i am sorry, but we will have to ask you to please find a seat. if not, you up to go into the chamber, because everybody has to have a seat. some of you might be here for the 2:00. it looks like it will be more like 2:30. if you're here for the 2:00 hearing, it is going to be later. thank you. >> how do you want to try again? -- and do you want to try again? we are looking at the altar. i do not know if you can get better light on it.

some of the best features of this church were removed without proper permits. this is certainly not against the law in terms of the church itself wanting to remove -- thank you very much. some of the most for a billion -- most resilience features. and i think those that own the church feel that they can stand above even our own building code was, that they would go ahead and remove those particular features that i think are extremely important to us and to the community. the church has been a magnet for significant light. -- blight. neighbors are stepping up to the plate to try to be the antidote to the blight.

those are the same neighbors that thought all along that there was going to be more of a community partnership between the academy, the church, and the community itself. but that did not happen. on may 26, the prisoner fines the window removed and open to the elements so that the church was in a compromise. on may 28, a dispatch my aid to make calls regarding the matter. on june 1, let aid was contacted by constituents that live in the area that all of the windows were removed on june 1. another call on june 2, i sent my eighth back to inspect the site and spoke to workers that were on site.

they came to the site, a complaint had been filed, and then issue of notice of violation had been provided. the issues a work order. on july 2, we were concerned how the building was left vulnerable. and to people that did not belong at that building. the fire department reports back that it was broken into, the gate standing open. and the department had to secure. my office informs the planning department of the status of the building. so we are concerned that this is a building that was much loved, standing well over a century that i think should be landmarked but never was.

it is certainly eligible. declared by our own department that this is a building of historical significance. nothing is stopping the church at all from eviscerating this building. it is part of the natural tension that is beginning to crop up because there are economic concerns of the church themselves and their relationship they have established over so many decades to be changing over night. the purpose of this resolution is to give voice to a community here. we are here to listen to the planning department and the department of building inspection who can help provide a little more insight as to why this is somewhat of an unusual situation, but one that needs some definition going forward

here. >> as supervisor mirkarimi mentioned, it came to our attention that there was some work going on without benefit of a permit. it removing some of the interior features of this building. the building was constructed between 1896 and 1907, it was designed by thomas welch. when those were installed in the 1909, -- to the windows were installed in 1909. they were shortly thereafter put into the building. the department issued a violation for removal of features without benefit of permit and for not going to the ceqa, the california environmental quality act

process. it would have to be followed regardless of what is going on. ceqa needs to happen first. in 1993, the advisory board had recommended approval of the landmark designation of this church. there is a designation report that was done at that time, and for some reason, that designation did not go through to the board of supervisors. it had been on the radar as being eligible has an individual landmark. we had been working with dbi to make sure that there was no other work going on without them coming to us first. we also contacted the academy to try to set up some meetings that we can try to resolve this issue. i do not know if dbi is here. >> just one question.

could you explain why it was on its way to being landmark but something happened? can you talk about what that was? >> unfortunately, i can't. i need to pull the files from 1993 to see if it made it here. at that time, it was owned by the archdiocese. if they had objected to the designation, it could have just failed when it went to the planning commission. i don't have specific answers. >> there is no other reason besides processing issues? >> next, i would call christopher van plank. and after mr. van plank, julie

welsh and arthur leevy. >> my name is christopher, i am at architectural historian. in 2009, it resulted in the listing of this fall determination of eligibility for listing in the national register. the building was determined eligible for listing under criterion c. sacred heart was designed in 1896 and constructed in 1898. thomas welch designed many

buildings for the archdiocese. it was enlarged with the addition of a sanctuary that was part of the original design. you can see the article that shows that alteration. the city was largely destroyed, but the church or escaped destruction and it remained open providing spiritual and physical sustenance. the church was basically finished which included the windows, the altars, and the painting of jesus. i have a couple of slides. like the majority of other catholic churches, her heart was designed with the revival style.

