they did not reach out to me. supervisor mirkarimi: i am astonished by that answer, but i will take it for what you are suggesting. there has been not only an active community, but a very focused community in working with your id administration in trying to caretaker for the building. how they live on the same block as to where your church is. >> and the only person that has gotten in touch with me is mr. pritchard. supervisor mirkarimi: this is why we are here. based on anecdotal evidence and the planning department, if there was sound intent to work with the community, it still violated what appeared to be the disregard for respecting the city process in the removing of

those features. >> i just got through reading my understanding that i obey the law. supervisor mirkarimi: there is a point that there is a difference. but the point of spirit is that we broker the idea that there would be communication. you knew that the community had been partnering with the academy. why had there not been at least the respect to tell them? >> you are talking about a relationship with mr. firth, not with me. supervisor mirkarimi: you are saying he did not require you to do this? >> he did not require it or discuss it with me. the you have anything in writing about this? supervisor mirkarimi: you said this was new information to you, the collaborative spirit that you were to engage in this

level where the community was so concerned about the church that this was news to you? >> i am saying the only person i have met in this room, although there may he bbe some others, ws mr. pritchard. this should be discussed in private. supervisor mirkarimi: the damage has been done, sir. >> i am trying to keep an inner- city school open. i've sent them to you already. supervisor mirkarimi: in 2005, when i met with mr. firth, did he not tell you that was part of the negotiation so that the property would be retained for the enhancement of the school and there be a scholarshipping of students? >> he did not.

supervisor mirkarimi: i appreciate your time. [reads names] >> la, la, la. just kidding. i have similar comments to mr. pritchard. i am a neighbor of the church. i am an architectural and the easiest. -- enthusiast. i want to know why mr. pritchard has admitted that he has the ability to contact, why were they not contacted about the removal of the windows? why were they not allowed to stay where they had been dedicated, and why was the community not given a chance to

try to raise a matching offer? the father said that it was for financial trouble. that is fine. we can all respects that. at the same time, we were not given the opportunity to raise a counter offer. i must seriously question the logic of the stained-glass window. that had been installed for over 130 years. it is not only an architectural element, you can see it from the exterior of the building. it is as much part of the building as the bricks that billed itself. -- build it itself. the father's actions make our regulations moot. if city hall allows this to happen, it will be setting a

precedent. it was going to be moved in its entirety to florida, but now the city council members have wisely stated that they do not want city treasurer's paid for by city residents to be pawned off elsewhere. [chime] this treasure is gorgeous. i encourage everyone to go see it. supervisor mirkarimi: who is next? next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i live just a couple of blocks away. i am deflated to hear that it might not be eligible for landmark status because of the removal of the artwork that as part of the fabric of san francisco.

although the rose windows were installed in 1909, they were dedicated in 1910. there were two donors. they still reside in san francisco. i could not believe that anyone would mohawk a 92-ton altered. -- altar. and they were all memorials dedicated to deceased relatives. there are still some windows int he chur -- in the church that are not as marketable as the windows that were taken. they commemorate the costello family that now lives on the

peninsula. those windows are still intact, i think. i don't have much to add to the eloquent testimony before mine, but i would hope that the windows could be returned. there is a registry of windows from this particular manufacturer, and they were located in san francisco by the man that was seeking information -- [chime] we would like to know where they have wound up. supervisor mirkarimi: [reads names] >> good afternoon, supervisors. i am part of one of san

francisco's oldest preservation organizations. we directed our president to write a letter to both mayor newsom and others. i would like to read the letter to you. dear mayor newsom, at our committee meeting on june 23, the details of the travesty occurring at the sacred heart church became known. when demolition companies and property owners hold the city and county in such contempt for the collective architectural heritage can do not honor a stop work order, which are all the worse for it. the victorian alliance stands with those in the broader community that the man that

investigation into the actions of the academy and the demolition contractors. further, we wish to see the city filed suit against the perpetrators to seek restitution and return the articles removed from the church. respectfully, president roman. we have a response, and i won't be able to read it, but it concludes that they will vigorously prosecute this case. i share everybody's feelings that this is a qualified landmark. that the windows have nothing to do with architecture is an affront to anybody is logic. hair is the letter. [chime] -- there is the letter.

