to be clear, if we do not make this change, there will be organized opposition to the bond. it that defeats the bond if it moves it from 70% to 66%, than the trails will get $0 instead of $4 million. i am not taking sides of the debate about the not areas program. the program will probably come to the board next year, and we will have a robust discussion at the time. the goal is to delink the debate from the natural areas program from the bond. i have been working closely in the past week and a half or two weeks with the department. the department supports this amendment. i have also been working closely with those that have expressed concern about the trail money, and the department has working closely with those who take the opposite view relating to drill

work. as i understand, we have achieved what i hope will be broad support around as modified approach to the trail money. the amendment i am proposing will keep the $4 million into real money fully intact, and will dedicate the $4 million to large parts in the city that have significant needs, specifically mclaren park in golden gate park. golden gate park speaks for itself in terms of the needs and importance as a civic treasure in san francisco. mclaren park is huge and a gem of a part in our city that serves neighborhoods that need more open space. it is also a park that has not received the attention it needs in terms of investment, and that has unending needs, including trail leads. this will increase funding to

mclaren park, as well as golden gate park and insure the $4 million into real money stays intact, and i hope we will make the bond even stronger than already is. so the amendment i am offering and have thdistributed is on pae 7 of the bonds ordinance, section f. it said that it will read as follows. trail's reconstruction, $4 million. the portion of the proceeds of the proposed bond shall be used to repair and reconstruct park nature trails, pathways, and connectivity in golden gate park and john mclaren park. after identification and development of certain

projects, and our mental review required will be contemplated. that is the amendment that i am proposing to the bonds ordinance. in addition, there is a technical correction to the bond resolution on page 4. there are dates being added. page four, line to. that would be changed to read as set forth in the general plan referral reports dated may 31, 2012 and june 20, 2012. those states have not been included before. that is a technical correction. colleagues, i hope you will support the bond and the amendment as well. >> bank you. we have an amendment to item number one and never to that we will consider after public comment. any questions before public comment? -- thank you. seeing none, i would like to open it to the public.

any of those wishing to speak to this item, come on up. he will have two minutes to speak. >>-- you will have to minutes to speak. >> my name is robert beck wiake and i missed a word for the park, and recently i code- founded friends of the oak woodlands in golden gate park, and the mission is to support the natural areas program management plan for that area, and to add community resources to this wonderful area and our part. 15 years ago this area of the park was a neglected, trashed area with all kinds of problems. there were lots of homeless transient camping. our native oakland was in danger of being killed of by invasive

plants, i'd be and all kinds of stuff. we have managed to pull that back, and the area now is thriving. because of the last park bond, we had a great trail that will start in august. it will go right through the open woodlands of. coca-cola came up with a leveraged $500,000 to add landscape and habitat to the borders of this trail. we are in the middle of restoring the historic horseshoe cords, and we were already gathering money to add more habitat restoration and landscaped enhancement through we're really happy with the last bond and resources that came through for that. we're looking forward to more of the same kind of thing, and i want to thank supervisor wiener for putting up with our big

flurry yesterday in the past few days. i appreciate that. i support the bond. as the amendment says. the natural areas management plan will be discussed later. i hope it will be supported by everybody. thank you. >> i just got a number of speaker cards. ms. stevens. robert bakewell. anita bowman. jeane mckenny. felicia ziser. >> any miss sally stevens and today i am speaking on behalf of the sentences go forest alliance. i want to thank supervisor wiener for his ability to find this committee. at the last week's meeting, recreation and parks said the trial restoration money, that there was priorities determined

in the 2008 bond for which trails would get money from the trail restoration projects, and that they would use the same priorities this time with the 2012 bond as they did in 2008. of course the 2008 bond was only four trails and natural areas, so that was a bit of a red flag for those of us that are concerned about the with the natural areas program has been using trial restoration money for things other than making them safer. i am very much happy to see this line which has been added. without this, we would have had the same language in 2008, and that would of been a concern to a lot of people. with the new language added, mclaren clearly needs work, in golden gate also. those are two of the major gems in the city. the forest alliance is satisfied

with the additional language. we might have hoped for more, but that is the nature of it, and we are satisfied and will not in any way opposed the bond. >> i have a slide. i will to speak to it. i am arnita bowman, and i want to sit the to the supervisors released -- for listening to the concerns. the natural areas is a very controversial program. they're people barely support it

and others of us the top concerns. it is encouraging we're starting to be listened to. i want to say that i agree with rpd and the representation of mount davidson being a signature gem of san francisco. it still needs to be protected. i think that is what we're interested in. there are many of the things that the natural areas are doing that some of us do not think are beneficial to the parks, and preserving those as a treasure of the sentences go. i just want to say i think it is really important that this discussion started sooner than later because in the 2008 bond, there's been $1 million fund already, and i do not think the majority of san francisco with -- would agree with the way that money is being spent. i hope the supervisors will really start to look at this program.

