said to us at a meeting that his job as the president of the commission was to find value in our parks and extract them. there was no mention of providing services to the public. it was to extract the value from our parks. in carrying out that policy, there was no discussion with the public, no involvement with the public. this ordinance gives us the opportunity to involve the public in this very critical decision. that is what it is all about. it is very simple. there has been a big smokescreen. there has been numerous red herring thrown out in order to try to confuse the public about this measure. it is much more simple than all of those allegations pretend. the big issue for all of us is how do we find the parks. that is the big question we keep getting asked. the people of san francisco have repeatedly voted money for the parks. they have never turned down the park s bond. by 2/3 votes they have provided $170 million. they have extended the open space. if this policy cont
here fighting for jobs. the same bill you are proposing i think would eliminate jobs. where would the money come from? the first place to go is staff. it stuff will be cut, you have to get the money. i hear great ideas, but not any solutions. i think we need to put the bill back and looked at it again, like he said. i heard another young lady say we are double dipping. if we are double dipping, every city agency is double dipping. look at the water department. look at muni. i pay the water bill every month. but my kids have to go out and buy the water. we are all double dipping. thank you. supervisor avalos: thank you. next speaker, please. i run off the grid in san francisco. i hope you reconsider the third party permiting for vendors and parks. off the grid was started a year ago. we employ 12 people. we work with over 50 mobile food restaurants that each employee anywhere from four to 10 people. we contribute over $60,000 to the parks department. we are a for-profit busi
tried to do as a city through numerous the ministrations and general managers is to fill that gap with generated revenues. think what would not have happened if this ordinance had been passed 50 years ago or 30 years ago, or 10 years ago a zoo admission? a coffee shop in union square? outside lands would not have happened if this had been past five years ago. that is a million dollars to the department. this will lock in mediocrity in this department, or it is going to result in an welcome cuts in general fund subsidies for other departments that i do not think you want to consider. i urge you to take this off the ballot. if we are serious about needing an ordinance, let us have some hearings and go through the normal board of supervisors process. supervisor avalos: next speaker, please. my name is lorraine bedford. i am here as a resident of district 11. i want to thank you for the hard work you have done for the community. i am a city employee on my own time. i am conce
the president of the commission said to us at a meeting that his job as the president of the commission was to find value in our parks and extract them. there was no mention of providing services to the public. it was to extract the value from our parks. in carrying out that policy, there was no discussion with the public, no involvement with the public. this ordinance gives us the opportunity to involve the public in this very critical decision. that is what it is all about. it is very simple. there has been a big smokescreen. there has been numerous red herring thrown out in order to try to confuse the public about this measure. it is much more simple than all of those allegations pretend. the big issue for all of us is how do we find the parks. that is the big question we keep getting asked. the people of san francisco have repeatedly voted money for the parks. they have never turned down the park s bond. by 2/3 votes they have provided $170 million. they have extended the