want to underscore it's been sustainable jobs in san francisco, from a micro business perspective is exactly the type of business that the board of supervisors wants to develop and sustain. so small business loves teatro zinzanni. thank you. >> thank you very much. tom mccarthy. >> tom mccarthy. i'm a resident of this part of town going back many years. i'm also a member and officer-holder in the carpenters' union for white a while. i would quickly like to say these folks have a nice history of supporting non-profit community groups that need support and recognition. they have made their space and performers available to worthy

groups, especially in the northeastern part of the city, but throughout the city and they deserve our support. the point that people make that in this time of the kind of money flowing into san francisco, any room we can make for these kind of both capable and very, very helpful people, the better off we all will be. thank you. also, they are all good on the union side, with the carpenters, as well as the hotel workers. >> thank you very much. i have exhausted all the speaker cards and if there are any speakers left who would like to speak, please do so. [speaker not understood] most respectful highness -- broadway -- i go there all the time. and make everybody happy for the teller, banker, they are at the corner of broadway.

[speaker not understood] there was an opening in the park in chinatown and said no pornography, no short-term pornography, no long-term pornography, but health, public health -- to engage and join forces with short-term holiness. join forces with long-term holiness and [speaker not understood] we should have a better goal --

>> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon community and madame chair, i'm a san francisco native and i'm in support of the proposition. i would like to encourage you to pass the proposal. i would view this as a risk-prevention process. as explained by the port authority unions, groups and businesses, the fair-market value process is, in fact, a process designed to protect the city, regardless of the qualification process in the aforementioned case. i propose this risk-mitigation is considered strongly because you never know the risks that you will induce by going through the other process. right now you have a lot of goodwill in the city. forcing a marriage may have a long-term negative impact in terms of the intensity and the sincerity of the low-term

bidder who might win the qualification process. i think every party here has shown their diligence, support and clarity in making this project come forward and i highly recommend that you please pass this proposition. thank you. >> thank you very much. are there any other members of the public to speak on item no. 2? seeing none, public comment is closed that the time. [ gavel ] . the matter is back in the hands of the committee. supervisor kim. >> thank you. i want to appreciate all the public comment that came out today and it's really clear that the outreach was very impressive, given the turnout that came and the diversity of support. it still did not really address the questions and concerns that i had. one, as stewards of public land ensuring that we have getting a deal that really brings back the highest-value, that includes teatro, i think

everybody is in agreement that tz should be on the site and that a hotel could support the building of that theater. no one opposed that proposal. i just have a hard time with the fact that we don't know what an rfq could bring forward and i also hear from the port it's not impossible to bring forward an rfq that has a partner that has already been identified. i really did appreciate the comments about what a good partner look like and again, we don't know what the rfq would bring about and while i think the forced-marriage rationale -- it's a reason, but i'm not sure that's compelling enough to waive sole-source. i don't want to delay the process and move it out of land use committee and more time to discuss with the port. i may support this on tuesday.

i would just like to have a little bit more time to understand all of the processes. but i do want to appreciate the clearly immense work that went into -- before the proposal came before the board. it's really clear from the outreach. we have a lot of projects come before us and there was clearly a lot of support from the neighborhood and i'm happy to see that. >> thank you. supervisor wiener. >> thank you, madame chair and i want to thank the members of the public and the performers and everyone else who came out today. having participated in several different significant land use matters from this particular geographic area of the city, which is one of our most breathtaking and beautiful and historic areas. the fact that we would have literally not a single dissenting voice here today is pretty extraordinary. i think speaks volumes in terms of the neighborhood groups, but also labor, and just a broad

array of people who understands the importance of bringing teatro zinzanni back. and i agree with some of the comments that were made that the length of time it's taken to even get to this point is really unfortunate. we should have really been able to bring or keep the commitment we made more quickly than we are now doing so. with that said, we are where we are. the municipal code gives us the power and exceptional circumstances to allow for a sole-source contract, and that is something that we have the power to do. it is something that is not some sort -- even though it's not -- it's the exception not the rule. there is nothing irregular about it. this has been an extremely publicly vetted, transparent process. it's not one of those situations where someone is

