say one thing and have the other way. the city wants to see the academy thrive. the resolution complex absolutely an directly with the survival of -- conflicts with the survival of the academy. i tell you, the archdiocese is unique unto its own. it is not like any other country in the world. supervisor dufty: i wondered if i could ask miss sullivan to comment. it would help me with the background. >> thank you. i'm from the planning department. this church does have a history with the planning department. the landmark preservation

advisory board initiated landmark designation of this church in 2000. it started to go through the legislative process, ultimately trying to be approved by this board of supervisors, but at that time, during that process, there was a state law that was passed that prohibited properties owned by religious institutions from being locally designated landmarks, so that process stock. we then got involved with the church several years later. in 2004-2005, when the church was sold from the archdiocese to a private institution or private owner. we were contacted by several community members as well as supervisor mirkarimi's office asked what the permitting process was for the church to do any kind of alterations -- as to what the permitting process was for the church to do any kind of alterations.

then, it was very quiet until about last spring when we received word that the academy had removed many of the significant interior architectural features. we have worked with dbi and issued notices of violation. they did issue a stop work orders. since then, the director has issued some letters to the academy to try to get them to come to the table to discuss possible landmark designation, which is still possible for the exterior of the church, and/or rectifying some of the issues and making sure there is a compatible replacement. i can go through additional questions if you would like. >> one question i would have is that the resolution calls on the city attorney to investigate and or take legal action -- and/or

take legal action. are these steps that the planning department is contemplating if there is not satisfaction with respect to the concerns that have been raised with the academy? is this something that, irrespective of the resolution, would undoubtedly happened as a result of major code violations? >> the resolution mainly speaks for the department of building inspection and they're permitting process. they are here to walk through that. the planning department has issued a notice of violation, which is a little more complicated and slower. we will be following up. there are times. the property owner can appeal our letters and/or commit to compliance. obviously, we would rather them come into compliance by somehow replicating the rose window with something similar or more historically accurate -- by

somehow replacing the rose window with something similar or more historically accurate. it allows the interiors of particular buildings, including publicly owned or publicly accessible buildings to be reviewed under ceqa. again, for the interior, there is little we can do, but in terms of the exterior, the rose window, which is a significant feature of that church, we would ask them to put something more compatible in, and if not, we would proceed with further enforcement actions. supervisor dufty: could i ask if someone from the department of building inspection could come up and maybe respond to the same questions? supervisor chiu: mr. sweeney. >> good afternoon, supervisors. what was your question again? supervisor chiu: part of the

language of the resolution calls on the city attorney to investigate, publicly report on, and take action on violations of laws. this sounds similar to our code enforcement process, which would take place, i would imagine, in an instance where there are major violations that take place, and i wondered if you could reflect on, from the standpoint of the building inspector and's point of view, if there is an effort by the institution to come under greater compliance or ameliorate some of their issues, that this could be pursued for code enforcement? >> yes, there was a violation. the violation was that they should have obtained a building permit to remove the finishes. the altars, the pews -- anything that is nailed in place becomes a fixture. to remove that, you need a

permit. it becomes something like a kitchen remodel. when you take out your cabinets, you need a building permit. >> in that case, the cabinets were viewed as being significant? is that a case where we might say no? >> the building department does not really go there. the building code is simply you either need a permit to do the work for you do not, and that is where planning comes in. they are the ones who tell you what is and is not significant. >> thank you so much. supervisor chiu: any further discussion on this item? colleagues? if we could take a roll-call vote on the resolution. >> on item 32, maxwell no. mirkarimi aye. alioto-pier no. avalos aye. campos aye. chiu aye. chu no.

daly aye. dufty no. elsbernd no. mar aye. there are six ayes and five nos. supervisor chiu: this resolution is adopted. item 33. >> item 33 is a motion confirming the mayor's appointment of art torres to the san francisco public utilities commission. on item 33, maxwell aye. mirkarimi aye. alioto-pier aye. avalos aye. campos aye. chiu aye. chu aye. daly aye. dufty aye. elsbernd aye. mar aye. there are 11 ayes.

