Note: On industrial facilities, I'm assuming we are making a special exception in our position to support the HANC recycling center in case it is considered industrial, and we should codify that exception. Eric B On 4/27/2011 1:49 PM, Eric Brooks wrote:

Hi all,

I've finally taken most of your comments and incorporated them into the Parks platform.

See the attached word document, or below after 'Here is the Platform'

Please suggest any further proposed amendments soon so that I can try to work them in before tonight's meeting.

A few things I left unchanged.

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.

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

3) Industrial spaces defined. We can probably get this from City code. I just didn't have enough time to look it up.

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.

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... ;)

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

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.

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.

Ok - Here is the Platform:

SFGP Policy Platform: Public Parks, Recreation Properties, Commons & Open Space

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

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

III. 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

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 III.)

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 /to /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.)

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

VII. 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

VIII. Opposes the placement of industrial facilities of any kind in public parks, recreation areas, commons, or open space

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

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

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

_______________________________________________ Sustainability mailing list Sustainability@sfgreens.org https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainability