of the policies that are already included in the urban design element, the Public Safety element that refer to preservation and we can flesh most of those policy out here in a more robust