not to go into details of the style, but the origins date back to the earliest christian architecture. during the course of my resrch -- [chime] i discovered that the design source is probably not this but likely the memorial church in new york city. i'm just wanted to wrap up by saying it is a landmark of the most fundamental way. welch designed it from the heart of teh c -- the city. that concludes my presentation. >> would still be possible to

land market? >> -- would it still be possible to landmark it? >> doubtful. the interior was one of the most important parts of the design. >> i am julie welsh, the great granddaughter of the architect. i have a letter that and submitted and she asked that i read it on her behalf. i was wondering if i might have a bit over the two minutes? supervisor maxwell: recant do that. anyone can ask you a question, and if somebody has a question for you, you get into the question.

-- can answer the question. >> my parents are native san franciscans. my aunt published a book that is in the library of about the architect. we are requesting that sacred heart be preserved. thomas john welsh was a prolific architect and my aunt says, please do what you can to save the church. its architecture is unique and is only one of two buildings left of its kind. it is one of the few remaining churches designed by my great- grandfather. in the late 1800's, he was one of the pioneer architects having

lived in the city since he arrived at the age of eight. he worked his way up to become a prolific architect designing over 700 buildings in california. the majority of these buildings are in san francisco. he designed schools and many homes for the common person. he also designed 10 of the early churches. it is the only one still standing in san francisco. all of the other churches were destroyed by the fire and earthquake of 2006. he dedicated his life to designing buildings -- [chime] supervisor maxwell: those of you without a seat will have to go into the chamber. the hearing on the hiring, employment, will not be until about 2:30. please go into the chamber.

it's item number 6. >> that is important to note that thomas welsh was an architect for the people. his building is truly magnificent and unique. in his eulogy, he was described at one time to be the most noted architect of california. sega heart church is the only one left standing, and what is important to know is that sacred heart church is only one of two italian churches west of the mississippi. it has huge historical significance. we request that sacred heart to be preserved not only for thomas welsh's legacy, but that of all

san franciscans. supervisor maxwell: there are a number of people standing. you will have to go to the chamber. the hearing will be around 2:00 unless you're here to testify on item number five. if you are here for item number six, i have to ask you to go to the chamber. thank you very much. >> good afternoon. i have worked with the "save our sacred heart" organization. why do people feel so strongly about sacred heart? it is a first-rate building, but there are a lot of other first-

rate buildings. what is special about this church is it was not built for the wealthy, the privileged, or the powerful. it was built for working people. it served the community for over 100 years, a community of workers. it was a refuge for whoever belongs to that community. first of the irish, the african americans, then the latinos and phillipinos. in particular, they took solace from the windows. on the left, you can see the rose window. on the right, you can see the whole. in may of 2010, the window and another one were torn out without permits, and stopped work order was ignored.

the parishioners took solace, comfort, and memory from the court this alters the ec here on the left. in june, they were ripped out, leaving a gaping hole the you see on the right. can we say that these are not part of the heritage, legacy, and birthright? i think not. thousands of people kneel here for decades. going, going, gone for profit. as far as we can tell, it was shipped to minnesota. the people who did this are the kind of people that would go through your drawers to look for anything that valuable, take it, and leave. [chime]

will we respond to this outrage? we certainly hope so. this resolution is a start. supervisor mirkarimi: considering the limitations that the law has with regard to compelling that the property owners of this building is only in violation of not complying with the stop orders and so removing the assets. what do you suggest that the city does? >> respectfully disagree that those are the only issues here. there are issues of property ownership. for example, these older is were given to the church has a gift from a family in memory of other

family members. there is a question under california property law whether those belonged to the church. there is the question that whether there is compliance with the comprehensive environmental quality act. that at least in the city and the attorney could pursue -- this resolution does not ask the city attorney necessarily to take any action. it does express the high concern of the board of supervisors for the actions that were taken in the removal of these treasures and asked the department of building inspection and the city attorney's office to investigate and consider to see what further actions can be taken. supervisor mirkarimi: you have been lending your time at a

