Transcripts For SFGTV TIDA 20240705 : vimarsana.com

Okay kate, item number two, general Public Comment. This item is to allow members of the public to address the hits committee on matters that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the committee, and that do not appear on todays agenda. In addition to general Public Comment, Public Comment will be held during each item on the agenda. Members of the public may address the board once per agenda item for up to two minutes. You will hear a chime indicating you have 30s remaining and a second chime when your two minutes are up. At this time, your microphone will be muted to comply with city rules and maintain hearing decorum. Okay, are there any Public Comments . Seeing none, the next item, please. Item number three evaluation of parks governance alternatives. Good afternoon. Uh, good morning. Uh good morning. Yes morning. Im not. This is, i think maybe the First Committee Board Meeting that ive been to in the morning. First public hearing in the morning. Its very early. Nice to see you all. Friendly faces. Im in rogers, Deputy Director of tida. And today, im here to talk with you about our parks and open space. Uh for sf gov tv. We do have a presenter thats online. If youre out there early this morning, um, this is the outline. And so first were going to get started with a bit of the background on the phenomenal open spaces that are planned. Maybe i should ask our Board Members can you see the presentation on your monitors . Okay. Great uh, and then were going to look at a couple of policies that set the table for our management of these lands. Next, ill get into two areas of perhaps the most interest. The immediate operations of the parks that have opened or will shortly open, and the long terme Operations Plans, uh, and considerations that will be addressing together in the coming year. My overview will then end with next steps in a conversation. So lets get started. Uh, first, an overview of our discussions from last year. And there have been several in january, staff gave an overview of the park types active passive sports, cultural, etc. And then in april, tida discussed the priorities for the year drafting an operations and maintenance manual. And youve seen that draft already and outlining an approach for the near terme and long terme. In may. This body focused on conservancies and identified a preferred approach of public, private, nonprofit partnership. In july, you heard the dog park acceptance and an outline of the near terme and long terms approach. In october, we dove deeper into the Operations Plan for the dog parks. The rocks dog park and today well step back into the larger view of administration of parkland. Um, this board knows well the parks and open space represent a significant addition to San Franciscos park system. Um, this look from the northeast side really gives you a sense of the scale of the planned parks on Treasure Island. There will be approximately 290 acres of open space and parks, including 80 acres on Yerba Buena Island and 210 on Treasure Island in the foreground. Here is the wilds with an urban ag farm and sports field in the distance. Here are the parks that we expect to open by 2025. Were calling this the near terme. We open the rocks last month and the other parks shown in the orange hatch outline are currently under construction. These are the parks that will support Yerba Buena Island and the Central District of Treasure Island. Now lets look at two foundational policies. In november, we provided you with a written report in the entire parks and open space plan as an attachment. For now, however, i wanted to draw your attention to two policies that guide parks administration. First, the San Franciscos general plan. This is the citys long terme plan for the future. The portion on Treasure Island discusses a variety of spaces that should be provided and when addressing management here, it asks that we seek to increase access to the waterfront, natural habitat and. Enhance views. Second, the das parks and open space plan also sets policies on management and ownership. This document calls out three types of potential owners and managers private, public, and a potential conservancy. Its worth noting that there will be parcels transferred into private ownership. These include parks and plazas that generally serve the most adjacent residents. These spaces, such as neighborhood parks, will be open. Im sorry will be owned or managed by a Treasure Island Homeowners Association on or adjacent commercial development tied to will be responsible for the operations and management of all the major public open spaces and recreation facilities. This plan also establishes that teda could form a Parks Conservancy to manage and operate all or some of the open space. A conservancy would be a private 500 and 1c3 nonprofit that raises funding independent of ida in a manner that is mutually agreed upon. The conservancy would not own any park land. That land would continue to remain in the ownership of tida. These are the most pertinent policies for todays discussion. So with that background, lets review the near tum approach. This is a slide from our july presentation in the near terme. Now through 2025. The title board is governing the parks. Financing is coming from our existing budget. Both the cdd subsidy and the Community Facilities district and maintenance will be contract paid over the long terme. Weve listed all of the options for public, private, nonprofit, partnership. We know that the developer subsidy will end and that financing will come from the Community Facilities district, hoa fees and hopefully a yet to be formed conservancy. Uh, heres the plan for the rocks, which is that existing funding and contracting for operations and