tv [untitled] June 18, 2011 9:30pm-10:00pm PDT
9:30 pm
department. i will quickly go over the two reports in front of you. they are both required by the ad men and planning code. they are annual reports. i think there from article 36 of the abdomen code called the interagency plan implementation committee. it is a mouthful. it is a committee set up to make sure all the good work we do in area plans for neighborhoods and upcoming plans, all the infrastructure, community improvements are being coordinated with all of the implementing agencies with the planning department taking the lead. this report is a progress report to our commission and to you about the work we've done each year. as you are probably aware, there
9:31 pm
has not been allowed development. therefore, a lot of impact fees have not been collected. that has been going slower than anticipated. in the interim, we've been working hard on identifying grants that will help fund the projects identified. we were awarded at least one transportation grant in each area. the street buzz will be going twa's -- v haight street bus will be going both ways. in balboa park, we will be completing the field project. in the mission, we received a grant for new open space. those are some of the great accomplishments that have happened in the last year. we are also doing more detailed planning work so that we know the infrastructure we need to build in the coming years.
9:32 pm
we have also identified a few new funding tools. those have been before you. that includes recon hill. we are looking at establishing rfd's in other areas as well. they have both done a lot of work in the last year. the market octavia created a list of priority projects. that has been integrated into all the work. the eastern neighborhood has been working on their prioritization process. they are new are. they also reviewed the future agreements -- a few of the agreements for improvements, including a child care center approved on third street. that is the first report in front of you. when you look for it, it does go through each area and talk about the accomplishments and how much revenue we anticipate. the sec report was drafted by the comptroller's office.
9:33 pm
it is much more of an accounting of all of the development impact fees. this cannot of article four. we put all of the impact fees in one article. we tried to get really strong. this was the mayor's office legislation on how we administer and keep track of all of our impact fees. this includes not just the area plans but also the city-wide fees and downtown fees. on page 9, it shows you a list of all 25 of them. this is pretty good for us to start seeing the impact fees is a revenue source we need to be keeping track of and doing good planning on. we have been working with the capital planning committee closely and looking at this is an important revenue source. the only other piece is at the end. the other thing that cannot article for is that we decided we would inflate our impact fees -- out of article four is
9:34 pm
that we decided we would inflate our impact fees. the capital planning committee determined what the rate would be. the comptroller's office increased all of the development impact fees by about 3%. that is another thing that will be happening annually. that is an administrative process. supervisor mar: it is increasing all of the development impact fees by 3%? >> that is correct. the planning committee looks of how much it costs the city on average to build a piece of infrastructure the year we set the fee. they look at how much the cost is increased. they do a full analysis about the differences and determine what makes the most sense for san francisco. that number is used in a couple of other places throughout the city like financial planning. that is the rate we used to inflate the fee rates. in rincon hills, the rate
9:35 pm
was $8.60 zero square foot. now it is $8.86. that is all i have. supervisor mar: is there anyone from the public that would like to speak? mr. paulson? >> ♪ you make it here and there you work real hard and then you will see that the impact fees are coming back to your me now ♪ supervisor mar: and sweet. can we move this forward with a positive recommendation without objection? >> that was short and sweet. thank you so much, everyone. >> would you like to file this or continued? supervisor mar: is an annual report. let's continue to call the chair
9:36 pm
9:37 pm
>> what if you could make a memorial that is more about information and you are never fixed and it can go wherever it wants to go? everyone who has donated to it could use it, host it, share it. >> for quite a great deal of team she was hired in 2005, she struggled with finding the correct and appropriate visual expression. >> it was a bench at one point. it was a darkened room at another point. but the theme always was a theme of how do we call people's attention to the issue of speci species extinction. >> many exhibits do make long detailed explanations about species decline and biology of
9:38 pm