thank you. >> thank you very much. nec's speaker. -- next speaker. >> good afternoon. i frequently visit to-3 parts per day. i live next door to billy joe hill. i am speaking today in support of the amendment. i really thank supervisor wiener for taking the time to create a good, a compromise solution for the concerns that many residents have and the way that the 2008 bonds have been used. a number of the projects, which i have to say i like improvements, but they're definitely part of the structure of them is about the natural areas program, not about safety. i just want to urge all of the supervisors today to vote in support of the bond as amended, and i want to tahnhank supervisr

wiener and complement recreation and park for the hard work they have done. >> good morning. my name is felicia veigor. i have served as a district four rep. i support the 2012 park bond. and i did not support the natural areas program. i think it is inappropriate to actask taxpayers to pay or voter a program they know nothing about and they object to once they learn about it. i think the natural area program has done some good things and not so very good things. i think it needs to be looked at

and probably scaled-back of it. they have had 15 years to explain the program to the public, and they have not done so. that is why i think to ask the voting taxpaying public to vote for something they do not know about and may not like or want is inappropriate. there have been the three surveys in 2004, 2007, 2010 of what the public wants from the parks, and it is clean and safe parks to relax in, and they have never said take it down 20,000

trees. we want things to look like they were to agree years ago. icing that the public needs to be informed about this program, and it needs to be looked at closely. supervisor elsbernd: thank you very much. i have when the share offer and carolyn johnson. >> i lived on mount davidson. i urge you to add the language to the bond suggested by supervisor wiener. i support adding the language because it is a needed for step in acknowledging the legitimate public concerns of the activities of the natural areas program and separating constructive park projects from destructive ones. destruction of the forested areas, restricted access and waste of money are issues still

to be resolved. i hope the board of supervisors, mayors, recreation and parks department and planning department are willing to work with the members of the community to address these concerns. i wish to express my communication that you listened and heard the concerns of san francisco park users. thank you. >> good morning, supervisors. my name is carolyn johnson, and i live in district 7. i have supported every local bond measure cents a move to san francisco in 1985. i send my children to public schools. i know how important it is to maintain these important services and resources. we should spare no expense in making them a great. i chose san francisco largely because of the open spaces, and i chose to live in district 7

because i like hiking in the woods. i used to live in chicago and new york. you cannot hide in the woods in the middle of chicago or newove. the proposal to remove healthy trees in spray herbicides calls to my nature of do no harm. while i would ever pay grudge them a penny to maintain or improve the parks, i cannot support a bond measure that would harm the parks, and that does. i am not a minority in this. i think some have regarded as as a fringe group and not taken as seriously. i would hope the vote of the unanimous vote of the twin peaks council strongly opposing that -- and i think that it has led you all to stop ignoring us and maybe start taking us seriously, because we represent the mainstream and majority of people in san francisco.

that is why i support the language in the bond as amended. i am grateful to the committee for taking our concerns seriously and revising the bond language to make sure this bond will not be sent. thank you for listening to us. supervisor elsbernd: thank you very much. please come forward. >> good morning. my name is linda shaffer. i have things are like to briefly add. first of all, as a person citizen volunteers serving on the city park recreation and open space advisory, representing district 10, i am delighted that even more money is flowing in the direction of mclaren park as a result of this

amendment. i look forward to look -- working with the wonderful people in district 10 and 9 and 11 in support of this bond that will make them all very happy. the second thing i would like to say is of the city i moved to san francisco's six years ago, and i am an avid hiker and walker, so i have been looking forward to getting to know more of the trails in the various parts of our parks. sometimes i make these explorations on my own, and other times it is with out of town and sometimes international visitors. it is amazing how many more people come to visit you if you live in san francisco vs. fresno. it has become apparent through these various explorations that are trails and our parks need a lot of tender, loving care.