number of projects, and there has been at least an understood agreement over the last several years of trying to have some collaborative relationship between the school operators, the property owners, and community members. are you aware of any communication by the church or the school about their unexpected demolition of those features? >> it came as a complete shock. as you pointed out, the agreement that was made back in 2005 was that the church was going to be retained for the use of the academy. there were plans that showed the retention of the altars, the windows, features of the use of the church for the benefit of the academy. when it was discovered that the

windows have been removed, it was a complete shock, totally contrary to the agreements that had been in place at that point. >> and what would you say that this is the last point, they may have to unload property. >> it is not the church, but leaving that point aside, whoever owned this, they are subject to building codes. there needs to be a process in the building this important to determine whether these treasures should remain where they are and are not shipped off to minnesota as they were.

even assuming that those are legitimate arguments, those arguments need to be considered in a public forum. there is no basis for taking the law into one's own hands in the dead of night, ripping treasures out and shipping them to point an unknown. how -- points unknown. supervisor mirkarimi: i would like to call my next speakers. >> hello. my name is mearl easton. i have lived there for 25 years. it is 11 blocks from my house. i am an architect and a past president of the victorian alliance. i am speaking for myself in favor of the resolution.

i was abroad when i learned of the destruction of the interior. i was studying renaissance art in this city where revered and preserve the churches are in every block while in my own neighborhood, one of the most beautiful churches was being dismantled. how's that for a san francisco and for us. the artwork, was paid for by the parishioners and the community. small the nations were sought door by door. the marble for the three sacred heart alters was quarried in italy by the finest

sculptors. they were designed and installed by one of san francisco's best artists. he supervised the paintings in the synagogue. the buildings were constructed during the same time and made of the finest materials. both withstood the 1906 earthquake. the first time i entered sacred heart, i was hot but -- awed by the beauty. [chime] supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i'm a first generation san

franciscan driectly across from the parish. i was baptized there, and everything -- all of my funerals -- all of our funerals were held there. in 2005, we met with the academy in good faith. they showed us plans to help restore and protect the architecture of the building so that when we saw the building had been ransacked, we were in complete shock. there was no dialogue. we were left to drift without being notified that our families and our families architecture and archival

material was being stripped and sent away without a word. i am here to support the resolution and continue the dialogue to help restore some kind of sanity to this complete disaster. it is a disaster. the owners of the academy must be held accountable for their refusal to stop and a baby work orders. this makes the actions of our historical preservation a moot point. why? they don't have to hold up the laws the way the rest of us do? thank you very much. supervisor mirkarimi: next speaker please? >> i am robert prichard of the sacred heart gospel choir and

community. one of three churches to welcome most in our afro- centric worship. our ceiling which only has cosmetic and structural damage, the insurance would have covered at 140,000. not allowed to repair, all we got, and the property was purchased in mid 2005 with the intent of the chapel for the retention of all artifacts. in my personal conversations, he expressed wanting to leave it better than when he purchased it. we have successfully blocked the archdiocese with an injunction from sale or removal of the

altars and roads. i gained his trust as well as his vice president. i was allowed to have my keys back to maintain my upkeep of the church since i have in november of 1980. i happily donate my time, my trust, my tools, and personally purchasing supplies to repair the roof. i also did weekly graffiti abatement. i did this so it was not cited and fined by the city. i paid for the repairs and was called. the sale of property was announced. [chime] >> if i may ask a question,

would it be safe to say you have been a volunteer that has been helping caretaker for the church? >> and with the sanction of mr. firth. i was called multiple times by the deed of the academy -- dean of the academy. i was in close contact with them. i have the ability to get into the property until april 4 when the leakeys were changed. that is when i alerted everyone that the fear for the worst should happen. >> were you notified in advance of that change? let me finish my question. was there going to be any kind of work being done? were you ever paid? >> i did all gladly. >>