Why doesn't Bevan Dufty want to vote on the Market/Octavia Project and the UC project?

FROM:
Mary Miles (SBN 230395)
Attorney at Law
San Francisco, CA 94102

TO:
Supervisor Bevan Dufty
San Francisco Board of Supervisors
Room 244, City Hall
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, CA 94102

DATE: April 7, 2008

By FAX to: (415) 554-6909; by e-mail; and by U.S. Mail.

IMMEDIATE DISCLOSURE REQUEST
REQUEST PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RECORDS ACT (Gov. Code §§6250 et seq.); and SAN FRANCISCO ADMINISTRATIVE CODE §§67 et seq., 67.25 (“SUNSHINE ORDINANCE”).

Dear Mr. Dufty:

Pursuant to the Public Records Act (California Government Code §§6250 et seq.), and the San Francisco “Sunshine Ordinance” (San Francisco Administrative Code §§67 et seq., 67.25), this is a request for immediate access to and the opportunity to get copies of the following documents.

1. In public hearings you have requested recusal from voting on measures on the Market-Octavia Project. Please provide all documents that have led to your request to be recused, including but not limited to the following:
a. Documents showing all real and personal property owned by you.
b. Documents showing assessed value of all real property owned by you.
c. Documents showing all real property transactions in which you have been involved.
d. Documents showing all campaign contributions and endorsements received by you.
e. Documents showing all campaign contributions promised to you.
f. Documents and records showing all communications you have received on the Market-Octavia Project from any individual, group, organization, business, and City staff, including electronic (e-mail), letters, memoranda, consultations, telephone calls, staff communications, and records of communications of any kind sent or received by you on the Market-Octavia Project.
g. Documents and records showing all conflicts of interest and any other reason why you have requited recusal from voting on the Market-Octavia Project.

2. In public hearings you have requested recusal from voting on measures on the University of California Extension development Project, aka “55 Laguna” Project, aka “218-220 Buchanan” project. For purposes of this Request, please include as the Project all proposals for development by any entity or person, including the University of California and their Regents, A.F. Evans, and Openhouse, and any other entity that will engage in the implementation of this Project if it is approved. Please provide all documents that have led to your request to be recused, including but not limited to the following:
a. Documents showing all real and personal property owned by you.
b. Documents showing assessed value of all real property owned by you.
c. Documents showing all real property transactions in which you have been involved.
d. Documents showing all campaign contributions and endorsements received by you.
e. Documents showing all campaign contributions promised to you.
f. Documents and records showing all communications you have received on the “55 Laguna” Project from any individual, group, organization, business, and City staff, including electronic (e-mail), letters, memoranda, consultations, telephone calls, staff communications, and records of communications of any kind sent or received by you on the Market-Octavia Project.
g. Documents and records showing all conflicts of interest and any other reason why you have requested recusal from voting on the “55 Laguna” Project.

If I have not received a response and all materials requested within twenty-four hours (one business day) of your receipt of this Request, I shall deem this Request denied and shall so inform the Court.

Thank you for your immediate attention to and action on this Request.

Sincerely,
Mary Miles

Why doesn't Chris Daly want to vote on the Market/Octavia Plan?

FROM:
Mary Miles (SBN 230395)
Attorney at Law
San Francisco, CA 94102

TO:
Supervisor Chris Daly
San Francisco Board of Supervisors
Room 244, City Hall
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, CA 94102

DATE: April 7, 2008

By FAX to: (415) 554-7974; by e-mail; and by U.S. Mail.

IMMEDIATE DISCLOSURE REQUEST
REQUEST PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RECORDS ACT (Gov. Code §§6250 et seq.); and SAN FRANCISCO ADMINISTRATIVE CODE §§67 et seq., 67.25 (“SUNSHINE ORDINANCE”).

Dear Mr. Daly:

Pursuant to the Public Records Act (California Government Code §§6250 et seq.), and the San Francisco “Sunshine Ordinance” (San Francisco Administrative Code §§67 et seq., 67.25), this is a request for immediate access to and the opportunity to get copies of the following documents.