supervisor chiu: this motion is approved. item 34. >> item 34 is from the rules committee without recommendation. motion confirming the appointments of larry del carlo and larry mazzola, jr. to the treasure island development authority board of directors. supervisor daly: by just want to raise my voice in opposition to these items in reference to my comments of last week -- i just want to raise my voice in opposition. supervisor campos: i just wanted to reiterate what i have indicated before, which is i think that we should move the completion of these appointments collectively. because of that, i think that since we do not have a deadline with respect to this set of appointments, which are knock --

legally, we are not required to act today, i would simply make a motion to continue these items so that they can be brought together at the same time that the vacancy for the treasure island resident is filled. i'm not necessarily against these appointments, but i think that -- because i think each individual has something to offer, but i think it makes sense that we vote on them together. as the mayor indicated, once the treasure island resident is brought forward. make a motion to continue, i guess, until next week. actually, i do not know how long it would take. two weeks? the first meeting in december? supervisor chiu: supervisor campos is making a motion to continue this item until

december 7. that is seconded by supervisor mirkarimi. supervisor mar: in the rules committee, i supported moving this forward, knowing that the mayor's office committed to appointing a resident from treasure island as soon as possible, so it seems like the deadline of november 15, i believe, has passed, so there is a number of applicants from treasure island, and my understanding was that there will be an immediate appointment as soon as possible. is that correct? supervisor chiu: ms. charo -- ms. terrell? >> that is correct. the application period completed yesterday. supervisor dufty: i just wanted to reiterate the point that was just raised. i received e-mail from the mayor's appointment coordinator,

indicating that they did close applications, and certainly, i have received e-mails from many residents of treasure island, very supportive of 01 -- owen stephens, so i have expressed my hope that what has been regarded as good work on his part will be recognized within the framework of other candidates that are applying. while i will not support the motion to continue it because i believe these two excellent nominees that i'm ready to vote for -- i support that there needs to be both a resident, and certainly, there is a candidate that has demonstrated good work on this panel. supervisor mirkarimi: i will support the motion to continue, and i want to reiterate that stemming from the boat, the conversation we had last year about the other candidates before us that succeeded on to the tida board, that they be careful that politics are put by

the side in this case because strong voices send a signal to the mayor's office that a strong representative who resides on treasure island be appointed, which we understand is the intention and the gesture that is forthcoming, but it also confounds this thinking when in fact they already have that person. if that person was not to be reappointed, and if that person, for some unexplained reason, fell out of the good grace of the mayor in that regard, then we can only deduce that politics is being played here, so let's make sure that we have sound representation on what is obviously a critically important board, and let's just have the proper complements as we see them. i look forward to this legislation coming back up in a couple of weeks or so.

supervisor campos: again, i do not want to belabor the point, but my motion to continue is in no way an indication that i would not support these individuals. just simply a recognition of the importance of having the presence of a resident of the island as soon as possible. i just want to make that very clear because i know that the individuals involved have a lot of things that they bring to the table. supervisor chiu: with that, why don't we take a roll call on the motion to continue? >> maxwell no. mirkarimi aye. alioto-pier no. avalos aye. campos aye. chiu no. chu no. daly aye. dufty no. elsbernd no. mar no.

there are four ayes and seven nos. supervisor chiu: motion to continue fails. the underlying motion. >> maxwell aye. mirkarimi aye. alioto-pier aye. avalos no. campos aye. chiu aye. chu aye. daly no. dufty aye. elsbernd aye. mar aye. there are nine ayes and two no. supervisor chiu: motion is approved. why don't we go now to our 3:00 special order? >> items 35 and 36 tons to the special order at 3:00 p.m., the board of supervisors sitting as a committee of the whole. item 35 is a hearing of persons interested in a proposed

