heritage, particularly big distinction would be more pastoral setting. as people, , you can actually be for this project, but i would ask you to look at the adequacy of the eir as essential. i think you can send the eir backed. it is legally inadequate, as was pointed out. much of the mitigation measures relied on in the eir relied on different litigation. for example, the artificial turf to be taken out, the promised a recycling program before it has to get pulled out. there is no plan now, and there is really no assurance that something like that exists in the future. there are no parameters to

assure that will happen. there is also a process to address toxic storm water runoff. the eir provides no process for this. i would ask you, supervisors, to ask the city, with the foundation continued to partner on this project if this product was cited -- and one president chiu: -- president chiu: thank you. >> i live in the mission, and i have two school-age children. i strongly object to this as being family friendly, it is

unfriendly. it is not family friendly to destroy the natural resources that we should be holding in stewardship for our children and their children. this is a great way for children to play, soccer. this is to make sure our children have a world to grow up in. the water, air, soil, living things aside ourselves. i strongly, strongly urge you to rethink and reject this characterization of this project as the only family friendly alternative. families like to play soccer. they can keep enjoying it for years to come. thank you very much. president chiu: next speaker. >> hello, my name is kathleen

stern. i am a resident of san francisco. this will have a monumental impact on golden gate park, which i think has been largely ignored in the eir because they have not paid attention to a lot of statements in the golden gate master plan. this is a jewel. it is anchored by a historic and windmills. one just underwent a restoration. this is not a dangerous and forsaken area as some have said. it has become a destination for tourists and locals. the big changes are the opening of the beach shall lay, the restaurant. go out there on the weekend, and the grass is full of families. 2006 and 2007, they made

improvements to the land's end trail. people come there, and they find out close it is to the park. my favorite one is in 2011. there was the copper drum. dramatically initiating the transformation of the southwest corner of the park. even now, it receives more visitors than it has for many years. when the area is landscaped and seating is provided, i believe this will be one of the most visited sites in golden gate park. please, do not certified the eir. thank you. >> high. good afternoon, supervisors. someone has done a good job, because it has taken from 1999 to get me back to testify in

this fine room of hours. it has taken this issue to motivate me to come out and get involved. i certainly will say it is an earful. it is ironic that a lot of the press is that a bunch of people with nothing better to do or a guy who said in a column, gee, we have got bigger fish to fry. what are these people all about? well, i can tell you, it is hard to stop a moving train. and this has been orchestrated by the fisher family, setting up fisher field, your general manager as well as your chairman of recreation and parks, going through a sham hearing where not even one question was asked. i live halftime in wyoming and have time in san francisco. my daughter played soccer on the

soccer team before they had soccer fields, and my grandson played for the vikings, but i want to tell you, it is a shame. do not accept the eir. who did the work on it? the california recycling commission. they are doing their job. other cities have cut it out. our kids are exposed to chemicals which are threatening them. they may not eat a tiger -- tire, but the chemicals and all aspects of their life add up. there is a major deficit disorder. there is optimism. we all ought to be most outraged about is that the kids were lied to. my kids say, granny, you are some kind of not. president chiu: -- you are some

kind of nut. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> i am a voter and taxpayer. i resent being told i do not like children. i worked 37 years and the recreation and parks department, so it is not that i do not like kids. i m blown away by what is being proposed. in a city that does not allow the plastic bag, i was going to bring one, you want to put enclosed to 8 acres of plastic tire crud in the wildlife refuge. nowhere in the bond that i voted for, i even had my heart surgeon vote for the bond, did it state anywhere that you're going to

take the natural field and put in plastic. trust me, i will not vote for a bond again because that just cannot trust them. i want to know where all of the soccer people were. did they go out there and fight for it? i was told that they did not have time. ask yourself what we want your legacy to be. what will be your carbon footprint? somebody already took this, but i remember supervisor avalos singing this. ♪ they paved paradise and put up a parking lot ♪ not those who had a vested interest in this. whatever their names are, they are the ones that put the lights in the park. i have a better idea.

if this is such a great idea, bring it to the voters of san francisco, as we have with this problem, and you will see that you will get probably 99% of people who will not vote for it. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> hello, supervisors. my name is miriam. i have been editing research papers and medical information, so i was particularly shocked by the lack of data presented in the hazardous materials. my comments on these issues were not adequately addressed by the planning department. my main areas of concern are the inadequacy of the so-called study about artificial turf of facts on the environment. it is clear that those reports have been chosen selectively.

