<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
Hi all,<br>
<br>
I've finally taken most of your comments and incorporated them into
the Parks platform.<br>
<br>
See the attached word document, or below after 'Here is the
Platform'<br>
<br>
Please suggest any further proposed amendments soon so that I can
try to work them in before tonight's meeting.<br>
<br>
A few things I left unchanged.<br>
<br>
1) Pierre's request that we allow fees for use impacts. While I
agree with doing this for large events (and added this) for smaller
scale uses it becomes a sort of regressive tax. Remember that many
people use public places and facilities because they cannot afford
to spend money as wealthier people do on paid activities. So, since
the wealthy have created a situation in the first place where they
have highly disparate undue paid access to a huge amount of what
ought to be public right-of-way and activity, it makes sense for us
to redistribute wealth from them to our public places through
increased taxes going to the general fund.<br>
<br>
2) Public process. I agree there are big issues, but I think we
should hash those nuances out in a live meeting, and likely in a
larger discussion on vastly improved public access to City decision
making in general, not just around Rec & Park<br>
<br>
3) Industrial spaces defined. We can probably get this from City
code. I just didn't have enough time to look it up.<br>
<br>
4) I left the 50-50 nonprofit-donation vs City inputs as is, however
I am personally very open to cutting the portion from nonprofits
down even further, and I also favor banning it at times,
-especially- in the cases of the Botanical and Zoological societies.
Let's kick this around more at the meeting tonight.<br>
<br>
5) Listing and describing specific positions we have taken on
specific cases. Good to add, I just didn't have time to do so; and
I'd like to delegate that task to someone else... ;)<br>
<br>
6) I didn't add the term 'mandatory' fees because of a change I made
higher up in the doc about nonprofits charging donations for
expenses, and also because the section in question was specifically
barring -excess- fees that would go to the City or Rec & Park<br>
<br>
7) I didn't add specific language on food cart size because the
other changes I made around allowing small local business,
tangentially cover that (by removing all profit motive to the
Department) but we still could specifically limit cart sizes in
specific types of places - let's discuss tonight.<br>
<br>
8) On supporting the City charter calling for votes on industrial
facilities in public places, I personally worry that opening such
stuff to public votes could actually make the situation worse
because private actors have so much freedom to buy ballot elections,
so I'm thinking we should just stick with a ban, and then if some
unforeseen use is badly needed, Supes, the Mayor or the public can
do the work proactively to get a measure put on the ballot for it.<br>
<br>
Ok - Here is the Platform:<br>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object
classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui></object>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family:
Helvetica;">SFGP Policy
Platform: Public Parks, Recreation Properties, Commons &
Open Space<br>
<br>
I. Opposes the sale or transfer of any public park, recreation
properties, commons,
or open space to private ownership, and supports the progressive
transfer of
private land and facilities to become public park and recreation
property, wild
open space, public gardens, and public commons to the greatest
extent possible
in San Francisco<br>
<br>
II. Opposes any fees charged to any person for access to, or use
of, public
parks, recreation areas, commons, open space, or public
recreational
facilities; which should all instead be paid for via San
Francisco's general
fund; with the exceptions that 1) special large performance
events which occur
once per year or less frequently may charge for entry and may
reimburse the
City for (and only for) added expense necessary to police,
maintain and restore
public areas during and after the event; and 2) sports and other
not-for-profit
activity leagues, clubs or associations may charge fees
sufficient to cover
their own expenses<br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">III</span><span
style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">. Opposes the
operation of any
business or nonprofit in public parks, recreation areas and
commons, in which
the City receives a part of the profits of those operations
above and beyond
what is necessary to maintain the operations themselves and
mitigate their
impacts on City property<br>
<br>
IV. Supports a complete ban on formula retail establishments in
public parks,
recreation areas, commons, or open space; only non-formula local
retail should
allowed in any public spaces, and only with the assurance that
their presence
is only for enhancement of the experience of public spaces (with
no profits
going to the City as indicated in point </span><span
style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">III</span><span
style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">.)</span><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><br>
</span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;"><br>
V. Opposes the management of any public park, recreation area,
commons, or open
space, by a for-profit private corporation or partnership; and
insists that any
outside nonprofit management should be strictly hired by
contract with the
City, with no ongoing funds provided <i style="">to </i>the
City by the nonprofit managers, and with one-time donated funds
or expenses for
capital improvements provided by a nonprofit for a space or
facility which it
manages being at least equally shared by the City (as noted in
point IX.)<br>
<br>
VI. Opposes the leasing or renting of any part of a public park,
recreation
area, recreational facility, commons, or open space to any
person, private
club, or for-profit corporation or partnership; such parks,
areas, facilities
and commons, should be perpetually open and free for public use;
and the SFGP
favors sign-up/waiting lists on a first-come first-serve basis
as a better
method of equitably allocating use of public spaces and activity
facilities,
with stipulation that City staff will allocate uses judiciously
with overall
public good as its top priority<br>
<br>
</span><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">VII</span><span
style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Helvetica;">. Opposes the
use of fees on any
private business or non-profit activity in public parks,
recreation areas,
recreational facilities commons, or open space, in order to gain
operating or
capital funds for the City, or the San Francisco Recreation and
Parks
Department, its facilities, or operations<br>
<br>
VIII. Opposes the placement of industrial facilities of any kind
in public
parks, recreation areas, commons, or open space<br>
<br>
IX. Supports the requirement that no private donation of funds,
construction,
recreational facilities, equipment, or ongoing
facility/equipment maintenance,
may be made to City and County of San Francisco public parks,
recreation areas,
commons, or open space, unless the City and County matches or
exceeds each such
donation in kind and value; and that such donations may only be
made after very
thorough public input on how any given section or facility of
San Francisco
public parks, recreation areas commons, or open space should be
used toward the
common good of the community<br>
<br>
X. Supports a complete ban on the use of chemical pesticides or
fertilizers in
public parks and wild areas, and supports a ban on the use of
artificial turf
and other infrastructure that may have toxic and or
environmentally degrading
impacts on public spaces</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family:
Helvetica;">XI.
Supports changes in the appointment process to the Rec &
Parks Commission
such that at least one half or more of its voting members are
either 1) appointed
by the Board of Supervisors or 2) elected by San Francisco
voters, with 11
members, each being elected by Supervisorial district</span></p>
<br>
</body>
</html>