resolution to establish the ocean avenue community benefits district. item 36 is the resolution establishing the ocean avenue benefits district, ordering the levee and collection of assessments against property located in the district for 15 years, commencing with fiscal year 2010-2011. supervisor avalos: thank you. colleagues, ocean avenue, along the english side line, has seen some dramatic changes over the last few years -- along the e ngleside line. last year, the plan was approved to set forth scores of units of transit-oriented development. last year as well, we saw the opening of the branch library. there are great streetscape improvements happening, and the latest major development along the corridor between -- on ocean

avenue between 280 and lobos is the ocean avenue community benefits district. the effort has been led by the ocean avenue revitalization collaborative, and the leader is here in the audience, as well as members of the alumni neighbors in action, principally dan weaver and hal -- al harris, who are both here as well. has been an arduous and difficult effort, especially because of our economy right now. a lot of businesses are struggling, but they managed to get the petitions necessary to lead to a vote, which is occurring today. the new plan would provide business retention and attraction and marketing services and corridor maintenance, and some ways of

orienting people around the corridor as well. this is a great development. we are here to hear the item, hear from public comment about, for, and against the item, and i would like at the end of the hearing to ask that we continue the item, and i will make that motion afterward. supervisor chiu: thank you. let me read a little bit of information on today's public hearing. the purpose is to consider testimony on the proposed authorization of an assessment for property in the business district containing approximately 148 identified parcels in the ocean avenue area. exterior boundaries include all parcels on both sides of the street unless otherwise noticed in the management district plan as follows -- those properties that front ocean avenue on the west, running along ocean avenue to interstate 280. at the conclusion of the hearing, the department of

elections will complete tabulation of the ballot assessment, including those received during this hearing and reporters tabulations to the clerk of the board will then inform the board of supervisors. if the number of ballots received is such that it is not feasible to accurately tabulate the ballot that day, the board of supervisors may reassess the meeting at a later date for the purpose of obtaining final tabulation. the board of supervisors will not approve final establishment if there is a majority protest. majority protest exists if upon conclusion of the hearing ballots submitted in opposition to the assessment exceed the ballot submitted in favor. the way today's hearing will be conducted -- we will first hear from all speakers in support of the assessment district for up to two minutes apiece. we will then hear all speakers in opposition up to two minutes apiece. if a property owner wishes to change his or her vote, please indicate that during your

testimony, at which point, you will be provided with the affidavit and the ballot. i understand we have been asked to not close the hearing today. a motion will be made at the end of the testimony to continue the hearing. with that, let me first ask if there are members of the public that wish to speak in support of the assessment district. if you could please line up in the center aisle. first speaker, please step up to the microphone. all speakers that wish to support the assessment district, please line up in the center aisle. first speaker please. >> thank you. good afternoon, supervisors. i'm the project manager at the oarc. i wanted to talk a little bit about the community outreach process. we have published information in the quarterly newsletter since 2007. we invited merchants and

property owners to informational meetings as well as attending community right meetings to learn more and gather input regarding the benefit district. surveys were conducted in 2007 and 2009 asking merchants and property owners what types of improvements they would like to see on ocean avenue as well as their interest, and in the past two years, we gain enough support to support and interest to it -- support and interest to move further. it was not until recently when we sent out a petition that many of the property owners and merchants that were hard to reach at the very beginning of 2007 came to us and we met with a lot of them through group meetings and one-on-one meetings, getting further input from them as well as asking

their support, and what we heard from the merchants and property owners is that they wanted increase advocacy for the neighborhood. more property owner involvement in improvements in the neighborhood as well as continue the marketing activities and provide more promotion activities to promote people to come to the district to shop, dine, and spent time in the commercial district. one of the huge concerns is safety programs. they wanted to see more safety programs and efforts and also, looking into pedestrian safety as well as graffiti issues. supervisor chiu: thank you very much. next speaker please. >> i am a 32-year resident and an active member of the ocean avenue revitalization

collaborative and the community cultural participation project. there is strength in numbers, and the effort here represents the efforts of residents, merchants, and property owners. we urge your support. i also want to read a very short statement from the owner of a cafe in support of the cbd. it's as efforts have coordinated for several years and he has seen the coordination of merchants, residents, and the city have produced results. as a merchant, he works 90-plus hours a week and cannot always take the time to organize research, but he can get involved. the believes it will be necessary to achieve positive results from a new project. we need to link the old and new and bring more consumers to the area. we thank you for your support and listening. thank you very much.

