supervisor mirkarimi: folks, we are on some significant time constraints. this has been going for a while. we need to move this along. anyone speaking, please be sensitive. >> my name is susan. i specifically to each of the history of work in san francisco. i am opposed to the relocation of or eviction of the haight ashbury recycling center. it is a good neighbor. its virtues preindustrial. it is a living testament to the pioneers of recycling in san francisco.

it has been such a good neighbor to park service's, users, an immediate neighbors including the homeless. providing jobs, education, and the most important thing to me is making those green jobs visible on a human scale. this is important because as a historian of housework, i will tell you that invisible work is not appreciated work and people need to know about the mechanics of recycling and its place in their lives. recycling is a pre-industrial use. during the industrial age, a private land would be fenced off. it continues the practice of hanc's public access and public utility commitments.

returning materials to their original use. and finally, the haight ashbury recycling center is a living testament to the commitment that the citizens have to recycling in the city. those citizens had the foresight to establish this vital center. that needs to be acknowledged. we honor our pioneers and the site that they have made important. we should honor the haight ashbury recycling center. it is a historic site. [tone] supervisor mirkarimi: i want to remind people, if you want to say yes or no, that is fine. [laughter] we are concerned about losing the quorum. your name?

>> my name is charlie lamar. over the years we have hired many homeless at the hanc recycling center, where i worked. most of the time the outcome was good. the about not being homeless thereafter. additionally to that i would like to remind everyone of the testimony from earlier that show that hanc saved the city $1,000,500 per year. thank you. supervisor mirkarimi: next speaker, please. >> my name is wayne wylie, an employee apple hanc -- an employee at the hanc recycling center. i would like to thank all of the customers that came in spoke. i am speaking from a different side. we talked about the material that was recycled, but if i

listed like credentials it would show that i learned the hard way, rather than the easy way, of how to do things. before hanc i was recently released, looking for work. it came to the point where i was married with two kids. it looks like that would be living in my car in getting to where it was time to make tough decisions. i wound up talking to ed. i learned about composting, cantonese, spanish. almost fluently. i can direct anyone around the center in those languages. others that are just like me that work there, others that come there, it has changed their life. it is not just for cycling for material, it recycles people.

if they could be represented here, i would want to be the one to represent them. i have been working there for three years and in two months away from my bachelor's in philosophy. i would like to thank those of you that showed up personally. i really appreciate that. [applause] supervisor mirkarimi: next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. first of all, i am glad that the history professor spoke. i was going to call this a historic operation. and one of the first that was in existence well before the cycling became fashionable or popular. it is one of the reasons i have supported hanc recycling center. it pays rec and park but

hundred thousand dollars per year in rent. it employs the people. there is no level on which this is unnecessary or wish the job with the region being done poorly. when the community parks manager called this non- conforming use, that is what they highlighted in the younger report. this hanc serve to the park and special events in the park. what is proposed as an alternative, without speaking for many of the things that i have to say, the proposed alternative is to hundred $50,000 to be spent for phase one of another native plant nursery. and $500,000 plus more for the leasing of these machines, which

claimed to have the capacity of what hanc is using for crv's. on what basis has this been calculated? 24 hours per day use? the supervisor talked about one by one, what happens when someone comes behind someone else with huge bags and there are more lined up? of [tone] supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. >> keep it. thank you. supervisor mirkarimi: next speaker, please. >> i am speaking as the committee member of the california hunger action coalition. we have been working for over one decade based on a coalition of grass-roots in direct service food assistance programs. today i want to talk about

recycling as income support. we have a history of supporting nutrition programs as well as a long history of supporting income support programs that help people to be able to afford food and other basic necessities. we are strongly against the eviction of hanc and this other proposal that has been floating around to replace cash benefits with food vouchers for recycling. i would like to point out that we have been against reduction to these programs and we are also trying to work hard to make it so that more people in the state of california can participate in the food stamp program. when we talk about ideas like what is going hanc in getting rid of the recycling center, these issues take our eyes off

