Home

Question 1:
Saving Theaters
Question 2:
Community College
Question 3:
Rezoning
Question 4:
Drug Dealing
Question 5:
Youth
Question 6:
Day Laborers
Question 7:
Visitor Attraction
Question 8:
Appointments
Question 9:
Commitment

QUESTION 3:

MODERATOR: The third question is from Mr. Lesser.

MR. LESSER: The Mission District is a highly desirable neighborhood to live in for a broad range of economic and ethnic groups. It's always the best weather in San Francisco, proud historical heritage, cultural offerings, business and employment opportunities, as well as the blessings that come from diversity. In the current process of rezoning the east side of San Francisco, how would you, as mayor, work with the Planning Commission and Planning Department, as well as stakeholders, to better ensure opportunities for people to live, work, and engage in business in the Mission District? Do you want to start with that one, Ms. Alioto?

AA: During the last couple of months I have sat in many meetings of what they are calling the housing element, which is supposed to decide the future of our city of San Francisco. The housing element is not going to be good for the Mission District. It isn’t going to be good for Hunter’s Point, the Excelsior, the OMI, and other parts of town. I think that the Planning Department absolutely needs to get a grip, that this city is a city of neighborhoods, and without the neighborhood input, you simply can’t just go willy-nilly and decide one fits all in San Francisco, because it doesn’t, and then do something that devastates one neighborhood and helps another. This is one city that has to be treated by its neighborhoods. The Planning Department simply does not understand that. As mayor I would start with a new Planning Department. [Applause] I would start with a Planning Department that understands city planning, and that isn’t somebody’s best friend. [Cheering] I would disallow all contracts that go out without a competitive bid, based on some phony sole-source exemption. This Planning Department needs to understand we are a world-class city, and that the Mission District is a world-class neighborhood, and that it must be preserved. You cannot trample over your past and have it become a bright future. We must keep rebuilding it.

(Applause)

TOM AMMIANO: Yes, I’ve worked very much since we established district elections to make sure the neighborhoods have a seat at the table. I’m going to take a little bit of exception to what Angela just said. It’s not the Planning Department: there are people in the Planning Department who are good, who actually come from this neighborhood, who –god forbid– know about planning, but they haven’t been allowed to. And you need a mayor that’s going to have commissioners who respond to that, and who’s going to have a Department Head who responds to that, and then the planners can do the planning. And we need to work with people like Matt, and we need to work with certain developers, to say yeah yeah yeah you might have a density bonus, but at the same time we do want apartments or homes that have two and three bedrooms, because we are a very family friendly district and we want to keep it that way, and we will keep it that way. The other thing is, incentives for small businesses, whether it’s an issue of trying to put a cap on Workers’ Comp, or ATA issues, or the Mayor’s Office of Economic Development, having people who are appointed to different districts and neighborhoods like the Mission District, working with small businesses, working with business incubators, saying, “Here’s a community development loan with low interest. We don’t want you to work for The Gap, we want you to work for yourself, and maybe we’ll forgive that loan after a certain amount of time.” That’s where the political will lies, that’s where the money lies, and that’s where the serendipity lies for the Mission District. And I say Viva la Mission District, because I think we can kick everybody’s ass! [laughter and applause]

SUSAN LEAL: As I understand it the question was about planning?

ANITA: Yes

SUSAN LEAL: And the Planning Department and the planning process. And we do need housing in the Mission District. That’s why I fought for Good Sam housing, that’s why I fought for 1010 South Van Ness. Those are good examples of family housing we put together, and those were tough fights, real tough fights, particularly 1010 South Van Ness. But they needed to happen. What we need---yes, are some good planners in the Planning Department, I agree with Tom. It’s a dysfunctional family, and now that the department head is out of town it’s a dysfunctional family without a parent. We need to appoint commissioners who are experts, who are experienced, and are committed to public service. That’s the primary basis. And you should have different neighborhoods represented, as much as possible. But we need to make sure that, as we go through the planning process...we do need housing, but we also need economic development. We still need jobs. There’s a lot of people under- employed and unemployed in this city, so we need a mayor who’s going to get the head of the Planning Department and the planners to bring in, and work through the planning process, so that we have housing, and we can also have economic development in the Mission. Thank you. [applause]