supervisor chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> i'm a longtime resident. i have been there for 12 years. i am also a member of the homeowners association. i am in strong support, and i'm speaking on behalf of a longtime resident and owner of ocean cyclery who could not attend the meeting, but supports it because he has seen many positive improvements along avenue that promote the district and helped draw customers and complementary businesses to the area. in fact, i participate in the annual festival, small business

sidewalk sale, and holiday decoration events. these efforts will continue in marketing in the commercial corridor to bring in more foot traffic and more diverse business mix. similar letters and support worsened by a supporter of merchants and property owners. thank you very much. supervisor chiu: next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is dan weaver. i'm here to make a few basic points about the cbd proposal you have before you. although merchant and neighborhood promotion is certainly an important part of it, in the process of putting

this together, we decided the most important thing is to get our sidewalks sweat, get our sidewalks clean with steam cleaning, and to get the graffiti off buildings without costing the merchants or property owners $1,000 or more for a simple problem that could be handled by organizing an effort like this. september 30 of this year, a five-year experiment on ocean avenue and many other districts in the city ended with the ambassadors program and the end of the federal stimulus program which funded it. we have had five years of clean sidewalks, and we liked what we saw. we would like more. without sidewalks weeping, the litter and trash just keeps blowing -- without sidewalk sweeping. before 2005, it was blowing since the beginning. we have five years of clean sidewalks, and it was a great thing.

we figured the best way to get back to that is to have a cbd. same thing goes for steam cleaning. last time we had that happen was about four years ago. this is a frugal proposal. $900 per year for a 25-foot store front. also, we have given up the cost of living increase for the first three years in the draft plan, so this is a very frugal proposal, which will achieve a variety of basic goals, which every neighborhood should have, but we usually do not have, and we are back to not having yet again, and that is why this is important for a syrian -- important for us. thank you. >> i am a member of the ocean avenue revitalization collaborative. i have been working on ocean avenue for many years to try to

make it viable and clean. we go out and do a lot of work there, and i think the cbd is file -- vitally needed in order to maintain the level of cleanness that we have. i hope you will support the cbd. thank you. supervisor chiu: next speaker. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm a san francisco resident, business owner, and property owner on ocean avenue. i support the ocean avenue cbd. i had been a property owner there for 13 years. i have gone through two recessions. i have five tenants on my property, and i have seen lots of struggles go on with respect to being a property owner as well as the tenants themselves. recently, as supervisor avalos

talked about, there have been some really good changes and developments that have occurred. we are at a crossroads. this is an important item that we need to consider. it is difficult, i grant you, because it means more property taxes, but it is something that is going to be better for the area and for the commercial businesses, so i urge you to support the cbd district in ocean avenue. thank you very much. >> hello, good afternoon. i'm a resident of west would park and have lived there for about 22 years. i'm also here to support the establishment of the cbd. i think it would come as no surprise to anybody on this board and nobody sitting in the audience that local governments have entered a new era of

burden-sharing. as taxpayers, we support our libraries, our parks, our fire fighters, our schools through the parcel taxes. as neighbors and residents, we donate our time as volunteers to clean the streets and unify the neighborhood. now, i think it is time for the businesses and property owners along ocean avenue to reciprocate the investment that we as taxpayers and residents have made in our neighborhood by passing this cbd so that we can continue the improvements that we have made. i do not think it is about shifting the burden onto the property owners. i think it is about collaborating with the residents and tax payers of the city to keep the momentum going along ocean avenue, so i would urge this board to support the this board to support the establishment of this cbd.