Education project inc. , mepi and dozens of kids were impacted by the fire s and the loss of life. I want to be very clear and i have been very clear every time Something Like this has happened that i am forever grateful to the men and women of the San Francisco Fire Department for their bravery for putting their lives on the line and what i can tell you is that with each of one of the fires that i have seen it is very clear to me, but for the incredible heroic work of the men and women of the San Francisco Fire Department we could have had many more deaths in these fires. These firefighters responded promptly and they truly saved lives and i think that we as a city should be very proud of what they do and are very grateful for their courage and bravely. The tragedy behind these fires is not just in the horrific loss of life, but also the tragedy is in the displacement of dozen was residents dozens of residents and Small Businesses and their workers. The 22nd and mission fire was home
Fire chief has just come into the building, and let me say that this is only the beginning. We plan to have a subsequent hearing where we will be discussing specific legislation that we will be introducing. This is legislation that is being drafted right now by the San Francisco City Attorney and i want to thank chief hayes white and director huey for working with my office in drafting the legislation, and the legislation is being put together for the purpose of figuring out how we as a city can enhance the response and enhance the prevention, and let me say what were thinking about as were moving forward with that legislation. One thing that the legislation could possibly do is to allow housing inspectors to cite building owners when the know annual certification of fire and alarm systems is out of date. Unfortunately now inspections happen but there is no ability to issue a citation when that is the case and we need to remedy that situation. Our legislation is also looking at requiri
Ask the question is because the resolution was because there were some last minute text to say we strongly urge the city to include resident concerns and Community Process in their final disposition plans. Thats part one. Part two is getting back to kind of the commentary that i just had that yes, i do think that we need we here, the commission, obviously here as the community is concerned, we have written commentary that was heard today and verbal commentary today and what we need to do is formalize again that collaboration with the city so we can create a public process around final disposition. I think people saw on their november 25 date, that date is sort of a soft dead hraoeub. Deadline. It says we know in the future what needs to happen. Theyre transferring to the city for government purpose, or we need to sell it. Weve got between 12 to 14 months with first sort of soft date in there all the way out to 2025, i think was the final date i saw on some of these documents to say we
Difficult to apply a new use restriction on it because the state would look at that as us trying to purposely reduce the value. I think i the reason i asked that question is because i feel the garage parcel adds to the value of the enter social center itself. So if it can be sold to someone who is doing rental on another lot nearby and they choose to buy that garage and then they say this is only for residents or for this particular use, but not necessarily for the heritage center, i think that would lower value of the commercial parcel in heritage center. I was wondering if we could enjoin the two in some way that would enhance the value of both. Maybe not today, but i think before i mean, we are approving these plans essentially kind of fuzzily. Theres any number of ways to negotiate a sale. I wonder if thats something we need to talk about today or something we can be i think the fair market value is i think to answer your question is that we would have to were just saying generally
Let me finish the two parts to that question. The first part is the reason i ask the question is because the resolution was because there were some last minute text to say we strongly urge the city to include resident concerns and Community Process in their final disposition plans. Thats part one. Part two is getting back to kind of the commentary that i just had that yes, i do think that we need we here, the commission, obviously here as the community is concerned, we have written commentary that was heard today and verbal commentary today and what we need to do is formalize again that collaboration with the city so we can create a public process around final disposition. I think people saw on their november 25 date, that date is sort of a soft dead hraoeub. Deadline. It says we know in the future what needs to happen. Theyre transferring to the city for government purpose, or we need to sell it. Weve got between 12 to 14 months with first sort of soft date in there all the way out to