The committee to continue this item. Next speaker. Good morning. Now it is afternoon. Peter cohen. The pdas at a technical level, i would like to step back and think about this item in contrast to the last item sb50 and the conversation about local community planning. It is very encouraging to hear your Planning Department staff and i am thinking about supervisor browns comments early about the staff being helpful. It is not a technical resource. You didnt see the Planning Department staff taking a position opposing sb50 based on the amendment the board put forward. Frankly, that is what a Planning Department should be doing. Unfortunately they were silent and it took the board to do that technical work. Now the Planning Department is coming forward with a pda proposal saying this is not dictating zoning or telling you your process is taken away from you. This is the short of music to a lot of folks ears about doing the planning right. Of course, all of the details matter much. It seem
Model. Let it was figure out what the state can do to help, not hurt. Thank you. Next speaker. Good afternoon, supervisors. George wooding, coalition for San Francisco neighborhoods. I support Affordable Housing, and i also am in very much agreement with the board and supervisor mars resolution. I object to the false choice that scott weiner presented the board of supervisors saying if you are not for sb50 you must be antigrowth. I think that was a terrible position to put you in because i know that you are doing the best for the city. As peter just stated, i dont think one size fits all, and definitely the amendments have to take care of different aspects of the city and the character of San Francisco. I think sb 50 billions the market rate housing much more so when you look at arena than it ever did build Affordable Housing. There is no profit in building Affordable Housing so it forces developers, even wellmeaning once, to build a market rate. Rate. It is a massive give away to deve
Good afternoon. The meeting will come to order. Welcome to the thursday, december 11th special meeting of government audit and oversight committee. I am the chair. I am joined by Committee Members supervisor peskin. Thank you to the committees clerk. I would also like to thank jim smith and matt at sfgovtv for staffing this meeting. Do you have any announcements . Thank you. Please ensure you have silenced your cell phones. Your speaker cards should be submitted to the clerk. Items today will appear on the december 17th agenda unless otherwise stated. Do i have a motion to excuse supervisor brown. So moved. Thank you. Mr. Clerk please call item two. Resolution authorizing the Planning Department to confirm existing and create new and resized designtions of Priority Production areas by the association of bay area governments and the metropolitan Transportation Commission as part of the planned bay area 50 update. Thank you. I am proud to expand this citywide alongside supervisor fewer.
I am not an expert on the funding available. My understanding it is mostly transportation funding from the state or federal government. The region distributes around for various purposes. There is a certain amount of that honey at th o of that money and they are using that for the planning activities around the region. Thank you so much. Again, maybe moving forward, can we send this item with positive recommendation to the january 14th, 2020 meeting of the full board without objection . I will not object. I want to concur with staff from the Planning Department that there is a difference between pdas and senate bill 50. I realize those things may beacon plated in the minds of some of my friends from the public, but i dont have any problem with the pda legislation item 2. As to item 1, i want to thank supervisor mar who picked up where i left off. I realize that there is a stream of thought that this should be opposed at all costs rather than doing what supervisor mar and other folks ar
Service to those who need it. Thank you. Next speaker. I have lived in the city since 1976. I basically totally oppose sb50. It is so flawed it shouldnt be considered. I support the resolution opposing it. I think it is a good way to deal with a bad thing. I think we have a housing problem decades in the making, and now it is an emergency. That emergency is being used to basically just create or developer give away. I agree it is capitalism out of control, i think. A bigger problem we keep Digging Deeper into the hole. We keep building more and more office space that we dont have housing to support people working in the offices. I think what we should do is stop the development of the offices, play the same game the developers are playing with us, and threaten them with loss of work and huge amounts of money they are making for themselves and investors and get them to the table with us. Another thing that bothers me the only good thing is getting housing close to transit. As another sp