tv [untitled] December 31, 2011 5:01pm-5:31pm PST
when you have multiple policy goals we all share. when there is apparent conflict , and i think they're necessarily is here, i understand the challenges for people. there are a lot of public assets we can sell if we want to fund this priority or that. there are a lot of different things we can sell and there is no way any of us would think about selling a lot of different public assets, even if it went to something as important as housing homeless families. open public space and open neighborhood space is finite. you are never going to create more. it's not like we're going to demolish a block of homes to create a park. that's not going to happen and none of us are going to support that.
in a way, this can be an irreversible thing once you develop neighborhood open space. in the castro, we have a lack of open space. yet dolores park amboina vista park and outside the neighborhood in different neighborhoods adjacent but the castro itself, it doesn't have much and core it does not have much, just a few small pockets, so this is an opportunity for the neighborhood. this property has not been sold. lot of people coming forward saying we want to use it for this project for the project, but this was in the surplus property program for years during a real-estate boom and it wasn't sold and we are now going to tell these neighbors potentially that they have to keep waiting because maybe we are going to sell it in the future and eliminate your open
space? i want to stress that the upper market neighborhood has embraced density. this is not a neighborhood as says can't build anything. when you look at the entitle them potentially untitled project between castro and octavia, it is 10, 11 projects, some of which are very large. this is not a neighborhood saying don't build a thing here, where is saying don't take away this neighborhoods open space. i want to thank president' chiu for his comment. if anyone finds that magical money where we can keep it as open space and still generate revenue for housing the homeless, have added and i welcome that. this won't stop anyone from
trying to think of that magic bullet between now and january 10th. i am opposed to the continuance. of see any reason to continue this matter and i ask for your support in adopting the order. supervisor kim: i have some questions. where their attempts to sell the site previous to this coming to the board? >> we were working with the supervisor to draft legislation to sell the site, but it never went through. >> so when we say no one had bid on this parcel, no one bid on a because no one ever put up for sale? >> that's correct. >supervisor kim: why didn't we
set up a sale to dpw for open space? i'm very sympathetic to supervisor weeder possible values over open space. district 8 has some of the least open space and i don't want to say either/or housing for homeless families or parks for our families. clearly klauer city values both. but this policy is clear stating that surplus property goes toward -- clearly our city and values of both. if we're going to transfer this to open space, and has to be a sale. i'm curious as to why when you came to the board this was not a sale. >> when the property came to us, we reviewed it for use as
housing or the revenue for housing. >> and john updike top acting director for real estate. this was originally the jurisdiction of department of public works. transferred under the surplus property ordinance to the mayor's office of housing. the item was a recision of the prior ordinance, returning the property to its home department -- home department. ordinarily, there would not be a payment made between departments. this is a unique circumstance in reversing a prior action. >supervisor kim: prior to being deemed surplus, this was the property of dpw? >> correct. supervisor kim: once the property is deemed surplus, what
do you think the process has to be to give it back to a department after it has been deemed surplus? you are saying we just took this of the surplus property less, correct? >> i think it is important to look at the totality of what is before you in the amendments. they have some flexibility as to reviewing the status of the parcels. this is a little different a normal jurisdiction transfer where it's moving from party a to party b. this is of little you need to respect. supervisor kim: i don't have an issue that this is going to be used as open space, but i have concerns about consistency and falling policy and process. either we are taking this off the surplus property list, and which case we have a process by which we do that and there's no sale, or is a sale under the guidelines of the policy.
