tv Government Access Programming SFGTV April 28, 2019 1:00am-2:01am PDT
they connect people to housing, and they save lives. our city is in a crisis. the waterfront is in crisis. people living on our streets are in crisis, and the need for services and shelter in this neighborhood is undeniable. over the past few weeks, i've heard countless visitors and neighbors speak about their concerns around the many people experiencing homelessness in their neighborhood or people experiencing mental health crisis on these streets or along the embarcadero. many of you here today have shared your personal experiences with us, including people who themselves have experienced homelessness. i agree that the city has to do a better job at preventing and addressing homelessness, and this navigation center has been proposed to be part of that solution, and i believe it will be. when i was campaigning here not too long ago, homelessness was the number one issue that consistently came up.
the east coast c.b.d., community benefit district recently came up, and homelessness was the number one request. there are more than 100 requests made to 311 related to homelessness every single week in this immediate neighborhood. the outreach team counted one by one 179 people sleeping on the streets in this immediate neighborhood, so the need is clear. i have spoken to people who are unhoused and formerly unhoused, both inside our shelters and navigation centers and on the streets, and what i've learned from them is that we absolutely need more navigation center beds. without navigation centers, people are forced to create their own shelter on our streets, on our alleyways and on our doorsteps. many of these people may have health challenges, they may be disabled. over 400 people have died on our streets in the last two years. this is a life or death situation for many.
it is imperative that we build more navigation centers, as well as put forward a citywide plan to build more housing. i believe this navigation center will be a place where people will navigation to get out of homelessness, where people can get home enrolling in benefits, health care, and access to mental health care, get help related to drug use, where people can feel safe and have access to a social worker to get them into housing. as these commitments are laid out in the m.o.u. and the good neighbor policy. i recognize that this has been a challenging issue and brought out a lot of strong opinions. as we continue to establish navigation centers citywide and
supportive services, we have learned many lessons from this process. i have worked very hard on a tight timeline to shape this proposal in a way to ensure that it will be successful, and it is very clear that all of us, from city departments to the neighbors here to advocates are invested in this navigation center's success. i appreciate everyone who has weighed in, and the work is not over. i believe that we can get this right, and if this is approved today, we have a responsibility to do so. thank you for your time. >> public comment. michael, brian, and judy. >> mountain view is building 144 unit apartment building
complex that's three stories tall for $57 million. you do the calculus math, you can build nine-three apartment building complex, and nine times three is 27, so that means you can build a 27 unit apartment complex and how's approximately 1,290 homeless people in this lot. san mateo is building a 68 unit, three-story apartment building complex and by the same response, they're only charging $57 million. with the budget that the city gives now with the budget cuts from the united states presidents, that means you could build nine three story apartment complexes side by side right next to each other. that's a total of 1,928 homeless people that's taken
off the street. homeless people don't need homeless programs, they need permanent housing just like you. this god damn navigation center, you can only stay there 90 days, and then you're put back out there, and you're recycling them. by the same response, you're not including the 1,139 homeless people that don't use the system because it's frustrating and you're getting better sleep on the b.a.r.t. train, going out to the international airport. you're using the bathroom at the international apartment in order to groom and take care of themselves because the services that you get in the shelters is not sufficient. you've been doing this for the part several generations administrations. the economic council added up approximately 28,200 homeless people in san francisco in the overall bay area.
and i want to show you these pictures close up so you can see what type of apartment -- >> michael, you're done. >> thank you, sir. >> thank you. appreciate it. [applause] >> no clapping. >> my name is bruce, and i would like you to delay the navigation center. you've heard from all the local residents, and 90% of whom are concerned. you've heard from the local businesses who rent from you on the wharf. all of those businesses are concerned about their thing. the community advisory group, all their feedback, and it's
been 100%, we need to delay this, and yet, they're moving forward. everybody is concerned, and the reason they're concerned, you won't believe there, but if you do the math, there's 1,377 new active drug users will be brought into this area. now i know that seems like a crazy high number, right? but according to the department of homelessness, approximately 30% of homeless people are active substance abusers, and each stay, according to what i was told is an average of 60 days. i was told by the department of homelessness, 60 days. with 130 bed for six months, 200 beds for three years and six months, you do the math, it's 1,377 new substance abusers into this area, okay? now i know is seems ridiculous -- when i explained this to the department of homeless person last week at
the cwag meeting, he said i was nuts. so i spent ten minutes taking him through the math. you know what he said? he said oh, my god. i didn't believe it, but you're right. it turns out that neither the mayor's office or the department of homelessness had ever considered this >> thanks, bruce. appreciate it very much. >> i have more. >> judy. >> my name is judy dundas. i've been a south beach resident since 2008. it's infurriating to hear city officials say that they have engaged with us. it's been nearly 100% opposition to this project, but nothing we've said has made any difference to this proposal.