[chime] supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. then i will bring up dbi. >> i'm ben allison, president of the neighborhood association. we were also outraged when we heard about this happening in our neighborhood. many of us had attended this church and the families had attended the church for a long time. we support you in trying to save the artifacts from the church and we also feel the same way that some of the windows would have not been personal property of the church. anyway, i wanted to state that the neighborhood association did not have any kind of contact with the academy either.

we had nothing that came to us to talk about this. that is why we are somewhat shocked. holly support this proposition to try to get the artifacts haulback. supervisor mirkarimi: may i bring up the department of building inspection. are you familiar with what happened? >> i was the one that wrote the notice of violation. we had numerous complaints that there was work without a building permit going on, fixtures being removed. i went up there around 2:00 that day, and what i saw was an altar removed. all of the accused -- pews were gone, some of the windows were

boarded up. there is no structural -- you would have needed a building permit or something like you would for a kitchen remodel. supervisor mirkarimi: they are contesting the idea that they would need a permit. >> if it is permanently affixed to the building, it is a fixture. supervisor mirkarimi: i think this may have transacted before you came into the room, they said it was considered personal property. why would that be an exemption? >> i know of no exemption. supervisor mirkarimi: doesn't provide for the church or any religious institution?

what time of day was that you visited the premises? >> the afternoon. supervisor mirkarimi: did they honor the stock work order? >> they did not. supervisor mirkarimi: what is the procedure thereafter? >> they are issued a second notice and a reply card -- we placard the building. the police are notified. it is placed on the building. supervisor mirkarimi: once it has left the city or left the state, does it complicate war began the difference of procedure? does the city still follow the rules with regard --

>> the notice basically told them to stop work and they did not stop work. whether they took all of that, part of it, we don't get into where it went. supervisor mirkarimi: i have no further questions. supervisor maxwell: if they had gotten a permit to do the work, -- >> it would have been fine to remove those fixtures. it would have been a symbol permits. >> if they had just come to you, they could have removed it? >> quite easily. supervisor mirkarimi: the contention is that is why they did not inform anybody. supervisor maxwell: he said they could have gotten it easily. supervisor mirkarimi: i will

call the remaining cards that i have. mike baker, joan wood, fancisco decosta -- francisco decosta. david torrenheim? those are the cards we have. supervisor maxwell: you don't have to have a card. you can just come up if you like. >> there is no doubt that the church is a highly significant historic resource worthy of protection. there is no doubt that the unremitted removal of the stained-glass windows and other features have substantially diminished the integrity of the church. changes that would have been subject ceqa under -- under supervisor maxwell: ceqa -- under ceqa.

they are only effective if enforced. we applaud supervisor mirkarimi for his leadership and for his longstanding efforts to safeguard this remarkable community resources. we strongly support a motion to determine the nature and extent , and prescribe the appropriate remedy. >> i am proud of you, supervisor mirkarimi 4 upholding the interests of your district. it sounds to me as if it is -- the call to account here. it is sad it has gone so far

before you took up the cause. i hope you'll make a firm statement showing the you have some or the same interests as supervisor mirkarimi. thank you. supervisor mirkarimi: next speaker, please. >> i live in the neighborhood, not real close, but within maybe 10 boxer so. i am really horrified by what i have learned about this. our understanding is that the community had an agreement, and that they thought the building was going to be preserved with historical artifacts intact. i'd pull this out of the file here, but you probably covered it already. there is a letter here.

it says that the building is on the national registry. there is no question about whether or not this is an historical building and that the artifacts are historical. i agree that to say that these things like the stained-glass window are personal property, that as an affront to what preservation is all about. had to do so in the dark of night, not telling the community, locking the person out that did this as a volunteer? that is so disrespectful of the community. i really thank supervisor mirkarimi for bringing this to the board's attention. thank you. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. i called a number of names, so

just come up. >> my name is ace washington. i was bron and -- born and raised in the west addition. i did not come to speak on this item, and i did not know it was even -- i am sure they are appreciative of bringing this to their attention. i am up here on a mission of community reform. i am here to tell the city to tell everybody in the west tradition that we have a group had is called the crc, community reform committee. we don't need no permission from the board of stupid- visors. anything that moves, you need to contact the crc.

