>> mayor for the city and county of san francisco. >> tonight, san francisco has a new interim mayor. >> a few minutes ago, city administrator now interim mayor ed lee, emerged happy but

humble. >> in 2011, a temporary or interim mayor was selected by the board of supervisors, what is an interim mayor? why do we need one? is it the mayor's supposed to be elected by san francisco voters? how did this happen? let's rewind the story a little and look at the people and complicated process that led to this historic transition. the last time san francisco had an interim mayor was 30 years ago, when, in 1978, george mosconi, was assassinated by supervisor dan white. >> both to grow rather mosconi and harvey milk have been shot and killed. >> they needed a new mayor at the time. the board got together and appointed dianne feinstein. >> we did not have much to go on and looked at 1978. there were no hints as to who

put it on the board, if any discussion occurred about a process. >> what triggered san francisco's search over 30 years later was gavin newsom's election to the office of lieutenant governor. >> i put myself up as a candidate for the tenant governor, won, thanks to the overwhelming support of the city. >> that is when we try to look for someone to take over his final year of the mayoral term. >> it is clear we have to do something in san francisco. we have to pick a mayor. that job was not up to the voters but the board of supervisors. by a majority vote, supervisors are able to choose the interim mayor. that is when the fun began in city hall. who would he be? >> we needed to protect -- perfect the process so that once the board asked us for that

process, we could actually have something in place that was well tested that we could provide to them. >> mayor newsom would be sworn in as lieutenant governor in early january. so the board of supervisors had barely two months after the november election to select an interim mayor to complete gavin newsom's term. but how would the board do this? san francisco's charter guided -- offered little guidance. >> although it was obvious we would appoint an interim mayor, there was no time line for the two to occur. we looked to outside counsel for answers. they researched those questions. while they researched the legal angle, we began the research on the parliamentary level. at the beginning of the calendar year 2010, we started to craft a

generic process for a successor for mayor. being a parliamentarian of the board, i have been working on the process itself. i have been working with two one and parliamentarians in the city. we did some role-playing and tried to contemplate all of the different variables that the board would encounter in appointing a successor mayor. >> the first time i became aware of the process as when my editor and myself asked us how the process would work. we quickly became tongue tied and did not have an answer. you went to the clerk of the board of supervisors to ask, the difference supervisors, the city attorney's office how it would work, and no one really had the rule book on it, so they had to figure it out. >> just seven days after gavin

newsom was elected to the office of lieutenant governor, on the member 9, the board of supervisors began to grapple with the responsibility of choosing an interim mayor. >> colleagues, i am concerned about the transition to successor mayor, in term mayor, for the city in -- and county of san francisco. we need a collaborative process. the earlier we get started, the better. >> with all these are the questions about procedures, there was an extra twist. the city office recused his office. >> the city administrator recused himself from the beginning. he is running for mayor himself, so he did not want to have any ideas of conflict of interest. santa clara county will be providing information to the board of supervisors on how they can proceed. the board met again on the

clinic to revisit the issue. >> it is my understanding there are at least four authorities that could potentially govern the process we are talking about. it is incumbent upon us that we have a process that is consistent with all of those things. >> on the member 16, you saw the board of supervisors direct me as the clerk to create a process that the board could utilize to nominate, select, and appoint a successor mayor. >> usually, when the board rules are silent, the role of order is the controlling parliamentary authority. so my recommendation is that the sports that have a process, received a draft, and then make modifications to it as you see fit. >> how do you start the voting, when does a supervisor have to leave a room if he or she is nominated? at what promises to you begin taking nominations?

>> what is not formal this town that is manifested, the details of it. it is a challenge. the last time we did this on when mayor feinstein became mayor -- supervisor feinstein became mayor, under difficult to infanta's. in this case, we had more for morning. we have the ability to come up with a deliberate process. >> we knew almost immediately it would be a challenge. the charter does not have time frames associated with how long the board president could be the acting mayor, nor how long the board could wait for them to appoint a successor bayer. that was compounded by some questions that surfaced around multiple board nominations, whether or not they could participate in the process. it was not until an outside counsel was retained that some of those answers were provided, that a board member could not nominate themselves, that they

could not participate in the process, if neighbor interested in being nominated to be the successor mayor. >> san francisco citizens never had a loss of opinion during the public comments. several suggested the more experienced board to make this election, rather than the new board in january. >> there are two problems with the new board coming on. one is the experience level, but more importantly, there is a part of me that believe you should already know your password and e-mail address before you get to hear. that is the reality of it. >> the board saw this as when yk about your rules and regulations, you changed your start time from 1:30 to 12 noon. unfortunately, all of your cases have been advertised for 1:30. we need to take care of all of the business that does not require notice prior to 1:30 so we can be legal in your the