i support the compromise that has been reached now. i strongly support the bond, and i would like to thank everyone involved for getting as to this point. supervisor elsbernd: please come forward. please line up on the side. >> good morning, supervisors. thank you for considering the amendment that will give voters a clear word choice when they go to the polls this november. i support the bond measure. thank you for differentiating the project of the natural areas program are undertaking. from those typical san francisco residents, it will be paid for by this bond. for myself, thank you for the peace as they enter most of the parks that i visit, and thinank you for the birds whose habitat

you will be protecting. i think what brings people to the polls is a substantive and balding and understanding of the issues, and how they decide that is most often based upon their confidence in the integrity and skill and wisdom and at the track record of the organization's carrying out the projects that are paid for. i think that when this project comes before you, i hope you will involve as many citizens possible in consider very carefully whether you should put this matter up for discussion. it is very important -- it is a very important issue that goes well beyond the money from

respond. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> takjake sig. i was a 32-year staff person, a gardener and garden supervisor for recreation and park. for the past 23 years i have been a volunteer in the parks and open spaces. i am keenly aware of the erosion problems caused by trails in golden gate park and mclaren park. this is money well spent, and i look forward to when we can take care of some of our other open spaces, which are basket cases in terms of erosion. thank you. supervisor elsbernd: please come forward. >> good morning, supervisors. i am speaking as an individual

homeowner and property tax payer, and as such, i am pleased to support the use of on funding for the improvement of our parks. i lived a block away from glen canyon park, and i am very pleased with the work of the natural areas program has done, although i am aware of the fact that is not on today's agenda, but some people wanted to make it so. i am very pleased with the work proposed. i very much support what is proposed in the package that has now been put together for the 2012 package. i like to use the trails and mclaren park. i like to go birdwatching and wild flower watching, and i agree that should be a very high priority along with golden gate park along with the use of money to make them safer and more enjoyable. and i am pleased to support the portions of this bond measure that will support waterfront parks and open spaces,

especially the blue green way. i also want to thank supervisor wiener and members of the staff for the compromise measure that have put together and form of the amendment you are considering today, so i support the bond measure and the amendment. thank you. >> good morning. my name is engageglen gage. i am here to support the changing the wording for the bond. i love the natural areas as they have evolves. i am against the policies of the natural areas program, which would destroy the natural ecosystem, but i want to support the bond that will bring much needed upgrades to the parks infrastructure. we should not have to choose between habitat and

infrastructure. we can have both. this is why i support the proposed changes to the wording. if i am forced to vote for infrastructure at the expense of habitat, i am going to protect the habitat. we cannot change that. we cannot come back at a later date with a more reasonable approach to upgrade infrastructure and make the parts safrks safer without destg the forest. i want to see the exact amount of money in the bond that will go to deforestation. again the 1 percent signed, 20 percent signed. $4 million is still a lot. -- it could be 1%, 20%. thank you. supervisor elsbernd: thank you.

any other members of the public that wish to speak? >> supervisors, good morning. i am richard mcgarry. i have about 400 paid members and serves 4500 households around the park. i am here speaking as an individual, because we do not take positions on political dollars or candidates, but i can assure you the vast majority of the members support the new bond for november and supports the trails allocation and a clarifying amendment that is before you today. we send an e-mail yesterday, which i hope most of you have had an opportunity to see, and we wholeheartedly support this. the capital funds are very badly needed. thank you for doing your part, and think you to supervisor wiener and the other sponsors for getting us this far.

>> thank you, richard. come on up. >> good morning, supervisors. my name is ann gage. i support the new wording that goes a long way to alleviate my fear that the bond will contribute to deforestation. thank you. the natural habitats that support our wildlife are precious and need to be passed on to future generations. please give us the opportunity to fix what is broken and our parks without having to at the same time provinot using the toc chemicals. supervisor elsbernd: thank you. and the other member of the public wish to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is

closed. we have two items before us. we have a motion by supervisor wiener to make an amendment to item number one. we will take them separately. item #one is the ordinance. a motion -- motion by supervisor elsbernd to amend item number one. we can do that without objection. as to the underlying item number one, a motion to -- motion by supervisor elsbernd. we can do that without objection. item number two -- we have a motion by supervisor elsbernd to except supervisor wiener's m. and move item #2 forward with recommendation. any other items? thank you very much. meeting is adjourned.