maintenance as well as administration by us. Um, similarly as we advance to the next phase of park openings, the near firm plan will be in place. It will expand slightly with additional contract support. You will consider next week at the full board in for staff capacity. Uh, our own operations, our supplemented with city staff from public works, rec and park San Francisco environment, including both biodiversity and integrated Pest Management support. Tida has real estate staff who are experienced at large scale programing of spaces. So as we move into the long range planning, the basic options have been the same since at least 2009. A couple of more recent reports are worth mentioning include the 2020 cmg and the 2022 city fellows. Studies both of which offered specific staffing ideas for more than 15 years. Various titus staff and boards have paid consultants hosted charrettes and produced reports. And while its good to know all of the options, there are some limitations that we must work with in one of these is Civil Service. Uh, make no mistake, Civil Service has its benefits for the workers within the system. And for society at large, with a high level of accountability, stability in expertise, and professional continuity. Um, for our parklands, Civil Service Commission Approval is required. While tida has been able to get short terme contracts approved, management of the parks does not fall under any of the permitted exceptions that would enable tida to do contracts outside of Civil Service for parks work, there are existing classifications for all the needed tasks. There is no requirement that would preclude the creation of new classified options. Should we find unique work and the work is not short turn and unanticipated or transactional, these limits apply to hiring for parks in the long terme, whether its done by tida or a conservancy thats associated with tida. In light of this, tida has had preliminary conversation with the rec and Parks Department with the general fund challenges that are ahead, there will be close eyes watching contracts that move work outside of the Civil Service system. Rec and park has institutional resources that can benefit titus parks with a whole departments worth of expertise across all levels of parks needs workers from rec and park have a deep bench to consult. They have access to the whole of the citys equipment, stock and support of administrative functions, their park system and care is highly rated. Both by the San Francisco Comptrollers Office as well as nationally by the trust for public lands. Lastly consistency would flow naturally with city policy on issues from human and dog behavior to the latest Standard Operating Procedures and monitoring. That said, we are very hopeful that a constituency we will be. Im sorry that a conservancy will be in the future. A conservancy we can offer much as this board heard in the spring, a conservancy needs a consistent agency and it needs parks, both of which are coming as resident s and parks are added. The private sector momentum thats needed will likely build. Looking back at past consultant work, the first steps to building a conservancy involve cultivating private sector leadership, a good vehicle can be a friends of group to organize the community. As this group grows, tidak can assist them in developing a Mission Statement and developing the framework for a relationship with the city. Um, the Business Plan for conserving, however, should be developed by the private partners with input and review by tida. In five years or so, there will be approximately 7 to 8000 People Living on the islands. As residents who have a vested interest in the success of the parks and are likely to be candidates for leaders in fundraisers as the island grows. Um, more people may mean added wherewithal to do the work and real dollars to improve our financing projections that brings us to next steps. Next week, youll hear a proposal for a short terme increase to our contracting authority. In february, well bring you an ordinance to establish a parks code, and in march, well return with a strategy for long terme operations and maintenance. That concludes the staff presentation. And were available for questions. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Annemarie um, for that. Um excellent presentation. And as you mentioned, from the history, uh, we started the discussion a long time ago. And in fact, um, since 2009, which went to actually set up, puge lot of this forward looking scenarios that you are talking about. And we are from previous discussion of course, weve gone all over the country, all over the world, as a matter of fact, and gone into new york and looking at models. And i know from my own personal standpoint that im looking forward to the conservancy is basically where we are. And im glad you mentioned, you know, rec and park, but even when you look at the rec and Park Strategies and partners, they have parks alliance. They are a lot of the stuff that are going on in San Francisco. So okay, improvement, maintenance and are there for that model. But thats not the you know, that thats a model that works. Again, im just highlighting that to show that even with the city rec and park, they are looking outside, you know, nonprofit for partnership. So we need to kind of underscore that. And so 2024 is going to be a decisive year because since 2009. And thats what i know that weve done the Due Diligence in getting all this information and we are going to move, um, expeditiously to make sure that at least we can put that framework that you alluded to in place, and we can do that. We have the staff, we have the knowledge, and we also have successful model. Were not going to do this all by ourselves. But again, where are people that we have spoken