i have some questions, but i want to state i support open space being utilized on this property. i want to support the neighborhood, but we have stated policy and from the best. it's pretty clear what it delineates. i do have concerns about the president's we set and being consistent. president chiu: any further discussion? roll-call vote on the motion to continue. [roll-call] there are five ayes and six no
's. president chiu: any further discussion? supervisor avalos: overriding the ordinance is not something on willing to do right now. perhaps there are flaws in the surplus organs and we should look at globally perhaps and that we could make sure it works more effectively. but i think there are many surplus properties around san francisco that are perhaps never put on the market. there are also claims that community groups have on the property for things that will be serving as neighborhoods and those are were the claims people might have. but i want to be able to protect the ordinance that is geared toward trying to look get short-
term and long-term rate -- the short-term and long-term ways to cover the housing needs. that was the intention and that's what i will be doing today with my vote. president chiu: any further discussion? roll-call vote on the item. >> on item number 35 -- [roll- call] there are six ayes, five nos. president chiu: this item is passed on the first read. >> item 36, ordinance excepting
the your vocable offer of public infrastructure improvements associated with the mission they storm water pump station no. 4. [roll-call] there are 11 ayes. president chiu: this ordinance is a fat -- this ordinance is pass on the first reading. >> item number 37 -- resolution supporting the adoption of the san francisco shares department and the san francisco juvenile probation department on a policy of restricting local funds to
respond to civil immigration detainers. supervisor mar: we are joined by quite a few organizations who work tirelessly to defend our community. i also wanted to thank the sheriff for as decades of work for our city and for being a leader on immigrant rights and human rights issues. this resolution supports his efforts of reform and challenging the policies of the federal level at bell make our communities safer and in fact make immigrant communities less safe and damage our efforts to create better community policing policies. this resolution simply insurers we minimize the entanglement with ice agents which i believe it or fears with community policing strategy because it increases fear in immigrant
communities when they will lack of forward to cooperate with local law enforcement. this resolution clarifies troubling misrepresentation that has caused many local law- enforcement agencies to believe erroneously that detainers are mandatory and must comply, but they are not. contrary to the false and present -- the false impression about ice, the cold -- it says that the dictators are merely requests. and that local law enforcement advise homeland security when an individual is due to be released from jail and local law- enforcement hold the individual for up to 48 hours for ice to assume custody. i urge you to support this measure and follow the lead of other jurisdictions like santa clara and chicago and a
coalition of immigrant and human rights groups around this country that have been ensuring we have stronger pro-immigrant policies in our cities and counties. i urge your support, colleagues, thank you. supervisor campos: i would like to be added as a co-sponsor. president chiu: any other discussion? roll-call vote on this item. supervisor kim: i would like to be added as a sponsor also. >> on item number 37 -- [roll- call]
there are eight ayes, three nos. [applause] [applause] >> thank you. president chiu: the resolution is adopted. why do we move to our 3:00 the special orders? >> items 38 and 39 comprise the board of supervisors sitting as a committee of the hole for a public hearing of persons interested in the proposed resolution establishing a
property based community but the district to be known as the fillmore community benefits district by re-establishing the fillmore$xc jazz community district. president chiu: this was originally held on july 26th and has continued several times until today. we will continue again today on the proposed levy, renewal and expansion my property and business approval -- business improvement district pursuing to the resolution of intention adopted on june 7th, 2011. that resolution also approved a management district plan dated june 7th and an engineer support -- engineer report. the proposed expanded cbd attains approximately to under
27 parcels. at the conclusion, the elections for a will complete tabulations on the ballot, including those received on this public hearing, and it will report the tabulation to the clerk of the board who shall inform the board of supervisors. members of the public may view the ballot of the basement level of city hall in room #59. if the number of ballots received at a hearing is set that is not feasible to accurately tabulate about today, the board of supervisors may recess the meeting to a later date for the purpose of retaining the phial -- maintaining the final number. a majority protests exists if upon conclusion of the hearing, the ballots submitted opposition to the assessment exceed the ballots submitted in favor of the assessment. ballots are weighted according to the proposed financial obligation of each affected property. the public testimony today will be as follows. we will hear from the speakers in support up to two minutes for
-- to disperse speaker, that we will hear from is vigorous and opposition, up to 2 minutes per person. during this hearing, their property owner wishes to change a voter has not voted, that person may speak with the department of elections who are just outside the board chamber in the hall and they will provide you with an affidavit and ballot. after the hearing closes, the ballots will be counted. before we open up the public testimony, want to see if the district supervisor as any opening comments. supervisor mirkarimi: we have continued this item several times with the hope and anticipation that the stakeholders of the fillmore treaty benefits district would be able to read marshaled the kind of special support buy votes to continue its role -- renew its existence. i don't think that's going to happen. after the vote today, we shall see.
unless there is some overwhelming reason for us to continue or recess from this boat from being declared final, then i will proceed with what i anticipate is the expectation that this cbd will conclude today. there are a number of reasons for that happening. two of them in particular. because the two partners who substantially hold high possession, a large possession of the votes because of their contribution, requiring certain trade-offs that i just don't think were quite principled, that, i think speaks to the need of the -- speaks to the native not compromising value. i'm more than happy to hear what public comments have to offer us and we will take it from there. president chiu: is leigh said in
the audience? i know you have been helping to run the process -- is lisa in the audience? >> i'm the manager of the community -- i would like to thank the fillmore renewal committee. volunteers current and past board members of the bed of the district as well as the dedicated staff person. your service to the fillmore commercial district is much appreciated by the entire family. they're professional stakeholders to manage many significant properties and businesses in the fillmore. including the fillmore auditorium, markets books, yoshi, the new chicago barbershop, the fillmore heritage center, the japan town garage.