it's still 200 beds, and two years with a two-year renewal. the safety plan is not written into the m.o.u., so if the police does not live up to its promises, we have no recourse, and you as the landlord have no recourse. the good neighbor policy is a sample. it's not in the m.o.u., so again, we have no recourse. the scale up metrics are not defined. if the thing turns out to be a disaster in the first two months, the city can still go ahead and scale up. i also want to show you some photos. so if -- if none of you have actually walked by a navigation center, you absolutely need to delay the vote. these are photos that i and other neighbors took over the last one or two weeks, okay? a chop shop, a bike chop shop
right in front of 5th and bryant. encampment right in front of division circle and 5th and bryant. biohazardous waste right at the entrance of the embarcadero with a massive syringe disposal. there are issues that any landlord would have to make sure gets written into the contract in the m.o.u. with respect to safety, with respect to metrics, but you, as the port commission, have a special interest, you hold this land in public trust for all of us. >> thank you, judy. our next speakers will be paul,
michaela, and hudson. >> the city is racing ahead at break neck speed to build the navigation center without any consideration of risk to the neighborhood. there's been no consideration of the impact in a densely populated area. all meetings with the city have been simply for show. at one meeting, softball questions were hand picked for answering. we were not permitted to speak. instead, we awere regaled with color siding options for the navigation center. the city has ignored all the other viable sites and told us that the only site in san francisco is seawall lot 330. the city is ignoring it and rewriting laws that would slow down the construction, actions that are more consistent with a dictatorship than a democracy.
san francisco police department will be unable to police the violence and the drug use that will occur. any assurance to the con -- contrary is not believable. this will act as a magnet and import a massive drug use population into the south beach. i urge the port to call for a delay to consider the impacts of this navigation center and the surrounding center. >> thank you, paul. sheela. >> my name is sheela, and i live at the brannan. i think it's great that you're concerned about the homeless, but i wish you were as concerned about the people that help this city survive like the middle class, police, teachers.
i've heard nothing about them. also, i'm concerned about what these people in the navigation center will do with themselves during the day. it doesn't sound like they have any way to really keep busy, and i don't see them having any responsibilities as residents of the city. i am concerned for my own personal safety, and i also understand that area floods, and i don't know that you'd want anyone living in a flood area. i want to give personal thanks to victor -- i don't know how you say your last name? madras? because you did respond to my e-mail. >> thank you.
mikhail. >> imy name is spencer hudson, and i'm a homeowner and taxpayer in this city. i supported and campaigned for and was successful in providing housing, services and funds and shelter for those of us that are homeless. during that time, i met hundreds of homeless people, people who were recently unhoused, and people who are -- who were in danger or are in danger of becoming unhoused. they are my neighbors, they are my friends. i am here to support them and this ethic to build a shelter. i am strongly opposed to any effort or laws that further criminalize or marginalize homeless people, and i am here
to say i know the best solution for this catastrophe that our homeless people are living every day are homeless services, mental health services, housing services, and shelter. i ask the commissioners to think about the people that died on the street, think about the kids that died on the street. think about your compassion and love for your neighbors and vote yes for this navigation center here in the embarcadero. thank you. >> thank you, spencer. the next three speakers will be cory, brian, and janet.