GAVIN NEWSOM: I think we can all agree---I imagine we can all agree-- there needs to be fundamental change. [some cheering, assorted noise] … I think we can all agree, even the dissenters out there, that we need some change in the Planning Department, for that matter,. potentially on the Planning Commission, as these terms come up. But we also. I think, can agree that this Planning Department needs to be funded. We can all talk about better neighborhood planning, we can talk about getting out there and putting planning back in this department, but unless we resource the department to do that we’re really going to fall short. And that’s why I’m proud to have a workforce housing initiative that we’ve presented to the Board of Supervisors, and hope they’re going to take a good look at it as it relates to rezoning the eastern neighborhood, as it relates to rezoning our C3 district and the FARs, and the downtown core, that actually sets aside--has a process that sets aside--- development fees and puts them into a fund that is protected, to enhance our Better Neighborhoods Planning process. I think we can also acknowledge that the process worked around Octavia Boulevard. It’s working down at Balboa Park. We’re still challenged out there in the central waterfront, but it’s an important process, and it’s one this city needs to commit to. We need a mayor who can find the resources, and not look at the economy and the general fund and say, “Well, I’m sorry, we couldn’t find those resources.” I think our Workforce Housing Plan, which also provides upwards of twenty five thousand housing units set aside for working families --those earning eighty to a hundred and twenty percent of area median income, with the set-asides for Better Neighborhoods Planning. I think it’s a great first step, and it’s a step I look forward to engaging in, in the course of the next few years as mayor. Thank you. [applause]

TONY RIBERA: I think the City’s planning process is an area where the new mayor will have a real opportunity to express his or her vision for this city. It’s where the leadership of planning starts, and my commitment is to protecting the neighborhoods of San Francisco first. I think that has to be absolutely clear: that’s our number one priority, protecting our neighborhoods. We also have to get away from the Willie Brown type of government of friends and foes. The Planning Commission is appointed jointly by the mayor and the Board of Supervisors. We need to establish a good working relationship. Matt is a bit more liberal than I am, but Matt is a decent guy who I am looking forward to working with in a positive way to help the people of San Francisco. You can’t be friends and foes. You have to have that commission on the same track, looking for the vision of San Francisco. The other thing that I think is critical is the business atmosphere, particularly here in the Mission where the small business owners have been hit so hard. The leadership of this city and the mayor has to put out a message that we are in fact friendly to the business community, particularly the small business community. As a native San Franciscan it boggles my mind that businesses are leaving our city and going to Oakland. It’s absolutely absurd, and we’ve got to do something to reverse it and do it quick. Thank you. [applause]

MODERATOR: Mr. Gonzalez.

MATT GONZALEZ: There’s been a study of the Northeast Mission Industrial Zone by the Mission Anti-Displacement Coalition, and I just want to share a couple of facts that they concluded with a block by block investigation of land use in this area. Nearly one fifth of the building lots’ square footage in this area is now devoted to live-work or office use, an increase of 330% since 1991, and since 1991 over 1.7 million square feet of building space that was devoted to production, distribution and repair activities has been eliminated, a decline of 57%. With all due respect to Supervisor Newsom, he voted for many of the projects that made it impossible for the residents of the Mission to stay here and thrive here. You can’t live if you’re being evicted and there’s no family housing being built because it’s just live-work lofts. You can’t work here if the industrial zones are being poached for office space and if the minimum wage in the state gets you $14,000 a year. And you can’t engage in business if you’ve got a business tax that’s based solely on payroll which hurts small businesses and favors large businesses. I’m proud to say that I voted against, I think, five of the commissioners who were put forward for Planning and Board of Appeals. I’m sorry to say there is no Latino representation and no Mission representation on either of those bodies. [applause]

MODERATOR: Thank you. I have one thought that I would like to interject here, because there is so much concern about housing in this district. Has anyone here considered the possibility, out of all the housing that has been built with city, state and federal funds, to have the residents in those places have the opportunity to be able to buy their apartments? [applause]
I’d just like to interject it because eighty to eighty-five percent of this district is tenants. Should not some of those tenants be able to own their own homes? It’s just a question. I don’t expect a response, but maybe it would be possible to start thinking about that in the planning process. That’s all.