birds and that is very useful for lots of purposes. but i think it is also important to try to pull at the strings inside people. >> missing is not just about specific extinct or endangered species. it is about absence and a more fundamental level of not knowing what we are losing and we need to link species loss to habitat loss and really focuses much on the habitat. >> of course the overall mission of the academy has to do with two really fundamental and important questions. one of which is the nature of life. how did we get here? the second is the challenge of sustainability. if we are here how are we going to find a way to stay? these questions resonated very strongly with maya. >> on average a species
9:39 pm
disappears every 20 minutes. this is the only media work that i have done. i might never do another one because i'm not a media artist per se but i have used the medium because it seemed to be the one that could allow me to convey the sounds and images here. memorials to me are different from artworks. they are artistic, but memorials have a function. >> it is a beautiful scupltural objective made with bronze and lined with red wood from water tanks in clear lake. that is the scupltural form that gives expression to maya's project. if you think about a cone or a bull horn, they are used to get the attention of the crowd, often to communicate an
9:40 pm
important message. this project has a very important message and it is about our earth and what we are losing and what we are missing and what we don't even know is gone. >> so, what is missing is starting with an idea of loss, but in a funny way the shape of this cone is, whether you want to call it like the r.c.a. victor dog, it is listen to the earth and what if we could create a portal that could look at the past, the present and the future? >> you can change what is then missing by changing the software, by changing what is projected and missing. so, missing isn't a static installation. it is an installation that is going to grow and change over time. and she has worked to bring all of this information together from laboratory after laboratory including, fortunately, our great fwroup of researche e-- g researchers at the california academy. >> this couldn't have been more site specific to this place and
9:41 pm
we think just visually in terms of its scupltural form it really holds its own against the architectural largest and grandeur of the building. it is an unusual compelling object. we think it will draw people out on the terrace, they will see the big cone and say what is that. then as they approach the cone tell hear these very unusual sounds that were obtained from the cornell orinthology lab. >> we have the largest recording of birds, mammals, frogs and insects and a huge library of videos. so this is an absolutely perfect opportunity for us to team up with a world renown, very creative inspirational artist and put the sounds and sights of the animals that we study into a brand-new context, a context that really allows people to appreciate an esthetic way of
9:42 pm
the idea that we might live in the world without these sounds or sites. >> in the scientific realm it is shifting baselines. we get used to less and less, diminished expectations of what it was. >> when i came along lobsters six feet long and oysters 12 inches within they days all the oyster beds in new york, manhattan, the harbor would clean the water. so, just getting people to wake up to what was just literally there 200 years ago, 150 years ago. you see the object and say what is that. you come out and hear these intriguing sounds, sounds like i have never heard in my life. and then you step closer and you almost have a very intimate experience. >> we could link to different institutions around the globe, maybe one per continent, maybe two or three in this country, then once they are all
9:43 pm
networked, they begin to communicate with one another and share information. in 2010 the website will launch, but it will be what you would call an informational website and then we are going to try to, by 2011, invite people to add a memory. so in a funny way the member rely grows and there is something organic about how this memorial begins to have legs so to speak. so we don't know quite where it will go but i promise to keep on it 10 years. my goal is to raise awareness and then either protect forests from being cut down or reforest in ways that promote biodiversity. >> biodiverse city often argued to be important for the world's human populations because all of the medicinal plants and uses that we can put to it and fiber that it gives us and food that it gives us. while these are vital and important and worth literally
9:44 pm
hundreds of billions of dollars, the part that we also have to be able to communicate is the more spiritual sense of how important it is that we get to live side by side with all of these forms that have three billion years of history behind them and how tragic it would be not commercially and not in a utilitarian way but an emotio l emotional, psychological, spiritual way if we watch them one by one disappear. >> this is sort of a merger between art and science and advocacy in a funny way getting people to wake unand realize what is going on -- wake up and realize what is going on. so it is a memborial trying to get us to interpret history and look to the past. they have always been about lacking at the past so we proceed forward and maybe don't commit the same mistakes. ok, is
9:45 pm