>> thank you, cory. >> my name is brian thompson. >> that was a good handle, brian. >> thank you. >> brian, are you going to use your two minutes, brian? [inaudible] >> okay, brian. all right. then, it will be janet lawson. >> hello again and good afternoon. thank you for allowing us to speak here, but let's face the fact here. the whole law on this thing was botched from beginning to end and the only crisis coming out of it was the trumpian level of crisis coming out of it. i would go onto say that woodstock was better, and i was there.
if the mayor reached out and said i need your help, we would have accommodated her request. when she finally deigned to make an appearance, she told a man to his face, i'm not going to talk about this. instead, they sent proxies to continue a well rehearsed script, didn't address questions, and didn't pretend to take notes of what she was seeing until she was forced to. those are the actions of a politician. a real leader would never forget that while they may be the cleverest person in the room, they are certainly not
the only person in the room. this is not the only location for his place. why not ask mark zuckerberg to give us one of his locations? the only action she wants is to stay in power. >> thank you. our next three is neil a linani -- there's two linanis here, and jennifer. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm neil. i'd like to cede my time to
andrew zachs. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is andrew zachs. i am an attorney representing safe embarcadero for all which is a group of thousands of residents here in the embarcadero. the port and the commission are moving too fast for this project. members of the public have not been given an opportunity to have any meaningful input on this project. from being announced march 1 to possibly be voted on today, there's no possible way a project of this impact can be properly considered and the public be properly consulted. in fact, the city has breached the brown act by failing to provide documents to my office in a timely manner. in fact, some documents were not provided until late yesterday despite being requested a month ago. that was after the time we filed our brief with this board
and there were hundreds of documents requested with that, notwithstanding the fact they were asked for weeks ago. in addition, what happens when this center closed? what is the plan for people who are going to be living on this site in two years or four years or when you exercise your termination right? without such a plan, the reality is the center is not going to close, this is not going to be a two-year lease or four-year lease because in san francisco, we are not going to take 200 people and put them back on the street after you've housed them. that is going to be on your folks if you're asked to displaced them. you should be asking yourself if you're willing to take that step in either two years or four years, and if you're not, you should be coming up with a plan now before the project is approved so there is in fact a plan in place to deal with the 200 souls who will be living at
the location. >> thank you very much. jennifer? who are you? okay. go ahead. >> my name's margaret lelani. i'm a san francisco native, a mom, and a professional. in my system, i operate in a system that perfect is the enemy of good. when evaluating an imperfect plan i feel like you have to go with an 80-20 rule in you have to have an 80% chance of success or your plan is not good enough. i live at the waterfront, and i'm not sure if you've been down there when there's a giants game. the traffic lasts from 330 time until 9:00 at night.
if there is a navigation center with vulnerable populations in it who need medical care, an ambulance is not going to be able to get to them. the city has given no plan for how they're going to get emergency services down there with that kind of grid lock. the city is getting more and more crowded. they haven't given us any success metrics beyond nebulous when dealing with people's lives. they want this to go to 200 beds, and that's bigger than anything they've done before. there's evidence that small navigation centers work, and that's great. they should move forward with these. but i can't understand how you can feel confidence in moving forward with this with other than nebulous metrics of
success. >> thank you. jennifer? >> i'm going to try to say this as respectful as possible. for me, how many of the sign holders are injection drug users. commissioners, i know this is uncomfortable for you, but standup to the hate. you know, like people, strong people, courageous people have stood up when facing hate. assuming your child is unsafe, even your pet is unsafe because
they're mereely near a group of poor people is hatred. putting -- yeah. putting their lives at risk, and you stand in the way of solutions? it goes much farther than that. it's inhumane, it's immortall. as a san francisco native, when my kids see homeless people, they ask me how we can help them. what i'm asking you, commissioners, for all of our children is to standup with pride and approve this center. thank you. >> thank you. the next three people will be debra baumer, bruce bales, and
john pashner. >> my name is debra baumer, and i live two blocks away from the navigation center. i ask you to delay the center based on everything you've heard. i'm concerned about the safety of the 10,000 residents who live within a ten block area of the site. many of these residents are seniors, and this area is home to one of the fastest growing areas of families in the city. the city's plan is to relocate up to 200 homeless people into an area where there are currently only approximately three dozen homeless persons along the waterfront in our area. i think this is both reckless and unfair. homelessness is a citywide program. district six has stepped up. we already are home to two navigation centers, including the one that was most recently
opened at 5th and bryant. now it's time for all districts in san francisco to step up and serve the homeless. two weeks ago, the giants celebrated their home opener. i watched as thousands of tourists, fans, and families hurried along the waterfront. this area is not only an important tourist destination but is the main area where our neighbors, the people in this room gather to exercise, walk their pets, hurry to work in the financial districts and take their children to playgrounds. it's difficult to estimate the impact this would have on the thousands of tourists and the residents who call this area home. this densely populated area is
simply the wrong location for a navigation area of this size. >> thank you. >> my name is bruce bales, members of the san francisco port commission and director forbes. there is a serious issue with homelessness, and i recognize as i've gone through this process, people are very dedicated to trying to solve this problem. they're given a solution to won't solve for them. i go past the bryant center, as well. things they say they're going to enforce, they don't. 52% of the affordable housing units were in district six in the past ten years. it's too big. there's only three shelters of this kind in the city. they all have curfews. the city has no experience operating a navigation center of this scale.