trying to sneak a sole-source bidder in the dark of night and you clearly get a better deal elsewhere. in terms of a agree with supervisor kim that we of course with our city assets that we are maximizing value for the city, but maximizing value for the city is not just about dollars and cents, but the cultural aspect of city and revered institution that does not disappear and i don't know if we know how lucky we are that teatro zinzanni was able to come back. you can envision scenarios that it has to close down, but that can't happen because of the incredible community support. i am very supportive of moving

this forward, and i'm frankly not comfortable moving this out of committee without recommendation. so i make the motion to forward this item to the full board with positive recommendations. >> i just want to say a couple of words and first just want to recognize the incredibly hard work that port has put into this and thank you very much for helping the city to to honor its word, the word it gave to the company, teatro zinzanni. i have to tell you that i'm a native san francisco and i'm ashamed to say that i have never attended a performance. so you most certainly must come back so we can all attend. i want to aknowledge the creative director and to encourage you to come to city hall with eclectic individuals for a show -- [laughter ] >> i always ask joke this is real estate reality tv and come and spend a couple of hours

with us in the chamber or our office hours and will you see a show, without a doubt. [laughter ] >> so we're at a little interest impasse here. supervisor kim is interested in passing this out without recommendation and supervisor wiener wants to pass with positive recommendation. so i was going to ask supervisor kim to see if there is -- >> my motion is to move this forward without recommendation. >> is there a second for the motion? i think this motion dies. [ gavel ] is there another motion to consider? >> excuse me, supervisor, madame chair, would you like to take a roll call on the item instead? >> correct. >> point of information, i believe that if there was no second, so it failed for lack of a second.

>> >> deputy city attorney, in a 3-member committee, the motion does not require a second. >> thank you, for the clarification, let's do a roll call vote. >> point of information, the first motion was the motion that i made, which was to move it forward with positive recommendation and i don't know about the rule which order you vote. >> the board rules don't specify the order. traditionally the board acts on motions in the order that they are made, but it's in the discretion of the chair, the order in which to take the vote. >> actually i heard supervisor kim make her statement, i interpreted as a motion she was making and i asked her to reiterate it. so i believe she made the motion before you. >> to the chair, i would ask rather than have a vote on supervisor kim's, if i could perhaps -- the chair could

state her views. >> so i believe that we at city need to honor the promises made. i'm sensitive to the points that supervisor kim is making, a general concern with process. we don't want any well-heeled people to get a better deal than the average person, but believe in the economic climate that we are in and how we are losing all the wonderful elements that make san francisco, san francisco, i do believe this warrants some special consideration. i'm happy to support the motion to move forward out of committee with a positive recommendation. so is there a motion? >> that is the motion i made. >> okay >> i will be voting against the motion today. it doesn't mean i won't be supporting it on tuesday. i just don't feel comfortable with the information that i have and i want to reiterate

that to support this very important institution in san francisco, but ensures that we are being public stewards for our public lands. i'm open to the dialogue before this comes backs to the full board on tuesday. >> excellent, fair enough. there is a motion made by supervisor wiener to move the item forward with positive recommendation. madame clerk, roll call vote, please. >> supervisor kim? >> no. >> kim, no. >> supervisor wiener? >> yes. >> wiener, yes. >> and chair cohen? >> yes. >> yes, you have two yeses and one know. >> thank you, this motion passed with positive recommendation to the full board. [ applause ] >> all right, madame clerk,

could you please call item 3. >> item no. 3 is the ordinance amending the planning code to change the designation of 149-155-9th street also known as the western manufacturing company building. >> okay >> supervisor kim is the maker of this item and we'll hear from her first. >> thank you. i just wanted to make a motion to continue this item to two weeks to may 11th. there was something that was discovered by the project sponsor thursday of last week. we need to insert that amendment into this ordinance and we did reach out to both the project sponsor and the planning department. and they have already agreed to a recontinuance. >> thank you. jonathan lammers is here to make the presentation. >> the department supports the

continuance. >> thank you very much. let's take public comment on this item. seeing no public comment, public comment is closed [ gavel ] the chair will entertain a motion to continue the item to may 11th without objection, this motion passes. thank you. [ gavel ] madame clerk is there anything else on the agenda. >> there is no further business. >> thank you, this meeting is adjourned [ gavel ]@p