meeting of the ad hoc board of education for june 13, 2011, to order, and if you could notes that the three members of the committee are present, commissioner of fewer, commissioner norton. we have four informational items on the agenda, and so, we are going to -- how do you want to do this? do you want to do of for you are short or three short presentations? do you want to do them all at the beginning? do you want to do that? >> yes, i think that would be great, commissioner. commissioner: ok. >> i have copies for the public, an idea of some eight copies. so the focus tonight, we wanted
9:46 pm
to give the board an update on the approach we are going to take to revise the attendance areas as well as the timeline and provide some feedback to a couple of elements of the feeder patterns that were raised at prior meetings, particular transportation, and the order of the tiebreaker process, and then to talk about the monitoring of student assignment, just giving an overview of the scope of work that the advisers are helping us with and see of the board has any specific questions they would like us to explore in the annual report, and then the future meeting schedule, so the first couple, the first slide, is kind of a reminder of the guidelines of revising the elementary attendance areas that are in the board policy, so the board policy calls for staff on an annual basis to review the attendance area boundaries and
9:47 pm
make recommendations to the superintendent if any modifications are needed, and if the superintendent would modify -- notify the board, and in reviewing the attendance areas, these were the factors that steps should take into consideration, the neighborhood demographics, where students live now and where changes are expected in the future, the availability of facilities, traffic patterns, the availability of programs, and the prekindergarten to 8. this was in p5-101. this was developed with working with demographers, and we gather data and got feedback from the community and evaluated that, and the board approve the
9:48 pm
elementary attendance areas, so it has been less than one year since these boundaries were approved by the board, so we think for the first annual review, we are recommending that we look at how the number of kindergarten applicants from 2000 -- for 2011 compared to the number used when developing the boundaries, so when we were developing the boundaries, but the average number of kindergarten emesis residents, so we thought we should look to see that for those in attendance areas, is there was an attendance area that had 385 residents, that is so many poor grade, how many kindergarten applicants did we have, and what is the difference between the two, and then do them for all of the 58 attendance areas and then recommend any adjustments based on those findings, so if there are two attendance areas close together, and in one case, the number is greater, and in
9:49 pm
another, it is less, we would obviously explores ways to balance that. the second thing we would do is review suggestions from the community, and we have already received as suggestions in particular to look at the mckinley boundaries and also looking at another, and what is important to remember is you just cannot adjust one attendance area, right? if you get a suggestion a just one area, it is also a suggestion to change another because it would be changing the boundary between two, and we also got some others, like near loma -- muir loma -- mira l;oma. we will look at the recommendations.
9:50 pm
there was a type of maybe in some of the documents that said 2010, so i just want to make sure that everyone understands we are talking about 2011, so in the next two months, and if anyone wants to email specific suggestions and to meet and talk about it, they can send it to the email address, and we will about d. wade any suggestions that come in to that forum, as well. commissioner: can i just ask -- most of us got the same recommendations you got. because the suggestion said this, which i know to be true, the neighborhood and at 30th street, not 29th street, but here is a problem with that. if you just moved it one block and drew it on 30th street, then the southern side of the streets would be in the other, so what
9:51 pm
i'm interested in as an example is what we do about -- do we always run a line down the middle of the street, is my question, because it is an interesting question. i mean, the issue of the kind of coherence of the neighborhood is a good question, but, of course, in that case, you'd want to draw it sort of between the backyards. >> so i think maybe these will help highlight house staff is going to vote all of the requests, and one is can the law to be consistently applied to all suggestions? so the suggestion to keep all of the neighborhoods together cannot be consistently applied. school district attendance areas. but it is definitely a factor that we look at where possible. we want to see how suggestion would impact the number of kindergarten residents, and speaking of one, it would make it bigger, and there is already a concern that it is already too
9:52 pm