it's being pushed in. dogpatch is successful. 6 68 beds. it's at the end of a dead-end street. experts say keep the navigation center small. the managers say the dogpatch navigation center says there's two pages of rules. it has to because the population is so large. seawall 330 lot is -- the staff has recommended the value of seawall 330 lot to be reserved for high priority capital reserve projects. instead you're going to lease the lot without an praisal, lease or plan to balance the navigation center in a
residential area. fourth, the city has listened but been dismissive of the hazard. every picture you show of one cleaned up, we can show you another picture at the navigation. the best comment was -- >> thanks, bruce. appreciate it. john? >> my name is john patchner, i live at the brannan. i lived in south beach in the mid90's when there was nothing, just a bunch of crumbling places. it was a pretty nice place then, it's a pretty nice place now. this has always occurred to me to be an inherently conflicting land use. if it weren't, the city would not be proposing this truckload of mitigation measures. those mitigation measures go on and on and on. i don't doubt the city's sincerity about those mitigation measures, i doubt your capablity to actually
mitigate them, to actually deliver on your promises from what i see about the surroundings of other navigation centers. secondly, i have never seen a mayor jam down the throats of a neighborhood a project when the neighborhood was 95% opposed. just because you can be autocratic doesn't mean you should be autocratic. finally, this flies in the spirit of supervisors by voters in 1975 to give neighborhoods a voice in policy making at city hall. thank you. >> thanks, john. wallace, emily, and will.
>> my name is wallace lee. the city has held a dozen meetings, but they're for show. our concerns have been ignored and not been addressed. the only responsive e i've hea about drug use? is did you there's 7500 homeless people on the streets every night? well, that's a separate issue. the community is prepared to take legal action. we all know the mayor is desperate to get this navigation center built in five months, but she's not above the law. she can't ignore laws designed to protect the public to fulfill a campaign promise.
if the center gets built any way, you'll be hearing from us every two weeks about the consequences you've brought upon our community. i think the first option is a lot better. the city is a tried and tested public transparent planning process, so let's use it. thank you. >> thanks, wallace. emily? >> good afternoon, commissioners. thank you. my name is emily. i've been in the neighborhood nine years as a resident and a homeowner. we're not a neighborhood of hatred. we're a really inclusive neighborhood. most of the neighborhoods have a high percentage of b.m.r. units. we have subsidized housing. if delancey were expanding across the street, i think a lot of us would be lining up to help, but it's not dlaelancy,
it's a navigation center. introducing a population like this into a densely packed neighborhood is a concern. we're not afraid of someone who's homeless, we're afraid of someone who is battling major drug addiction who is volatile and perhaps aggressive. so putting it in a neighborhood like this is a bad idea. and putting it in a location that is transited by tens of thousands of tourists on any given weekend, baseball goers and concert goers and families and kids and cyclists pass by that location every day. so solving one problem by creating another problem for thousands of other people feels like something at the very least that deserves a little more time and a little more consideration. thank you. >> thanks, emily. will. >> my name is will everet. i live on delancy street across
from the delancy street foundation since 2012. i want to reiterate the delancy foundation does wonderful thing. do we really want to tell passengers on the new cruise, don't go beyond the bay bridge? i think we want to have the waterfront be a beautiful opportunity for our residents, for our visitors, open space, all the way from the golden gate bridge at least to the baseball stadium and beyond. so again, i think this is the wrong location for a navigation center of this size. thank you. >> thanks, will. next three speakers are garrett, marcus, and law. >> hi.