i'm the founder. i don't appreciate, and i know the community is unity. i hear you talking about african-americans. i don't see nobody representing up here. that has to stop. anything that moves, brews, s hakes or makes, you let us know. i've been there 56 years. redevelopment is gone. the city council left us like a baby out the sidewalk. i am telling you going on record now, anything that moves in the western addition of gilmore, -- fillmore, we must be involved.

my name is ace washington. [chime] supervisor mirkarimi: next speaker, please. >> linda chapman, i'm representing the senior houseing pl -- housing plan for st. john's methodist church. thank you, supervisor mirkarimi, for doing this. we can show you the good, the bad, and the ugly. we have a similar situation going on right now with an abandoned church. in this case, the church still owns it. this is a social justice church. it appears that they are telling them -- it is a church, what are

they going to do with the empty churches they can't use it? i would ask the planner, maybe it was dropped because of that state law. it is not owned by the church now. why don't people apply to have that landmark in the first place. and apart from that, even the church that is still owned by the methodist church is still subject to supervisor maxwell: -- ceqa, so forth. they are trying to convince the church people that it isn't. one of the things that has happened is that some buildings have been preserved. it is possible to actually re- use these buildings, prevent demolition and not actually trashed the building.

the same thing -- they have preserved a senior housing, i am sure you are aware. [chime] supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i don't reside in the fillmore, bubut i have been going to the church since 1976. i raised two children in that

i lived over there. my kids went to catholic schools. i did everything i could to be a part of the community, and is so hard that if somebody could get away with this -- they are supposed to allow us to a have the fiesta there every june, and they were going to keep everything. we were promised to the world, and we have nothing. i have been on this over 60 years, but i have never been so

crushed over five years of my life. >> if i may ask you a question please. first of all, the idea of having a fiesta and continuing even a limited capacity of the church -- did that ever occur? >> no, because they were trying to make it did jim, and there was going to be a removable floor, and they were going to have -- trying to make it a jig, and they were going to have removable floor. >> in the last few years, has anybody contacted you to let you know what their plans are going to be? >> no, i am on the parishioners board. they have my address. i give the paper from the

catholic church every saturday, so i have never gotten anything as a parishioners. >> you were hoping to be able to continue a relationship with the church, that there would have been some communication? >> yes. >> nothing materialized? >> i never got anything. we got money for fund raisers. they never came and had a meet and greet. i never received any document like that at all. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i am the chair of the board at the catholic academy. i think there has been some huge misstatements and misunderstandings. i would like to respectfully

state that we have not seen a copy of the revised motion, so there are a couple of points i want to make that may have been reflected in the revised motion, but we have not seen it. mr. firth has not been involved in the school for years. he has been out of the picture for a long time. the other gentlemen passed away years ago. this school is run by a private board may go -- made up by a lot of folks from san francisco. any agreement our board is not aware of, and if someone has an agreement, i would love to see it. this church was the commission before the school bought it years ago. this church is an on reinforced masonry building. it is not a church and never was going to be a church.

the catholic church has made that clear for the last two decades. this building was erroneously by the department. the papers called it a historic church. there was a letter written august 12 saying it is not his story. it is eligible, but it is not historic. i do not know if the new resolution reflects that are not. as far as the removal of items, you need to understand that the authors have religious relics. they have certification -- that they have religious relics in the altars. they have certification from the vatican. derailing his furniture. we did not take out the windows.

we took out the glass, and there is no requirement to get a permit to remove the glass, and the glass was not restored, and it gets back to the government's action to 735 about state law for a religious organization, and what i really think is that there is a lot of misunderstanding and facts not being properly represented. supervisor maxwell: would you go back to the personal items? >> there are three altars. supervisor maxwell: how are they personal items? >> it is personal property. mr. sweeney and i have a long co