the real problem. one job opening for every five job-seekers nationwide. and under-funded safety net with 79,000 san franciscans eligible for food stamps yet only 37% of those people are enrolled. we need all san francisco to recycle. people that redeem them for cash as well as those that do not are just important as recyclers. we should not be discouraging people from doing anything that helps people to feed their families and pay their rent. i do have a copy of the state legislative agenda [tone] that explains some ways to end hunger. supervisor mirkarimi: next speaker, please. >> my name is richard ivanhoe. i am the current president hanc -- president of hanc and i am

speaking in support of keeping the center at its current location. maintaining the recycling center, contributing somewhere between 1,000,001.5 million to the local economy each year, the proposed community garden is going to cost the city $250,000. a large portion of which is going to architectural design. rec and park put up a sign saying that there's a waiting list of 700 for community gardens. but there was only a waiting list of four at white springs, the closest community garden to the hanc recycling center. as far as the buyback machine, $1,600 per month comes up to $19,000 per year * 27, $518,000,

it is not clear if the city or the merchants of the ones that have to pay for that. there were a couple of comments about 1992 and 1995 actions. the golden gate master plan was finalized well after those years. so, thank you. supervisor mirkarimi: next speaker, please. there was one more card. ellen epstein. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i served as a stakeholder of the san francisco food policy council representing the urban agriculture sector. thank you for your time. i support the continuation that

the existing site and the relocation of the proposed community garden. by had applauded the allocation of one quarter of a million dollars for the encouragement of leadership to examine the deep contradictions within the displacement of hanc for community gardens. today i share the street -- the same statement and ask how it can exist without the displacement of the center pepper hanc -- of the center that hanc manages. over the years it has supported grant funding for community gardens and material resources for new gardens for the environment over the last six years. last year at the request of the mayor, policy departments and agencies were asked to conduct

surveys reviews of serviceable lands. neighboring locations appeared on the audit and from a technical standpoint, the mclaren what site is enormously more appropriate for a community garden over 780 frederick street. what i support more is the transparent process by which these decisions are made, especially when results have needlessly pitted community members against each other who otherwise you night to support environmental causes. i would urge you to continue the process started today that is transparent inclusive. [tone] supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. next speaker, please. >> thank you. i have been a resident of haight since 1985.

i support the rec and park decision to relocate hanc and build a community garden. i will try to read as many of these as i can. [reads names] [reads names of people and

businesses] please, these are a lot of people and that is a lot of support. thank you. supervisor mirkarimi: next speaker, please. >> tess wellborn. i understand that 1000 postcards were collected from people that use the recycling center and of

them, 75% of them lived in haight, richmond, or sunset. and of those that came, who are our neighbors, 20% had asian surnames. these are people that recycle for good reasons. i would like to thank rec and park to be able to except the native plant nursery as a donation. it was very generous of hanc to take this from us as a new type of privatization. i would like to finally point out the golden gate park has 1,000 acres in it. many of them have sunshine. you do need sunshine to grow crops. not nearly so much for native plants. thank you, supervisors. please help us help the neighbors keep this valuable resource.

supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. next speaker, please. >> i have been using the hanc recycling center for decades. since the recent environmental action center, as referred to earlier, was opened. i support community recycling and i do use the center because i do not wish to use my blue band. i would rather donate the materials to the organization for all of the good that they do. many of those uses were referred to earlier by others, i will not reiterate them out. the idea of a machine for bottles and cans is absurd to me, as other people pointed out. those are not the material steps the state -- those are not

just the only materials that the center takes. items that other people can take back our very important. as a professional gardener, and must reiterate that this is a bad site for a community garden. the conversion process alone is one thing, but the side has for sunlight coming in, there are tree issues -- it is a very poor site and i am sure that there are much preferred sites. i guess that is the primary thing i would like to mention. supervisor mirkarimi: after this speaker, we will close public comment unless someone absolutely needs to make a comment. >> good afternoon, supervisors.