my name is garrett, and i've lived at the brannan for the past 16 years and watched it grow. this is part of a limited community engagement. in today's decision making world, we all believe that a decision making process produces stronger results than traditional chop down management. in this process that we've gone through, we feel pretty managed. and you as the court commission, you use community engagement on your projects. you have projects all up and down the waterfront. use it all the time. look around here. there's probably 300 people here. does this look like a community engagement process that's coming to a conclusion? it's just growing. this process hasn't been completed today, and the additional two minutes is not
getting there. i think you need to additionally engage the community. i think 50 or 60 navigation center is the right size, but 200 beds, there are just too many unknowns. thank you. >> thank you, garrett. marcus. >> you heard me speaking of my commitment to fight homelessness. you've heard my praising the mayor and her staff for their work in fighting homelessness. neither here or there. a shelter has no business on the embarcadero within three blocks of 10,000 residents, many vulnerable to habits homeless bring. you've heard me speaking of small stuff like homeless dogs which are often aggressive,
unleashed, unvaccinated and unneutered. you've heard me speaking of sex assaults, and the homeless shelter will house 150 owe sex offenders. there are currently seven registered sex offenders in our neighborhood. that's over a 20-time increase, and this shelter will circulate 1,500 substance abusers in the neighborhood. that's irresponsible and unconscionable. the community engagement has been a cute show of alleged patrols but nothing heard from the real demographics. an additional shelter in our neighborhood will set back 20
years of making a safe place to live. it will terrorize residents. but wait. the proceedings, it's from schooling, so the city doesn't have funds to open a school, but they'll spend $20 million from schooling on a shelter. observed, proper schooling is one of the key cornerstones to fight homelessness. i urge you to delay or vote no on this project. thank you. >> thank you very much. is there a -- i can't pronounce the first name, fute lawrence? being none, the next is suzanne, william -- laura fute? >> she's not here. >> i said it three times. suzanne, william, and carmen.
>> hi my name is suzanne algomar. i believe that no one questions the need to shelter the homeless, however, this location is the wrong one. i am the owner of a home at the waterfront since its inception. i have contribute today the port mission of development, the construction of the brannan park, and low-income housing in my plg. it is also -- this also uniquely qualifies to be a permanent stakeholder who bought into the port mission and waterfront land use policies which are not in alignment with this proposed use. i urge you to check the websites and all the documents that describe the policies for waterfront land use. i respectfully urge you and urge this commission to honor its commitment to the port commission and to uphold seawall lot -- seawall land use policies which would be violated along with public trust should this commission approve this proposal.
i also want to address the responsibilities and accountabilities miss cohen just presented. as you have seen, there's a whole chain of people contracted to take care of somewhere between security -- the security in itself, there's going to be a private security plus police plus nonprofit providers. so what's really accountable to me on this seawall lot for my private safety given that there's going to be allowed drug abuse outside and given that there's a huge epidemic of meth abuse and meth people who are boozing this drug are actually not in control of their capacities, and they do attack others. so who is accountable to me? is it the police? is it the nonprofit? is it the commission because i'm on the commission? who's accountable to me?