to . Uh, especially cities that have done this successfully in new york, we actually went to new york, a delegation a few years ago, and we saw how, uh, successful models could be. So having said that, im going to open now to commissioners to, um , yeah, yeah. Yes. So, commissioner, um, howard, go ahead please. Yeah. Thank you, thank you. Emery. Um, i have a couple of questions, and i must admit, im a tiny bit, um, confused. So, um, you mentioned a number of past reports, and we still havent. I havent seen those. So there was a report that was done. I dont know what year it was. Um, that, um, the preference was a conservancy, and we still havent seen that. I dont know if it was included. We asked that it be included in the, the materials, and im not sure if it. Oh, okay. Im sorry i didnt get that. Uh, request. The materials are pretty sparse. Theyre notes from conversations, meeting notes, and a summary of what happened. Id be happy to email those out to you. Or, uh, you know, im not sure if theyre on the network, but later today or early next week. Okay. Yeah, yeah, there was a i cant remember the year it was early on, but there was a report that was done that actually recommended a conservancy. And then that last months report that we got it didnt necessarily state a conservancy. It said there were all kinds of options. So yeah, im just it seems like from your, um, presentation that that a decision has been made that we would be doing a conservancy and thats Public Private partnership. Im just. Yeah. So it felt like there was something that got skipped in between. I just want to make sure that were all on the same page. I dont know if were all on the same page. A decision has not been made, and im sorry if my presentation, um, created any confusion. Uh, there have been those two reports which were in your november packet. Um from and those were the ones that i mentioned on the screen, the 2020, the students paper, the student paper, and a bunch of documents that were pulled together. But it did refer to that earlier in the cmg report. And then so the other materials that i have are from before, uh, tida was in the agreement with the developer in 2011. So before all the planning documents were adopted. But it was similar conversations about the potential options. So those have been on the table for a while. Um, a decision has not been made. Okay. Yeah. I guess maybe, um, maybe thats something. Weve been talking about this for a while as, um, director richardson said, and as we all know and just, um, i guess when do we get to a decision . And then how do we begin to move forward . And thats where i really i yeah, i mean, the list of the times that weve had these discussions, i mean, they were very, very sparse. So there wasnt a lot of in depth. And then this last meeting where we actually discussed these various options and that it appeared like we have made a decision and just wanted to be clear that, yeah, were still in a yeah, we still need to dig in a little bit anyway. We need to. Annemarie, could you come up . Um, just so that we can. Commissioner shen, thank you. Um thank you. You know, for that summary, um, and it seems like, um. What was being, uh. What your summary was about was that that there has been some talk of a conservancy that that it may be, in fact, um, something we do. That decision hasnt been made, but its not something that is being contemplated at this time. Um, is that right . Im sorry. Im having a hard time hearing you. Can you say that again . Hello . Um it seemed like, um, in the summary that you just presented, uh, you talked about the possibility of a conservancy, a nonprofit conservancy. And id like to point out that it is telling that that prior to 2011, and i think most of the work on the parks and open space plan was done prior to 2011 when, when all of it was adopted at that point in time. Since then, i dont believe that weve had a comprehensive study about the alternate lives that are before us and this is what were trying to do at this point in time. Am i correct that there hasnt been, uh, an analysis of how how the long terme plan thing, um, and the organizational structure should be weve been wanting to discuss it. We need a roadmap to discuss it, but they havent been any study of on that, on those alternatives that i know of. And board president s and you may very well be correct that theres not been a study that is satisfied to this board. There have been the two studies that were mentioned, the cmg study about staffing and the city fellows study in 2022 that were in your packets. But, um, those are the same options as and have not really advanced the conversation to decision making. I think those are the primary studies that have been done in post 2009. So the cmg study 2020, um, uh, certainly these two studies, uh, we would like to have those. You do have those in your packet from november. We can recirculate those. Um, and the cmg study, if i remember correct me. Um did was more about the maintenance. They had a plan for, for some of the procedures for operating the parks. I dont recall that they delved deeply into what the organizational structure would be, but let me look at it again. Um the other study was a report. It was a paper to which a graduate student at the Goldman Center did. It was simply a paper. He did not necessarily have the background in horticulture or garden management or parks. Um, it was a Public Policy paper that he did. Um, and so he, he also came up with some ideas, um, which some of them were good. Some of them need to be discussed. Um, i think that, um, its important to note that in when they did the cmg, im sorry, when they did the open space, um, parks and open space. Um plan, which is part of the dda. Um, its really telling that they looked at th