HANC recycling at the Board of Supervisors, February 28, 2011

Very good. madam clerk, please call item two.
>> resolution requesting the recreation and parks department and the

department of the environment collaborate to establish a comprehensive

parks recycling program utilizing the
expertise, volunteer base and facilities of the hanc
recycling center in golden gate park, for the department of the

environment to establish an independent recycling center master plan,

and requesting the recreation and parks department to rescind the

eviction of the hanc recycling center from
golden gate park.
center
>> I want to follow up
from a
well-administered, a thorough
hearing two weeks ago about the
possible eviction, termination
of lease of the haight-ashbury
neighborhood counseling recycle center, following that
particular hearing, we used the
information, which I thought was helpful in constructing a resolution

before us today.
I want to thank supervisor
avalos and mar for the co- sponsors of of the resolution. i do not

plan on this being another in-depth hearing as it
was two weeks ago, but as we
were able to will document from
that particular hearing, it seemed rather hasty and
inconsistent 5 rec and parks department and the part of the
environment and city to move on this termination of lease on the
recycle center by using the premise that the recycling center is a

nonconforming use
for this park -- for this part
of golden gate park, and as it
relates to the master plan, yet
not exercise any due diligence
as the city had done elsewhere
in trying to help a resource
like the recycling center moved to a different location.
That lack of due diligence, I
think, proves it was a rash decision in the way that it was
processed by the wreck and park
department, compared to the water recycling plant that is
being proposed by the puc in
golden gate park, which would
also be categorically accepted
as also a nonconforming use, where the city has realized
perhaps there should be alternate locations for that
particular service. In the same would apply, I think for the hit-.

Neighborhood council.
-- haight-ashbury neighborhood council. Yet when we search for an
alternative location for the puc water recycling center compared
to the hanc recycling center, it pales in comparison to whatever

efforts are being led for our efforts.
In helping to preserve and sustain an important resource.
That resource, some might argue, is obsolete, because of our blue
been efforts half
approximately 5% of the total
contribution of what our overall
objectives are, city-wide, towards our diversionary rates, as required

by state law.
Of those independent recycling
centers, hit after neighborhood counseling recycling center is
the largest of that recycling center, and their contribution
is not insignificant, but more importantly, quite profound with
regard to the level of tonnage it takes in every year and the

diversity of the recycling that
it is able to help process from many communities, not just communities

which have become the poster child for those who
are looking at an exhibit a to give cause for the removal of
hanc, being that of homeless
people who are distressed, down
and out, who often cause concern to many neighborhoods in the
surrounding area, of that part of our city, as well as other
parts unrelated to the recycling center.
People of middle class and upper means use the recycling center, too.
It would be a mistake for us to
lose this particular service
that has been such a mainstay in our larger environmental goals for

30-plus years and to not
think of a plan to have alternatively already in place.
By the fact of there was no
advanced thinking, before the
rec and park commission moved on
this, shows how intuitive the department and city is not synchronized

with the department of environment. When it was well reported here
that the concept of losing 1,600 tons per year and that is taken
in byhanc, to only be compensated with 27 vending machines that would

be
distributed in areas nearby
grocery stores so that people
could singularly feed bottles
and cans, was not well received in my opinion by the grocery
stores, as we have called and asked them, nor do I think it
was well thought out, if the goal was to mitigate that kind
of distress caused by people who call for the blue bins or
crew tried to resell those goods
that has given rationale to what
moved hanc in the first place.
When wholefoods opened its doors
in the upper haight, and I spoke to the vice President. They are

petrified of the notion
that they would all of a sudden
become the replacement facility. They had no idea this was coming.
That they would be the replacement facility of
multiple vending machines, not what they would not want to be a
host to those vending machines, but that they would be left
alone having to steer an usher
in and around the people traffic
that would be lining up, simply
trying to feed those bottles and cans.
So again, logic did not dictate
the proper reasoning of what the
city wants to do with hanc while
it thinks it is responding to neighborhood concerns.
So the resolution before us
simply tries to provide, I
think, a more methodical step that the city should undertake.
we ask mayor kelly, dept. Of the
environment, rec and parks, real estate, to look at their reasons
and marriage as to why hanc
should stay, and if not, provide that due diligence, which has been

absent in the process.
So that is really what is before us, colleagues.
i would be happy to cover to
public comment so that we can go and ahead and process what is on

people' s minds.
Keep in mind, how we got to this
place, the natural tension that has culminated over the years
between neighborhood and hanc,
is not just on the shoulder of
ofhanc, or competing member
organizations, but it is also a big city hall but did not refer these

tensions. Over the years, it could' ve
helped steer that unity that one might expect, even when there are

diverging opinions in
neighborhoods that are eclectic and well-known historical for their

civic engagement, like the
operate -- upper haight.
I think we are fortunate that
previous administrations, and
not so distant pats, have not use of aerosol and political
capital to obtain a win-win in this. I am hoping that with this
resolution, we can inject some sensibility that you cannot
dismiss, the matter where one' s
opinion May lie on what hanc
does or does not do for their
particular neighborhood, but you do not on rightly discounted a
contribution of a non-profit, of
a service, somebody who helped elevate our environmental goals over

all as being anachronistic
or absolute, and therefore not as necessary. I do not buy that.
by the lack of a plan that the department of the pirate --

environment, certainly was not able to prosper in lieu of hanc'
s loss and other independent recycling centers them seem to be on the

chopping
block, only shows why these
recycling centers should be stayed, and should be allowed to flourish

in the city.
The city needs to be that referee so that this tension is
not simply shouldered between labor organizations, but also on the

leadership of san francisco.
It is our obligation.
Mr. Chair, I would be more than happy to call their cards before us.