thank you. >> thank you, suzanne. william. >> yeah. i just wanted -- my name is william glasgow. i'm a south beach resident. i just wanted to quickly help you make a quick diagnosed by offering up the quick and dirty pros and cons by locating the navigation center on this particular site on the embarcadero. as far as i can tell, the only real pro is that seawall lot 330 is large, with reasonable access to utilities and is quickly accessible by the city at an illusory reasonable price because soet's owned by related party to port, which is controlled by mayoral appointees, which is willing to lease lot 330 at a highly
subsidized rate. now you've heard all the concerns on the con side. i'm not going to repeat them, but i think they fall into three major areas. one, it's not about economically challenged people who have fallen on hard times. if you heard, the delancey foundation is around the corner and has been a great neighbor for all of us, and we've embraced that neighbor. but it's about a high percentage of the people are going to be substance abusers, mental health problems, and criminal individuals. secondly, it's been represented multiple times that this facility is simply housing homeless people who already exist in the nearby area. this is completely false. there's approximately ten homeless people that live or stay or can be located within about three blocks of the proposed center, so it's
talking about importing people with the profile i just outlined into an area that does not have these problems today. and the third thing is that this center -- and it's going to be described more -- makes no economic -- >> thanks, william. appreciate it. is there a carmen? okay. >> thank you so much for this opportunity to speak today? this is crisis belongs to all of us equally no matter what neighborhood we live in? south beach is in san francisco, and san francisco has a homelessness crisis. i live in the tenderloin neighborhood for those who are familiar with it. it's been mentioned a few times here today? i live next door to a homeless shelter, and i have lived there for four years. i would be lying if i said that it wasn't hard and heartbreaking to see what i see every day. it is hard, and it is
heartbreaking. what it is not is unsafe as is being suggested here on these orange signs. it is not in and of itself to be unsafe to live near a shelter. it has not made me less safe, it has made me more compassionate. what is unsafe, however, is sleeping outdoors. people die when they sleep outdoors, and that's the real issue here today. so i would ask everyone here holding up an orange sign, who's unsafe? whose safety are you talking about? all of us are safer when everyone in san francisco can sleep indoors. thank you so much. >> thank you, carmen.
>> good afternoon. my name is sarah ogilvie, and i'm here on behalf of the homelessness, and yes in my back yard. i would like the opportunity to thank the port commission for the compassion and their goodwill that they have always shown pastor edwin passer and the church that i outreach for the assemblies of god. with all that i can, i entreat you to continue supporting the homeless shelter and extending the compassion that you always have to the 100-plus homeless people that congregate in front of the dog run on brannan street every saturday.
i know them personally. many of them are elderly, many of them are veterans. many of them are drug free, and they would just fluorish at the opportunity this navigation center would provide. i invite all of you to come here at the 10:00 a.m. center on sunday mornings and meet the pastor who runs the church, meet my husband who also helps there and just understand that the community that you have a lot of fear about here and you have a lot of misinformation about, they're not the people that you think that they are, and they would be very open and receptive to this opportunity. and i just want to say that, you know, my husband and i, we are taxpayers, and we live in
san francisco, and we feel like we do have a stake in this, as well, because we know that the port and the embarcadero are subsidized by state and federal tax dollars. and tourism, it also provides for us, so please, consider, everybody. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commission. just wanted to start off with a fact that was provided by tipping point recently. you can find this on-line. the majority of individuals experiencing homelessness or living in san francisco when they became homeless. in fact more than 70% of people experiencing homelessness in san francisco were living here when they became homeless. at st. anthony's, we want to encourage the commission to see this through the lens of san franciscans supporting san franciscans. we all live in the same beautiful city. we all are impacted by the homeless crisis, and every day
at st. anthony's, we bring in homeless people from all over san francisco to help serve the homeless. every day, we hear from folks that are in desperate need of housing, in need of supportsive services. we're thrilled -- supportive services. we understand that the stigma surrounding homeless folks is real, but we know it's mothers and daughters, fathers, and sons out there. and we encourage people to join us, join glide in helping and supporting and showing and understanding compassion by meeting your neighborhood and through volunteering opportunities. we believe that right now, we have a real opportunity to bring san francisco together and provide solution based paths out of suffering for all of our neighbors. h.s.h. and safe navigation
centers provide that path. today we have an opportunity to take an important step twoerow healing and showing all of san francisco that it's up to us and together we're giant. >> thank you. marty? >> hi there. my name is marty reagan, and i'm a director at s st. anthony's. i have to say i'm really taken aback by the hatred. i go to all of these meetings, and i feel it. it breaks my heart as a san franciscan. i work every day in the tenderloin. i live in the tenderloin. i have a son, and we feel safe, and we have love for our neighbors, and i don't feel that in this little section of district six. these folks that we're talking
about are families, 70% of whom were born here. most of them have lived here longer than you guys. those are people that need to be sheltered, loved, and connected. not hated, rejected, and marginalized. there's so much hate in this city right now, and it's heartbreaking. i beg you to come to st. anthony's, come to our community. spend time. talk to a homeless people. you use the word import? import? these are human beings that live in the city. what do you mean by import? they need help. connect with your fellow san franciscans. this is about people dieing, not your god damn property values. i ask you to help, not hate. thank you.