my name is dennis [unintelligible] and i want to extend congratulations to you all for the kinds of questioning and in- depth discussion that took place today. i want to challenge the idea that there is a list of these organizations that addressed their members and got a vote in opposition to the placement of ashbury -- hanc. hanc is a historic entity. no one was objecting that was a 40 niner vip parking lot. or when we were in process of changing the decayed polytechnic high school site into affordable housing. some of the people on that list were screaming in opposition

because it would bring -- riffraff into the neighborhood. the reason for the debate on inner sunset with so many groups on the list, they were urging people to come down here to urge the commission to move hanc out in favor of the community gardens. the primary issue was the presence of homeless people and how we could get rid of them. as expressed openly on their discussions sites. we need to understand that that kind of stuff is easy to say. like saying that many organizations are opposed to the recycling center. but underlying that is the stuff about the kinds of people that it attracts, just like the opposition to the park, and that transformed the neighborhood, opposed by the same people that testified today as bringing in

riffraff to the community. thank you. [tone] supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. last speaker. >> walter paulson. ♪ make the waste go away and get it off the shoulders of the city but we all said the things that we needed to say. please make the waste go away and held the plants today make the waste go away and get it off our cities shoulders. turned into something else and you will be glad that you sold her make the waste go away and helped the plants to recycle today and make a better say the

things we had to say and make the plants stay ♪ supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. i will now officially close public comment. i would like to give the courtesy to rec and park for a quick one minute response, if they would like. i know that the time does not reflect greater responses you might like to give. i do none of your microphone is on. >> thank you, a supervisor. i am happy to answer any questions you might have. supervisor mirkarimi: one quick question -- i was going to let to make a statement, but one quick question than -- since one of the central tenets is of the nonconforming use that came out abundantly in public comment

about the hanc republic -- recycling center, one of the proposed recycling plant and that it regarded non-conforming use? >> the proposed water treatment plant, but i understand the argument and there are conforming reasons for the plant as a part of the proposal. we have not -- the water treatment plant is a program that was initiated by the puc and is presently being worked through in alternatives. supervisor mirkarimi: just because this is important to the question -- those people that say that they very much support hanc but not at that location, what efforts are being done to demonstrate that support for possible relocation?

>> they have exhausted numerous vacation publications. supervisor mirkarimi: what about the hanc recycling center? >> sorry? >> if it does coincide with thinking that maybe the water treatment plant is not of consistent use to golden gate park and that there are actions to be taken as considered alternative uses outside the park, with that now go to a continuity of building hanc on a new location? i have no record of that. >> supervisors, when we began this process of repurchasing for the state, we headpin conversations with almost all city departments about the possibility of city land being available. the department of the

environment led those conversations. there is no park land in the convenience zone that would be a suitable location for relocation. as i recall, a city-owned properties that it makes sense, it did not mean that there were not existing properties outside of that zone. as a possible place to relocate hanc. supervisor mirkarimi: department of environment is welcome to speak on this quickly. >> sarah is right. we did look to see if there were city lands inappropriate to relocate hanc. no possibilities were drawn up, but there may be some with private lands yet to be explored. we have not initiated the search yet. supervisor mirkarimi: with presentations made it would seem that there would be consistency for the actions to support that

and we have not seen support of that action to the fulcrum that we have seen the alternative to in trying to potentially relocate the water treatment plant. i wanted to line up that thinking. >> a reasonable point. pedroiapu -- puc has been working closely with the department of the environment in supporting their efforts for alternative locations for hanc. supervisor mirkarimi: if i might -- one, too. let's the level of interest in -- >> the level of interest seen on possible relocation, we will continue in that effort. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you to the departments. we appreciate it. i am sure that we will follow up. i just wanted to sum up in this

regard. many people believe that it is a fait accompli that the determination of the eviction of hanc recycling will occur, and they are quite right. the board of supervisors is not enabled to overturn a decision by the rec and park decision. as i said in the opening, there had been no spotlight on the hearing of the process of unveiling in consensus on the larger issue for many on all sides to stipulate public comment and it was important to get out in the open. i think it is important to many of us were neighbors to the recycling center, that we look at this issue. as much as i appreciate the intentions they are trying to

reconcile with the mayor's office, perceived or real in their mind, the recycling center being a contributor to any kind of neighborhood distress, it doesn't excuse what it means to have a loss of the recycling center. i have to say that the answers the presentation has given do not complete the feelings that that loss has been satisfied or well compensated. i do have a hard time understanding that if we lose the recycling center, to supplant that -- as it is the equivalent of that major contribution -- crv machines, thinking that there will be a thinking that there will be a line of people at stores selling