big, so we will look at the impact on the average number of residents. we also looked at how it would affect the diversity of each attendance area. obviously, in this case, it would impact the attendance. just to the south. we would see it changing it would affect the size and diversity of enrolling. if it is making one bigger and one smaller, is that helping balance perfect and then the barriers. that is particularly pertinent to, for example, the valuation of the suggestion for rosa parks, because there is one that is a huge traffic pattern. so we have looked at but have not even begun to evaluate this suggestion is that we want to actually do the valuations at the same time and looked at all of these factors, and then based on that come back to the board and recommend revisions its provisions would have minimal impact or would improve the demographics and the balance of
9:53 pm
students in each attendance area and avoid topographical barriers and if the logic could be consistently applied, so we will definitely look at all of the logic and avowedly everything that is suggested, and then we will oppose suggestions and staff findings on the web, so there would be an opportunity for people to see what we found from the revision, and then we would share a recommendations on the august 8 ad hoc committee meeting. et commissioner: i just want to clarify, and then commissioner norton has something. i appreciate this. analysis is always a good idea. however, none of those necessarily address the issue that was raised about álvaro. i am not advocating that we try to keep all neighborhoods in a coherent attendance area pattern. it is impossible, and you are
9:54 pm
right. not all neighborhoods have very clear boundaries, so when they are -- i just want to know where in those principles can you take that into consideration, and will he report back to us on this issue, or have you already looked at that? of course, it is easier, and all of the attendance boundaries that i know what actually go down the street, the middle of -- street. people live on both sides of one street generally should go to the same school, unless it is during boulevard -- geary. >> we will look at that, and we can superimpose city boundaries on our boundaries and see where they change, and we can explore the difference between having the majority of our attendance
9:55 pm
areas are down the center. i think when we were doing it, there were a couple of exceptions, and they were actually an exception to keep city neighborhoods together, and there was one, i think. at any rate, one of the revisions we made was looking at how we can do this to a-as best as possible, so where possible, we try to do that. we just cannot guarantee, so we will do it as part of the evaluation. commissioner: commissioner norton? commissioner norton: it seems to me that we want to look at what the pools were like. >> thank you. yes. the last part of this presentation tonight is actually specifically around monitoring, and one of the questions on
9:56 pm
there is what would the board like us to review as part of the process so that we can fall back in to see what impact that has, so maybe we can maybe even go into more detail about that. commissioner norton: the composition seems to be part of it to me, too. if you can adjust a line and have a more diverse pool, that might be something we want to look at. >> that was in the original design and will continue to be as we look at suggestions, however impact, not just the size but also the demographics. thank you. commissioner: commissioner m
9:57 pm
urase? commissioner murase: no. is very different from south, and you end up concentrating a particular group by using that line. >> ok, thank you. i will definitely. so we will plan to come back to the border with august 8 meeting using this process and timeline that we have just outlined, and the next section of the presentation is about. peters, and it is responding to two areas in particular that have come up, but just in case some of audience members are not familiar with the background, i thought i would take a second to
9:58 pm
provide some context. i think, in march 2010, the board approved a policy that included the development of elementary feeder patterns for elementary schools to feed into particular middle schools, and there would be an initial assignment based on the process. in august, the staff recommended which would feed into which schools, and then in august and september, we received community feedback through lots of different forum s, and based on that, the substitute motion was presented by the superintendent, and that was to delay the feeder patterns for a year and to the interim year have a tie-breaker involving its siblings, so that is the process we use this year. in february, staph submitted
9:59 pm
revised kindergarten through eight feeders, and throat march and may, groups did a lot of work, community engagement, and we got a lot of feedback, and based on that, staff presented revised items to the board, and those are scheduled for their second reading tomorrow. some of the revisions included instead of having an initial assignment straightaway and then going to choice, we would have a choice process through 2006, and then starting in 2007, go to initial assignment. we also had modifications. thank you. i am having problems. >> i think everyone knew what you meant. >> and that we would
65 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television Television Archive Television Archive News Search ServiceUploaded by TV Archive on