[Applause]
Thank you. [Applause]
I am going to call a few names.
joey came. Calvin whelks.
Michelle welsh. Jerry lastly.
If you could just line up in the middle, I would appreciate it.
>> thank you, supervisors. You pretty much summed it up.
i want to reiterate, this notion
that it is an anachronism, that it is unnecessary.
We have over 1000 people who
have used the recycling center in the last three months, who have

written to the mayor. We have their addresses.
1000 people over a three-month period.
The fact that we give out over
$700,000 a year in buyback to folks in the kids this is a needed

service.
This mythology that has been
voiced by some lame, suburban
columnist in "the chronicle"
attacking a neighborhood organization is absolutely outrageous.
It is bad policy to close the center down. Thank you.
>> neck speaker please.
-- next speaker please. >> I will try to be brief.
Scheherazade' s calvin while. I just want to stress, the fiscal facts.
The pay-per neighborhood council contributed $1.5 million a year to

the city' s economy.
Directly, it contributes $700,000 of that to the city' s
economy by diverting these of
cost to the city, of its 1,500
tons a year that it diverts from
the solid-waste stream, $500 a ton.
The fee that is generated for
the city by being a convenience-own buyback center.
We employ 10 people. We pay full health benefits for those 10 people.
It is astounding to me, at this
time and day, 10 greene jobs are
simply waved off as being meaningless.
I have no idea how many grain jobs mayor newsom created.
Certainly, losing 10 would be a substantial impact on the number
of green jobs created.
Also, for the last 20 years,
the haight-ashbury neighborhood council has played an increasingly

important role in the community garden movement in san francisco.
our fiscal sponsorship of
gardens for the environment, our
ability to use recycle and
surpluses to cover the
notorious slope of the city on contracts to guard and the environment

has meant we have
been able to keep their staff
body and soul together as well. It is an important economic benefit to

this city that should not be ignored. Thank you. >> next speaker

please.
>> jerry
lasley, a 30-year resident of the city.
i own eight units.
I use the recycling center very frequently. Those machines you are

proposing will not serve my means. There is no way to get the volume

of cardboard and paper that I used to get into those things.
I probably take 1 ton of paper myself.
you are talking about a community garden to serve maybe 40 people.
Right now, there are 3000 of us using this recycling center.
Thank you, supervisor mirkarimi, for pointing out the rash decisions

that have been made.
They came in through the back door and stabbed us in the back.
There was the public combating.
the one public meeting we had, no one from the other side showed up.
This is really not about community gardens but about one group tried

to get rid of another group.
And for past problems.
These things have not been vetted in the public. They need to be. This

is unfair.
it feels a little soviet union
to read in the paper one lie after the next.
I could not believe the column I had read or the weekend.
This guy says last friday was the last day of the recycling center,

and most people believed it because they have to trust our news media.
these people have been busy convincing my neighbors that if they only

get rid of these
people who come and take their recycling, they will increase their

property value.
So it is greedy and selfish motivation here.
No one got to say anything.
You had a more accountable only
to the mayor, a
a decision that
was made by the mayor.
This whole process spells, smells of something not fair.
So please do something about it.
we do not need to fix something that is not broken. You' re going to

have to pay money for this other thing which will not work.
>> I am going to call some names before the next speakers.
He lane cigar rock. Michael job.
>>
just a few quick point. You have heard all the arguments.
First, recycling is the way to go.
There is no substitute for it. Those machines will never work.
It has been an incredible biological and social economic resource for

the city for 30 years now.
It is a resource we should never paved over.
There are better alternatives. As a citizen of san francisco, a
parent, whose child benefits
from a local public school, do the right thing. Do with thousands in

the
neighborhood and thousands in this city want you to do. It is the best

opportunity for all of us in san francisco.
Do not just keep it going. Expand its impact.
>> next speaker please.
>> let me thank supervisor at
avalos, mar, elsbernd, and especially mirkarimi for considering this

issue.
Many of the criticisms of this have already been mentioned. The loss

of 10 jobs.
The simple fact that even if it
were at fault of the
proliferation of homeless, its removal would only ruler could the

problem instead of dealing with the source.
I am here to talk to you as a gardener. Although I would love nothing
more than a community garden across the street, there are simply