1. In public hearings you have requested recusal from voting on measures on the Market-Octavia Project. Please provide all documents that have led to your request to be recused, including but not limited to the following:
a. Documents showing all real and personal property owned by you.
b. Documents showing assessed value of all real property owned by you.
c. Documents showing all real property transactions in which you have been involved.
d. Documents showing all campaign contributions and endorsements received by you.
e. Documents showing all campaign contributions promised to you.
f. Documents showing your membership, affiliation, endorsement or support of any individual or organization that supports or in involved with the Market-Octavia Project. If you have no such membership, affiliation, endorsement or support, please so state in writing.
g. Documents and records showing all communications you have received on the Market-Octavia Project from any individual, group, organization, business, and City staff, including electronic (e-mail), letters, memoranda, consultations, telephone calls, staff communications, and records of communications of any kind sent or received by you on the Market-Octavia Project. If such documents and records do not exist, please so state in writing.
h. Documents and records showing all conflicts of interest and any other reason why you have requested recusal from voting on the Market-Octavia Project. If no such documents exist, please so state in writing.

2. In public hearings you have requested recusal from voting on measures on the University of California Extension development Project, aka “55 Laguna” Project, aka “218-220 Buchanan” project. For purposes of this Request, please include as “the Project” all proposals for development by any entity or person, including the University of California and their Regents, A.F. Evans, and Openhouse, and any other entity that will be involved in the implementation of this Project if it is approved. Please provide all documents that have led to your request to be recused, including but not limited to the following:
a. Documents showing all real and personal property owned by you.
b. Documents showing assessed value of all real property owned by you.
c. Documents showing all real property transactions in which you have been involved.
d. Documents showing all campaign contributions and endorsements received by you.
e. Documents showing all campaign contributions promised to you.
f. Documents showing your membership, affiliation, endorsement or support of any individual or organization that supports or in involved with the “55 Laguna” Project. If you have no such membership, affiliation, endorsement or support, please so state in writing.
g. Documents and records showing all communications you have received on the “55 Laguna” Project from any individual, group, organization, business, and City staff, including electronic (e-mail), letters, memoranda, consultations, telephone calls, staff communications, and records of communications of any kind sent or received by you on the “55 Laguna” Project. If such documents and records do not exist, please so state in writing.
h. Documents and records showing all conflicts of interest and any other reason why you have requested recusal from voting on the “55 Laguna” Project. If no such documents exist, please so state in writing.

If I have not received a response and all materials requested within twenty-four hours (one business day) of your receipt of this Request, I shall deem this Request deliberately denied.

Thank you for your immediate attention to and action on this Request.

Sincerely,
Mary Miles

Rachel Kraai: "I'm considered brave and crazy..."

Below is a transcription of the public comment by the SF Bicycle Coalition's Rachel Kraai before the Board of Supervisors' City Operations and Neighborhood Services Committee on April 17, 2006. 

This is the meeting during which this BOS committee---including Supervisor Mirkarimi---voted to implement part of the Bicycle Plan by eliminating almost all of the street parking on Market Street between Van Ness and Octavia Blvd. to make bike lanes. 

The committee did this in spite of the vigorous opposition of many small businesses in the area. Adding insult to injury, they rushed it through at the behest of the mayor to get it done in time for Bike to Work Day. 

The message the SF Bicycle Coalition was sending then and is sending now: the safety of cyclists---as if merely painting bike lanes on Market Street makes them safe---trumps all other considerations on the streets of San Francisco, including the interests of the city's small businesses.

See also this, this and this

Rachel Kraai: 
Thank you, Supervisors, for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Rachel Kraai. I am a six-year San Francisco Resident, pedestrian, transit user, and a bicyclist. I'm also the newest staff member of the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, and I'd like to speak as a new staff member. I have a simple point today. 

I began working at the SFBC over one month ago, and it is astounding. In that time, the number of people that I've spoken to who are interested and passionate about riding bicycles in the city but who are simply scared. We have volunteers, and we even have an intern who comes in for almost one full day a week who does not bike in the city because they're terrified by the prospect of getting on busy city streets where there is not space for them to ride. 

I'm considered brave and crazy by some of these people for going down Market Street to the major economic hub of our city daily. This is an incredible shame in our progressive city. People are blocked from using sustainable transportation to get to the city's major economic hub. To feel safe, these people need a designated space to ride in. 

The visual distinction of a bike lane is mental as well as physical in making people feel that they belong on the street. Without a bike lane these people feel that the street is for cars only, and the rules of the road belong to cars, not to bicycles. 

I'm also a resident of the Mission and use Valencia daily. The popular Valencia bike lane is one of the major feeders into this stretch of Market. Valencia serves current and potential bicyclists in the Mission, Glen Park and Noe Valley. In this city, which professes that [inaudible] a sustainable green policy, these current and potential cyclists want a safe way to get to the major economic hub of our city. Thank you.