and the latest data is 2009. in terms of medical research, this is outdated. 3, the finding of the task force should be deleted. there is the fact that the ecosystem -- ecosystem would not prepare a summary. i quote, the departed should continue to request feedback rather than relying on manufacturers. they will know more about the safety and longevity within the next three years. it has been years since this has been issued, and they have not collected this information. there is the data for the eir, and 5, the inability of the planning department to do basic math.

there will be a 6% increase in the area where it is less. i am submitted a bid to i am submitting a slightly longer version. please, supervisors. do not make me have to speak in public again. i really do not enjoy it. send this back to the planning department and instruct them to use only scientifically valid research. you -- president chiu: thank you. >> that afternoon, supervisors. my name is robert clayton. they followed state law in certifying the eir. been flouted the law. there are many serious

deficiencies. it is your responsibility to do this differently. i was among 40 individuals and 10 others who asked for this alternative. this was not provided despite all of these requests. the nightlife at the beach shall lay. artificial turf, such as west sunset. that is what we are proposing. as you heard, this hybrid alternative meets the criteria about what the eir can consider. it should be considered and analyzed. by selecting the alternatives that were inadequate from the outset, the eir prevents people

from being elected judge whether that would be a better solution. i would also like to say that we do trust in you as our elected representatives to do the right thing in these matters. supervisor mar and president chiu. i know you use the same consultants to promote this project, but we trust that you will be independent and maintain your integrity. i know you never received campaign contributions from one man and his wife. we trust you will make it good. president chiu: thank you very much. i should mention that there is a board world that prohibits comments being directed to individual members, so i'd like

to ask folks that make commons to direct them to the board. thank you. next speaker. >> good evening, board of supervisors, and thank you for doing it tonight. it is a very important issue. i thank you for -- i want to say that i am opposed to this project. i ask you to look at it objectively. i am a frequent user of golden gate park and a native san franciscan, and i never lived consistently in the sunset district. the project is a misuse of the natural beauty of golden gate park, and what is not mentioned because it is not supposed to be mentioned in the eir is to it on to pay for the maintenance and repair and replacement of this field, once the natural light

has been used up. the project will result in a loss of trees, while blood habitat and an increase in traffic. the soccer project turns what should be a metal available to all into a single use area, and the renovation is not equitable to everybody who likes to hike, picnic, and enjoy nature. in particular, it has been proposed that the soccer field is our children that i believe it is our stewardship to protect the natural part for the trees and the nightlife, and every natural beauty that you can find there. the lighting will be tracked from ocean beach. we have all been there. we know what that means. the lighting will take away from the night sky and our ability to see the stars, and particularly the migrating birds.

this is natural between the park and the beach. the beach should not be marred with a soccer complex that will serve a few. respectfully, i thank you. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is john s. -- ho -- joph -- johanas. we are so glad this protect the east end of the area from the freeway. now the west and is a controversy. to adhere to the master plan and keep its natural character or to use artificial turf. i am including a photograph of a sign on the south sunset playground. the last line warren's players

to, quote, stay healthy. wash your hands and scrape after play. i have never seen that sign on any grass field. it seems ok for kids to play on fields that are not healthy. playing on these fields have been known to code shoes, pants, and even underwear with black soot and dust. we are not talking about dirt. this stuff has to be washed off because it is not safe. i understand we're talking about a gift of around $5 million, and the city has to come up with a similar amount or more. that amount could make many more beautiful playing fields. many times over. great for kids. safe fields. healthy fields.

the eir has not addressed that aspect. the lights. the whole neighborhood is going to whole neighborhood is going to remember the decision about these lights. we can even see the intrusion of the lights at west sunset. it has not addressed this. as you reflect back on your actions, i hope you find pride and satisfaction. >> thank you very much. thank you very much. thank you, sir. >> good afternoon or early evening, supervisors. i am here today both as a

concerned citizen and also as a board member of the organization. i am here to urge you most strongly to reject the certification and uphold the appeal before you. i have looked through a, i don't claim to have read it. no one could possibly have read all of those words. but i have looked at it and it is inadequate. this project is inconsistent with the master plan for golden gate park. rather than reiterate the things other people have said, i will take a different path here. i like to suggest a sort of precedent for you to keep in mind when you are thinking about

what decision you want to make on this issue. i serve on the city committee that is referred to as prozac. we have not had a hearing on this issue, so we don't have a recommendation. but we have a hearing about two years ago on the occasion when the public utilities commission proposed a waste water treatment facility in the west end of golden gate park. and to skip right to the punch line, we listened to everything they had to say and we went on record recommending against that. they listened and they changed their mind, they changed the location. this does not have to be the way it is. i urge you all to do the right thing. thank you. >> next speaker.