better locations.
First of all, exposures.
The site only gets one-third direct sunlight.
Would take extensive pruning and tree removal to bring it up to
acceptable level of sun exposure.
Furthermore, the site has been
operating as a recycling center for 30 years.
Trucks and forklifts have been driving through heavy oil and other

pollutants in the soil.
Because of that, the amount of
money, labor, and time, it would
take to run -- without the asphalt and remove trees would simply make

this fiscally irresponsible.
On top of all that, what makes it even more ridiculous, there are

numerous other sensible locations for community gardens, as was

mentioned two weeks ago.
There is a spot near mclaren
lodge, as well as a two-acre
field to the west of the recycling center.
If even a small portion of that were allocated for the community
garden, it would leave over 1 acre for field games.
If the rec and parks department
ultimately decides to stay there course, I hope that they will at
the very least postpone these evictions until they can
relocate the recycling center. Thank you for your time.
>> if I have called your name, please come into the middle of the

aisle.
Next speaker.
>> my name is michael job.
I am a member of the haight- ashbury. Thank you for the resolution.
i want to speak on being careful with who you listen to with regard to

the community gardens.
Commissioner mirkarimi, if you
come to the 600 block of schrader street and see with the greening of

the sidewalk has
done there, the department of urban forestry allocated all that.
one year later, the permit was okayed, after it was a done fact.
The same thing is going to
happen, as you heard from the
speaker before, if community gardens is allowed to be put into this

space.
It is not thought of by the ones proposing it.
All I am saying is, be careful review take advice from.
In regards to community gardens and so on. Please keep hanc recycling
center opened.
>> thank you.
Supervisor mar: I -- thank you. I am going to read some names.
>> greg gar..
I have worked at the recycling center for 27 years.
I started the native plant nursery. Of course, I support the
proposed resolution. I hope we can get the votes from the full board.
i understand it will not
overturn the rec and parks
commission vote, but it is an opportunity to go in another direction.
When you actually combine the
recycling, native plant nursery, a native plant gardens,
composting, that ecological classes that we have at this
site, the end result is really
the golden gate park because center.
That is what the facility is, and eco center.
The rec and parks department, the department of environment,
and hanc should be partners in sustainability. All stakeholders should

negotiate and find common ground. Thank you.
>> thank you. Next speaker please.
>> kevin bayuk.
member of the hanc recycling
center council.
It is clear this is not about community garden spirit to do the

retrofit at frederick and make it a community garden, you
would have to remove asphalt,
soil testing for chemicals and
tens of thousands of dollars of additional cost, which you would
not have to do any of the other applications approved already by the

commission.
In terms of being fiscally responsible, I would answer questions about

that.
It is also important to
mention, the hanc recycling
center already provide additional services to the agricultural

community. That would be provided by rec
and parks proposed community gardens urban agriculture site such as

the ability to pick up mulch and compost.
Hanc is providing those services at no cost to the city.
it has already been
proposed that they will not be able to use the capital budget that

they have been allocated.
Hanc is able to provide those services today at no cost to the city.

Something very important to consider.
In terms of money spent, $250,000 to get 45 garden plots.
I am a principal in the valley project here.
We have been able to spend $35,000 and provide gardening opportunities

for over 6000
people and educational opportunities for youth.
Something to think about when
bouncing funds during this time. We need to look at how we are

spending every dollar. Thank you.
>> thank you. Next speaker please.
>> hello, supervisors. I spoke at the last hearing.
spoke at the last hearing
and that that hearing and I talked about the reason that I
use the hanc
recycling center myself.
At the last hearing I overheard one of the opponents saying that these

people could just get other jobs. I have a neighbor with two sons at

home with him.
One has been unemployed for two years.
I do not think that we can cavalierly say that these people can just

get other jobs.
It can be difficult to find jobs
like these with health benefits.
I would like you to support this resolution and save these jobs. Thank

you.
supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. Next speaker, please.
>> my name is jim rhodes.
I am a 35 year resident of weeks height.
I am particularly interested in the part where they set up a
really good recycling operation for golden gate park. we can do that.
We have a lot of experience.
In past years we have talked about doing that but there has never been

follow-through.
If we could do something together, I would look forward to it. Thank

you.
Supervisor mirkarimi: thank you.
Next speaker, please.
>> thank you for your time. Good afternoon.
I managed two properties there and have been there since 1984.
The people against the recycling center do not want to solve the

issues, rather pushing them under the rug.
i know this because I have a government employee and I understand why.

We' re going to get paid regardless and it is more work that we have

to do on top of the other jobs.
As civil servants it is our
responsibility to properly vet issues.
I do not think that recommend park did so and I think it is

deplorable.
We have beaten to death of the
reasons why hanc should stay and
pointed out all the reasons why beckham park is wrong.
most importantly, in my opinion, the recycling center
provides revenue, jobs, and they are desperate for money.
I do not understand how the unjustified moving to recycle
and center initially to [...NEXT]

Pages: PREVIOUS | 1 | 2 | 3 | NEXT | All