>> hi. i'm laura foote, advocate for yimby, yes in my back yard. i am very acustomed to being called an outsider for standing up for saying we need to standup for people that are in crisis. every community needs to be more welcoming. so many people are shocked at the level of vitriol and opposition that has been lodged against this desperately needed homeless shelter, and i will not say that i am not shocked at all. this is very common. every time we see a homeless
shelter proposed, there are people behaving this way. how can we make permanent systemic change so that we're not doing this? hours of public comment of the worst things you've ever heard referred to about other human beings. we need to be allowing homeless shelters in every single neighborhood across the city all down the south bay, everywhere in california, and we cannot continue to make decisions like this where we bring out the worst in people. we need to decide together we are all going to allow homeless housing in every single neighborhood. we need it here, we need it there, and we need it everywhere. we need to make these decisions differently. we cannot continue to refer to one another as outsiders. we are all in this together, and everyone needs to be
standing up for our neighbors. thank you. >> thank you. nancy, floyd, and allen. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is nancy. i live one block from the proposed navigation centers, and i just want to respond to the last couple of speakers to say our neighborhood is an inclusive neighborhood. my neighbors, they volunteer at st. anthony's, they volunteer at the navigation centers that are by the way in our district. so i take great offense to the fact that we are being portrayed as people who hate. but i am a business owner also in the district, and i want to address the economics of this deal because i want to address the city's claims that this site is the most economic. as the city, you have a duty to
make the most prudent decisions when it comes to lot 330. in 2017, only a couple blocks away, 75 power street sold fore $110 million. both properties are on the embarcadero, and there's only one real difference between the two properties. lot 330 is five times the size of 75 howard street. therefore, one can assume that lot 330 is worth at least $100 million used for commercial purposes. if you had land worth $100 million and entered into a lease on that site, it would mean $7 million for rent for the whole site or 3.5 rent for the year for the site that the city proposed to use for the navigation center. if you sold it, you could realize at least $100 million in proceeds. what we realize is that the city would pay only $440,000 a
year in rent. the cisubsidizing -- port woul be subsidizing the city rent to the tune of $3 million a year. >> good afternoon. i would like to thank the port for the opportunity to have the most community engagement that we've had through this entire process. i think that my concerns echo what a number of my fellow residents in the neighborhood feel is that the process that we've been dealt in this particular instance is one that's very top down, where the city is basically telling us what they already decided to do, and we've been playing catch-up ever since. i think my concerns echo a lot of what my fellow neighbors have said here, that we have a real concern about the issues
involving this particular center. the details have not been worked out. the plan that we've seen has not been even -- hardly brought together in terms of any cohesiveness. we're asking to take a vote without hearing all the details. i think all of us in the neighborhood, we have great concerns about the homeless in this community. i echo the concerns about the size of this particular center. we've not seen the city be able to operate a shelter of this size. they contract it out. there's still concerns about the security associated with it. let's have an actual dialogue about the size and let's make sure we scale it to the right considerations. we've not seen what other sites are available. this site was dedicated to be housing, and this site was dedicated to be able to fix a
crumbling seawall and the piers 30-32. all of those plans are now being put aside because the city told us we have to choose this site. why this site? why not other sites? let's have a dialogue and get all sides and get the city to address what the housing is in terms of that location. >> thank you. allen? >> my name is allen dundas, and i live at the waterfront since 2008. at times, it was noticed that there was toxic waste on this property and that remediation was necessary. there's no discussion at all about any of the proposal about how that's going to be taken care of. i'd also like to point out that
this piece of property is under a lot of laws. we have quite a bit of legal information for this property to be used. in particular, if this commission votes yes on the m.o.u., that is considered illegal, and it's against the law, and there will be a lawsuit that happens. i encourage the bay area media have their lawyers come and talk to the lawyer for safety embarcadero. we have got some good information specifically about why this property cannot be exchanged hands in the way that's happening right now. thank you. >> thanks, allen. our next three speakers, christie, james, and dee. >> i'm christie, and for seven weeks, you've heard me share my concerns about the proposed loon