cases. with that, commissioners, the first category on this calendar is the general public comment that has a time limit of 15 minutes. members of the public may address subject matters with the jurisdiction of this commission with the exception of subject items which may not be addressed during this category. each member of the public may address this commission for up to 3 minutes, keeping in mind the entire category has a 15- minute time limit. i do not have any speaker cards. the development tax increment financing commission abroad [no]

indicated there were strong similarities between infrastructure development instruments and redevelopment tax increase in financing. that is absolutely and completely untrue. they, by statute, infrastructure development mechanisms are prohibited from funding public benefits or affordable housing development. the only possibility of using the infrastructure development instrument for housing is if in the course of devinfrastructures demolished. some of the funds can therefore be used to replace that demolish

housing. in the case of treasure island, there is of course no housing being proposed to be demolished, yet a significant portion, in excess of 30% of planned housing development for treasure island is affordable housing. most of it, rather deeply affordable. to contemplate as the presenter did the equivalency of this bonding mechanism for and the structure development with redevelopment tax increment financing, which in san francisco requires that the% of the tax increment financing in evan -- in any given district go to affordable housing is laughable. they are in no way equivalent. it is astounding to me that an agency of local government would even implied that it is.

that is why i am speaking today. the challenge of treasure island is that, given the state of the budget language concerning that basically dissolution of urban renewal, there is no possibility under pending state lot of initiating treasure island as a redevelopment area so it could be an approved project. so we are faced with the stark reality of having to come up with mechanisms to fund the affordable portion of affordable housing on treasure island or we are giving up totally on trial in having any additional affordable housing. i would strongly urge this commission and by the redevelopment agency, the former counsel of the redevelopment agency, the former director of

the redevelopment agency and former planning commissioner to give you were detailed discussion. president olague: thank you. >> thank you. for once, i'm not here to address you on housing issues. i am here as a neighbor near a proposed chase bank branch that is relocating -- that is locating a big branch without complying with the formula retail law. i am very disturbed by what appears to be on this project, a concerted effort to rewrite the planning code and prevent this branch from having a conditional use hearing before you. it's a major issue that applies not only to this proposed bank

but many other categories of what are clearly formula retail under the planning code and are not being treated as such by the department. the chase bank in particular, as to of the commissioners and the board of appeals agreed with us last night at a hearing, chase bank is a type of sales and service retail, a broad category specifically included in the formula retail law of the planning code. the interpretation being applied by the planning department would exempt banks, car rental companies, automotive repair companies, a whole host of what are clearly chain store businesses, what are clearly required by the formula retail legislation to go through this body for a conditional use hearings. right now, the neighbors are having no input whatsoever on

this project. there is also a major issue at this particular site, given the plans reveal the site is over 4000 square feet, requiring conditional use, yet the permit holder has claimed it is 3946 square feet and even their own plans submitted to the planning department, one set of them -- there are two conflicting plans -- one set of them reveals a bigger over 4000 square feet and planning is not applying the planning code requirements for the measurement of the space. they are excluding exit corridors and other common areas that are clearly part of gross floor area and clearly under the planning code trigger conditional use. this is a very disturbing situation with respect to this branch and neighbor this feels strongly about that and want nothing more than the opportunity to have our day here at the planning commission agenda item to talk about the

use. thank you very much. president olague: thank you. >> good afternoon. thank you for the opportunity to be heard. i live five blocks from the site for chase bank and i have lived in the neighborhood for seven years. i oppose permitting the chase bank to move into this location without a conditional use hearing. i want to draw attention to what is the improper reading of the law. there is no exception for bank in the law. for miller retail is defined as the types of retail sales activities or establishment and in section c, it goes on to give a list of types of businesses. each of those is defined in article 7. every item on that list has its

own definition in article 7. sales and service retail is included as having its own definition within article 7. it states a commercial use which provides goods and or services directly to the consumer. that is what a bank is. a bank provides services directly to the consumer, and directly to me as i am a chase customer. it also gives an express exception -- it says it does not include sales and assert -- it does not include a noretail use inaccessible to the general puic as defined. those are three sections as define you can look at them, it is light manucturing, ales, n- tail.

seicfincl not e of t three sections expressly stated in the exception provided for in les and service retail. if allow this exceion to move forwa, which is not providedor in the w, we are setting a precedent and a domino fect that allows banks like chase popping up nonstop in cities without opportunity for neighbors to be hearand a conditional use hearing is necessary. the denial of which denies me and my neighbors are due process rights. thank you. >> i live in the same neighborhood and ihave the same feelings. i have been there about 15 years and i agree that the case should be having a conditional review before this body and they are trying to avoid the public outrage required, the notice required -- public outreach

required. there are at least three other people who want to speak but i believe they have similar positions. i agree the formula retail law should be plainly read -- this is a large bank, a chain and it should be applied. the formula retail includes retail sales and service and there is no exception for banks. i agree with their analysis. additionally, this space appears to be over 4000 square feet. i went and measured the space as best i could from the outside. i used to be an engineer, so i know how to make accurate calculations and vestments. i also looked at the plans they submitted to the board of appeals. i remade the measurements and my measurements were accurate and showed it went over 4000 square feet and i believe the neighborhood met with the zoning administrator and even as sony

