Bored of Supervisors - 8/12/08

1. The Mark of the Beast

In Tuesday's meeting, the Board voted down an ordinance proposed by Supervisor Daly that would require  "every lobbyist or person who is acting on behalf of a lobbyist" to wear "a badge...that shall be visible at all times when the person is making a lobbying contact." (Proposed ordinance here: Download lobbyist_id.pdf.) Only Supervisors Ammiano, Daly, Mirkarimi and Peskin voted for it. I guess the lobbyists against the law did a good job of, well...you know...

2. Better Man

We lie and say we're in love with them,
Can't find a better plan,
We dream of another; a retrofit instead,
Can't find a better plan...

The Supes continued their coy dance with the peaker plants by re-referring the matters to the Government Audit and Oversight Committee.

3. A Little Gentrification Wouldn't Be So Bad...

Is there no infrastructure in crappy neighborhoods because no one lives there? Or does no one live there because there is no infrastructure?

Supervisor Sandoval seems to think the former is the answer. The way it is now, SF Planning Code Section 315 says that new housing developments can meet their inclusionary housing obligations by either (1) providing affordable units on-site (Sec. 315.4); (2) building some affordable units within a one-mile radius of the development (Sec. 315.5); or (3) paying a fee to the Mayor's Office of Housing (Sec. 315.6).

Sandoval’s proposal deals with option number 2. (Ordinance here:Download off_site_housing_ordinance.pdf.) In it, developers would have the option of building 25% of the required inclusionary housing outside of the one-mile radius. Such out-of-zone housing cannot be in industrial zones or within a quarter mile of a “development or developments that consist of 200 or more publicly-owned and operated affordable housing units.” (Read: developers can’t put all their affordable housing units in the Bayview – a practice that prompted the one-mile rule in the first place. The Western Addition will also largely be off-limits with this restriction.)

The Planning Commission issued a report disagreeing with the proposal, saying that the purpose of the one-mile radius thingy is to create diverse little neighborhoods. (Report here: Download off_site_housing_report.pdf.) If we allow developers to build elsewhere to satisfy their inclusionary housing needs, they’ll all be building is undesirable locations where land is cheap.

And Sandoval was all: Hello?!? Broke-ass places are precisely where we need to be building things! This one-mile rule means that SOMA gets everything and my district gets squat. (Note that Supervisor Daly, whose district encompasses SOMA, was also a sponsor of the proposal.)

Only Supervisors Ammiano, Alioto-Pier and Maxwell disagreed so the ordinance was passed on its second reading yesterday.

Temporary Programming Interruption

The Board will be on a hiatus until September 2. Don't worry, I have no plans to go out and get a life. There will still be lots of fun election stuff to write about in the meantime.

--Melissa

I TOLDJASO, CONSTANT READERS: Remember when I wrote that thanks to the Board refusing to outsource security functions at SFGH, Laguna Honda and related clinics, Mistermayor was going to freeze money for the pet projects of those who voted not to outsource? To the tune of 5 million? Sure enough…it’s “news” today! Why would a Supe allow this to happen? Well, by refusing to outsource security, they suck up to labor, and by putting back in pet projects knowing they will be cut, they can blame Mistermayor for being heartless. Win-win!

Comments

[jamie]

Applause for Sup. Ammiano's noise legislation .... the motorcycles that have a tailpipe modified to set off car alarms as they roar down the street are a horrible nuisance to all around.

[chester]

1. What constitutes "lobbying contact"? Does that refer to visits to City Hall and/or other City offices? Or also attendance at fundraisers, benefits, social functions, etc. where City officers are in attendance? If a lobbyist calls a City officer on the phone, do they have to put on a badge, regardless of where they may be physically located? And has anyone considered the plight of nudist lobbyist or has the Ethics Commission made provisions for armband badge adapters?

2. Let's just force lobbyists to sew a scarlet "L" badge onto all their work clothes. I could get behind that.

[citydweller]

Amen jamie, and include the car alarms themselves--especially the ones that run up and down the scale, go on forever, and are set off not only by motorcycles, but by trucks as well.

[Fredo]

I will support Daly's legislation if he is required to wear a copy of the threatening e-mail he sent prior to DCCC elections. Or, you know, for brevity, just a sign that says "tool."