it does apply to large projects like park merced. under your legislation, for any project in which the board of supervisors will be voting on any approval item, the board will not be required to hear a full legal appeal before the entire board. instead the e-i-r will just be formally lumped in with [speaker not understood]. under normal public comment procedure with no opportunity for appellants to present a formal appeal. for project like park merced that is so contentious and profoundly important to the existing residents, a mere three member committee hearing will be totally inadequate to presenting serious problems with an e-i-r. there were many changes with the park more said after the first e-i-r were released by not siting by planning staff to do an e-i-r what had been called for. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker. mr. [speaker not understood]. >>> yes, i'm robert [speaker not understood], and i'm with dolores park works, the friends of dolores park. and i'm speaking mostly as a supporter of san francisco's parks

was acknowledged by staff and consultants of park merced that [inaudible]. with repeat problem with regard to pipeline. despite a quarter of a mile distance on the most volatile earthquake seismic center in the region and not addressed. the testimony and written statements to that effect were removed from the comment -- public comments. i point out that 4,000 [speaker not understood] radius of danger is [speaker not understood]. >> thank you. ms. shabba. >>> [inaudible]. >> okay, why don't we show that to the public. >> can we turn on the overhead? >> okay. >>> there >>> there it is, park merced, and cpmc. >> great, thank you, mr. showed en. ms. shabba. >>> hi, pilar shabba, california nurses association. we want to echo many of the comments that have been said today. we want to be able to take a look at supervisor kim's legislation at the same time as looking at the legislation that supervisor wiener has brought forward. we do have, you know, concerns, as everybody knows, we along with coalition members who have spoken and will speak today have been involve

i have an overhead here of park merced. per sequa guidelines public agencies must carefully consider any potentially feasible alter that may minimize a significant environmental impact. and this is sequa 5.1626 it must contain a thorough decisions that do not included that dpoogs. the bulldozer are torn down adjacent to a large community and the loss of an open is that a that was part of the hearing where the public lost and the individual tenants went from 1 thousand square feet to 1 hundred square feet and none of this was addressed. it was raised but the public agencies in charge doesn't due their diligent duty and that's why we're here today. we must have adequate comment in the process >> thank you, mr. wood. >> thank you very much i'm george coalition for san francisco neighborhood. a couple of thoughts. i think the best way to look at this sequa legislation it's not my legislation or your legislation i've heard that a couple of times today. i think we should look at the best for all are i want to thank president chiu

i think that's a laugh because i was at a park merced hearing where i saw your good government. the city attorney came in with documents from the developer and said that was the legal [speaker not understood] of the city. is that good government when you take the developer's legal opinions paid for by the developer? i think this really is a fraud. i think that it shows actually that what's going on is the bully -- the people of san francisco, the community for the projects of the developers, and i have to say that we have a case where the supervisors, all the supervisors just voted for $750,000 settlement for dr. derek kerr because he was bullied, as have been the planners in the city department, senior developers were bullied out of the department [speaker not understood]. where is your concern of good government when you're voting millions of dollars for retaliation suits [speaker not understood] by the workers of san francisco, public workers who oppose the corruption? because that's really what's going on i think in san francisco at this point. workers, public workers are be

the system when available and would take advantage from the canal that come available from the park merced project. so that would be the first option the second option would be for the puc to offer pumping rates and another step would be to stop pumping at the lake merced and thereby in a step-by-step fashion reduce pumping to allow the lake to recover >> can i have a point of order here. isn't this provided through a - >> i think we need to clarify so we shouldn't get into a lot of detail about what the commission says and a ongoing thank you. i'm not saying it's not within the document i'm raising that certain so the public need to know they have to read the document. and another comment which is a question i guess regarding the lakes and golden gate park. in recent years they seem to be stagnate and overgrown and i'm wondering if you're plan addresses the needs of those lakes to have enough movement and water supply even though those are rec park facilities but their dependent on the water coming in. you don't have to necessarily rely. finally the other thing is we're seeing only part o

the system when available and would take advantage from the canal that come available from the park merced project. so that would be the first option the second option would be for the puc to offer pumping rates and another step would be to stop pumping at the lake merced and thereby in a step-by-step fashion reduce pumping to allow the lake to recover >> can i have a point of order here. isn't this provided through a - >> i think we need to clarify so we shouldn't get into a lot of detail about what the commission says and a ongoing thank you. i'm not saying it's not within the document i'm raising that certain so the public need to know they have to read the document. and another comment which is a question i guess

it is not about park merced, treasure island, haight washington or cpmc. those projects all proceeded under full environmental impact report. we already have clear and transparent appeal processes for full e-i-rs. instead, this legislation aims to bring that same clear and transparent appeal process that we already have for e-i-rs to smaller projects, particularly categorical exemptions and negative declarations. many of these projects are small home projects, small business projects, park projects and other public projects. as we saw yet again last week, when somebody appealed the negative declaration for the dolores park renovation, one person, one single person, can appeal and potentially delay a project even if hundreds of community members participated in the design process. indeed, under our current rules, that appeal can occur when the project is already in construction. that appellant who filed the dolores parka peel, as with other appellants, has every right to file that appeal, but we should at least have clear rules and deadlines in place. the [

. >>> i'm michael, i'm a member of the park merced coalition, and the community improvement team. like to thank both supervisors for the work they have been doing on this. very, very challenging issue. it's been a pleasure to be involved in participatory democracy. ~ and i would just very briefly like to ask that supervisor kim's new legislation be given a full vetting in hbc and planning before it moves out of committee and onto the full board. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. next speaker. >>> well, today's message comes from john and luke. the high priest then asked jesus of his disciples and his do trim and jesus said, i spoke openly to the world what i ever taught in the synagogues. and in the temple where the jews always resort. in secret have i said nothing. why ask me? ask them what i said to them. be hold, they know what i said. and then when he had thus spoken, one of the officers that stood by struck jesus and everything jesus says is touche, but this is particularly touche. he says, if i have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil. but if well, why do you sm

generally the eastern part of the city, bart corridor as well as the southwest where the sort of park merced development is. in order to be a priority development area there are criteria established by the region in terms of frequency of transit service as well as in terms of having plans to accommodate more growth, in particular more housing. so, through the contact of what priority development are, we're being asked to think about how can we use different funding source he that we have available and we'll be having available soon to support development within those priority development areas. so, in particular there are two funding sources to be thinking about. one is the 1 bay area grant that i know this committee is quite familiar with since it's been a multiple previous committee meetings. the thing we haven't talked quite as much about is the pda planning program. this is a regional funding source that is intended to support planning work within priority development areas both land use planning as well as transportation planning and it's really the planning work that can be used to set

and, you know, yes, when you're talking about the cpmcs and the park merceds and the treasure island and the mission bay kind of appeals, those are certainly very, very large projects that have significant and profound effects on neighborhoods and on the city. but i don't like referring to cases like this one or like ord street or other appeals we've had as little appeals. these appeals all affect people. and even if you're talking about a relatively small project in terms of a one-story vertical addition, you know, if the project doesn't happen, that has a real profound impact on the people who are living in the home and wanting to do expansion. they're going to continue to live in that home and they're not going to have that expansion. if you allow the project, you have a real effect on the surrounding neighbors. and we all know, we all live in homes. when you have impacts in terms of physical changes on your next-door neighbor the neighbor behind you, it has a significant and long lasting permanent effect on the way that you live your life and the way that your house is situated i

and then, of course, you've already heard the big one, cpmc park merced. i think you were hoping that we depth bring that up. those were excellent examples. now for the frustration part. the frustration that i want to quote is actually coming from the planning department. and here's a quote from ms. jones who spoke today when she was asked what the issues are with first approval versus second approval. she said, quote, it's problematic if an issue a raised post approval. it's better if it's raised proactively. well, of course, we don't want to be in the position of having to defend an e-i-r. the fact of the matter is the planning department really needs the public's help and that's one of the beauties of preserving ceqa the way it is with the long-timelines, with the multiple opportunities to participate. we are actually helping the planners as we are helping the supervisor pass this legislation. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >>> hello, supervisors. my name is michelle meyers. i am the director of the san francisco bay capture the sierra club. fir

see this legislation as part of an assault on affordable housing here in the city, combined with park merced if the legislation passes. we've got the loss of nearly 4,000 units of rent controlled housing in the city and that is massive. and i believe that you were all concerned about the ability of the legislation to withstand the palmer challenge because you have that little clause in there about a lawsuit. so, you're concerned about that, too. can it withstand that? and i agree with previous speakers. they think you should be focusing on working at the state level to get the ellis act repealed and to get costa hawkins repealed. and an additional compromise could be that for every unit of affordable housing that is built in san francisco, you could free up one tic to be -- to go -- to be converted into a condominium. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >>> my name is [speaker not understood] lopez. i'm here because i think that the proposition of the legislation today is not about condo. it's about people. so, it's not about the tenants or about the landlords. they kicked me out [speaker