this is a unique district and the only cbd and san francisco were there -- where one person represents 38%. yet achieved much to be proud of since thecbd began. we will continue working with you in 2012, even if the cbd does not renew today. continue working with you on the programs that will support the commercial districts success. cleaning and maintenance will continue and private property engagement. dpw has agreed to at the fillmore to its cleaning richmond in 2012. they will assign an ambassador to clean the sidewalks and remove graffiti from public places. they will do it four days a week
off friday through monday, a love o'clock a.m. until 8:00 p.m. the office of economic workforce develop will continue working with your district identity marketing and russian programs through the emblem edition of the film or economic action plan. marketing and promotion includes special events: march and committee meetings, and website maintenance we will continue working god business attractions and a british-based attractions -- neighborhood-based attractions. we will be working with the fillmore commercial district of the streetscape and had spent an activation of public space. we at the ash office of economic and work-force development look forward to working on the work we have
started to gather and the tangible successes since the implementation of the services in 2007. thank you for your attention and support. president chiu: let me now open up public testimony and call up any members of the public who wish to speak in support of the assessment district. if you could please approach the podium and lied about right and side of the board chamber from your perspective. each member of the public shall have up to two minutes. >> i'm a director of san francisco of open government. i am opposed to this for the same reason i oppose the ball. if you think there anything but a racket, guess again. if you as a private citizen try to use the california public records act or the sunshine ordinance to get any information about how these operate, who runs them, who pays for them, or it becomes from and where it
goes, try it. they will fight tooth and nail, especially if it is financial information. they pay their staff amid salaries, they appoint people under no control from this board of supervisors or any other city agency, they run it for their own benefit and sometimes to the detriment of some of the members of the committee. community benefit districts served no purpose. the library commission, i was at a meeting where they approved their participation at the local committee but the district were told a bunch of very tales that really meant nothing. we're going to approve this i did get we're going to clean the streets and we're going to do this. but nothing substantial. nothing you could look at say exactly what we pay invests $20,000 a year and committing ourselves over a quarter of a million-dollar for the next 10 years -- what are going to get for that money?
some of the people who are members of the public said you know what you are getting? you're getting private police who will move along the disenfranchised, who will tell the homeless people belong. in fact, that was one of the things they said about our -- about their ambassadors. one of the match was very proud of the fact he took a guy who was on the street, forced him to move out, and followed him are on the block to make sure you would come back and settle down again. what you're doing is enfranchising it private police force to work against the disenfranchised about list. [tone] president chiu: next speaker please. are there any members of the public who wish to support this assessment district? >> thank you. i do want to comment on by disappointment at the cdb not
being renewed if that is the case. like any organization, it had its growing pains over the last five years. but the idea of a community that is doing everything it can to rebound from the significant loss of people indigenous to the area, in a community that has undergone disruption and displacement of redevelopment, we needed an organization to try to coalesce and moved certainly be commercial corridor forward. i am especially disappointed in the fact that the two biggest landowners and the district, safeway and fillmore center, chose not to support and go forward with us. when i'm reminded of the fact that they got the land a steel
because others lost their businesses and homes, many african-americans lost their businesses and homes due to limited domain and, they were able to get land at somewhere around $5 a square foot and are putting millions of dollars out of that committee. money we could not even begin to think about if we had at that for them not to be willing to invest back is disappointing at best. hopefully i am wrong and have changed their mind when the vote comes out. i doubt it, but i am urging you to remember this in the future as you do business with these kinds of entities, you are going to need to decide for results, are you doing business with people will be good partners to the community in the future or people who are basically content to draw money out without putting money -- [tone] president chiu: any members of
the public which to speak in support of this district? let me call up any members of the public who wish to speak in opposition. >> i am as washington and i'm not going to sing right now, i'm not appalled but i'm tickled pink or tickled black that the cbd is gone. it was corrupt. let me go back a little bit. maybe the concept was good as rev. towns and spoke of. money is coming into the community. yet to understand history of cbd. this was created by an agency that's gone trade even people on the redevelopment agency are trying to get employed by the cbd. i'm going to prove to you in my year-end report that the west is corrupt -- we have the senior
citizen program, which have thecbd -- there are so many agencies are corrupted our community, no fault of our outgoing supervisor, to be sure of, but it was corrupt by individuals. reverent tones and mentioned how we need the funding it was good in the first five years. -- rev. jones. it did not work in the western addition because it was involved with african-americans, blacks, negro's were involved. it wasn't a mixture because the people that you gave the money and trust to, they were corrupt. [tone] myself, i had to sit down with the corrupt as of that old board and tell them i would not support them. most of the people that were elected office or the people
that were recipients of getting money, and talking about 1300. reverend townsend was talking about the filmore center and safeway, i don't blame them. i would not want to be involved with all that corruption. data need to be involved with all of that and become a nickel, dime -- they don't need to be involved with all of that penny, nickel, dimeb.s. [tone] >> last time we came before you, we were in support of the conditions that were bad and we were supposed to implement those plans and the renewal committee decided not to include the community and those plans. that has been the problem from the get go. we have not a market street area we have not a market street area where it's all business, we have