>> the project has one big problem. it has a master plan that it has to get by. the only way it can get by the master plan is to fake or falsify what the master plan is. it participates in that falsification of the park master plan, it is a fraudulent and corrupt report. if you approve this, they are participating in the corruption. on page 100, it says according to the master plan, the different areas will be lighted to different levels based on safety considerations. that sounds like a can be anywhere in the park for what we want to use it for. if you look on page 9 of the master plan, different areas of

the park will be lighted to different levels based on safety considerations. here is the second sentence. lighting is for safety purposes and is not intended to increase night use. that is the whole point of this project, to increase night use. the project is a complete violation of the master plan. it never mentions it. hot for hundred pages and never mentioned in. and on the next sentence, it says the layout listed in the master plan as an night use area. what is listed as a knight used area is the beach lay restaurant. if you go out there at night, it is dark. by saying it is a night used area, it is part of the fema.

i sent you an e-mail to a seat can see the links for the master plan, it is fraudulent and it knows it. >> san francisco prides itself in being the lead a green city in the country if not the world. it cares deeply and you have worked hard with multiple programs including a ban on plastic bags and a ban on plastic water bottles. we are debating installing seven

makers of plastic grass and the professional level of sports lighting. no plastic bag, no plastic bottles, but plastic grass, rubber tires, and sport sides. what kind of a topsy-turvy world are we living in? lots of families want soccer, but it is not an us versus them situation. a project does not need to be a golden gate park when there is a safer alternative a few blocks away that the planning department and staff have said is acceptable. it'll give kids the playtime they need and keep the western edge of the park the way it was meant to be. i urge you to do what is right in support that alternative. and don't approve one that fails to properly evaluate the impact of the lighting. safer and non-toxic info with a

hybrid alternative. uphold our appeal and do what is in the best interests of the city. don't paved paradise and put up a parking lot. >> i am a resident of the richmond district. so much has already been said about this. the elimination of darkness from fulton to gary and from ocean to forty third ave. i don't live in this part of the city, i live on 37 that avenue, but the light pollution will cause the residents' physical, unemotional, and psychological harm. it could potentially lead to a flood of lawsuits from affected property owners. as someone has mentioned about

the lights, the reality is that we don't need the lights for the kids. kids are not going to be playing under those lights. there is another issue that has been mentioned. the composition has a tendency to leached toxins and other contaminants into the water. part of our drinking water comes from an offer under the soccer field. it says, if and when there were to be leaching, it could cause a hazard to public health and at some time in the future, the commission would take some kind of action. this waiting until we get to that bridge approach is not acceptable for our water supply. last point, traffic. they say it won't create any extra traffic on the roadways. the report refers to four lanes of ocean highway and makes no

knowledge of the fact that this road is scheduled to be reduced to two lanes. don't let the family and are crazy commission shove this down our throats. and do what is right, send it back. >> good evening, my name is karen anderson and i am from district 5. i have lived in the city since 1968. so much has been said, but i can't think of any good reason that would justify putting artificial turf and extreme lighting anywhere in our beautiful and a magnificent golden gate park. william m. hall, the famous surveyor the plant apart design would roll over in his grave and cry. do the right thing.

>> my name is susie, i am from district 9. i am here as a soccer mom, a soccer player, a soccer trainer that is watching in trading on these fields every single day. with all of the talking points. my son who is 13 and plays every single day, he has played at franklin square, garfield, crocker, balboa, sacred heart, her and now we desperately need 14 more acres of synthetic turf? what we have played on is a

small sampling of the artificial surfaces that we have in the city already. i was hot and beautiful practice on grass and i want kids to play all the time, it is part of my business in training them. most of the fields were empty and i got to hear birds and snodgrass, it was a wonderful experience. has the fields get older, you see that the synthetic material gets trampled and the public and start flying in to your nose. i am sure he covered this, but games and practices, that is ridiculous. most played between 102 hundred practices a year and at least 30 games. thanks.