and administrators calculation appeared to go over 4,000 feet. then there was a back and forth trying to change the numbers. it is clear that goes over 4000 square feet and that should require a conditional use permit. not only that, as they walked up atm college planning concedes requires a conditional use permit that now are trying to change the plans so they don't have to have a conditional use permit. the board of appeals did not buy that and for all of these different reasons, this should be heard by this commission. we also have a facebook page for people to look at. i want to call your attention to another matter. the board of appeals last week, some permits were heard by the on appeal, one by me and one by jeff cooper. in one case, the permit was

revoked. in both cases, [unintelligible] so to avoid the opportunity for residents to appeal those permits, there is about 190 permits we estimate. second, in the rush to the equipment up, they did not comply with a number of conditions on the permit, including that there is supposed to be a safe, flush mounted, and they had not even painted some of it the correct color. t board of appeals was pretty upset and felt that the next one should be fined and i think that would be a good way to do -- to deal with our budget problems here. [tone] >> i live about two doors down

from the proposed chase bank on the other side of oak. i am a member of the community and feel we needed the opportunity to weigh in on this major change in our neighborhood. whether or not the formula retail law applies, it exists so the community can weigh in on the impact of the character of the neighborhood and to independently owned businesses have already been kicked out in order for chase to move in. a shop that has been there for almost 30 years and that means effectively if chase can move in, this entire block will be a gas station, a gas station, a gas station with a car wash, and a chase bank. the city has already invested in the character of this neighborhood. at about a year ago, we have a boulevard built-in trying to beautify it from waller to california street.

obviously, the city is invested in the character of this neighborhood and that is you should not be able to fly under the radar. another major issue being overlooked as traffic. oak is a major artery through this city for bikers and cars. we have already seen at the of arco station, the massive nightmare that has been a bike lane over there. there were months of protests and an organization formed in order for this problem to be addressed. i do not want to have to wait until there is an organization to address whether or not traffic is going to be impacted by this. the san francisco bicycle coalition is connectingwith the city master plan and has proposed a city -- has proposed a bike lane to run on oak in front of that chase bank where we could have lines of cars waiting to get in. this is a major hazard to the city, potentlly, and we're not even asking for chase to be

blocked from moving in, we're just asking for the community to have an opportunity to weigh in on this issue. thank you very much for taking the time to let our verses -- let our voices be heard. president olague: any additional general public comment? seeing none, general public comment is closed. commissioner moore: i have a number of things, if i may. last sunday, at&t has agreed it announced by t-mobile for $39 billion in cash and stocks. since we have a number -- since we have struggled with repeated applications for a number of months, i would say more than eight or nine months, i would

like this commission to have a separate discussion about the extensive list of the joint networks which we have basically supported but now i think this poses other challenges to us. i'd like to understand the challenge as comprehensively with some nod from the board because they will be asking themselves the same question in whatever different form they will ask themselves the question. i would like to suggest we all step back and consider what that means to us. no decisions have been made yet, but this is a very important ethical issue we have to go through. the second point -- i talked to you last week about the numbers of the u.s. census. i was able to get additional information on that and that information made me even more concerned. if i quoted to you last week

there were 31,131 units recorded housing in san francisco, that stands in stark contrast to a we had in the year 2000 where 16,827 units were reported vacant. an increase in vacancies from 4.8% in 2002 8.3% in 2010. -- 4.8% in 2000, 8.3% in 2010. we are creating a theoretical additional vacancies. i'm not saying it do not approve, but i would like to see something not how i look at the vacancy and what opportunities there are and what challenges are posed to us in decision making. with respect to what i heard from public comment a few minutes ago, i sit on the

treasure island citizen advisory. this group, together, tried to find information, what input structure financing district means. there is not a route -- there might be some experts who know something about it, but it's an uncharted tool from what i understand in the state of california. i think florida has practiced it and i am really not repeating any knowledge, repeating what i have been able to gather. i want to be respectfully ask for your indulgence. i'm not an expert by a long shot. but the question that was raised for me is why will -- why we will all be struggling to look for new tools in lieu of redevelop because we all need them and city governments, we all need to understand what it

really means so that we can support this in what ever way new support needs to be brought forward, particularly in light of we have a policy which is clearly stated. if that policy is challenged by new tools, we need to figure out how we formulate new policy to supplement or redefine what the new tool needs to do if we use it. then again, there will be many projects that will be asking for the same thing. the biggest one that comes to mind is hunters point. we have all made commitments to a number of projects along the way, which will probably have to use that tool the way trends are going. i'm asking this commission, perhaps using the suggestion to ask mr. marsalis to join us --