Read on Twitter
It's kind of breathtaking the way we currently make decisions about big projects that are *entirely the city's creation* in San Francisco.
Step 1: The city makes what might *appear* to a layperson to be a "decision" to ask various developers to propose projects in a "Request for Proposal" or RFP.
In the case of Balboa Reservoir, 6 years ago the city asked for housing proposals on an underutilized parking lot.
In the case of Balboa Reservoir, 6 years ago the city asked for housing proposals on an underutilized parking lot.
Step 2: In what again might appear to be a "decision," the city selects a team of developers that has a proposal they like best.
This team is now in charge of trying to get their permits from... the city.
This team is now in charge of trying to get their permits from... the city.
Step 3: 6 years of community meeting to make sure this decision-making process is as agonizing as possible.
People are selected to sit on a Citizens Advisory Committee. Hundreds of meetings take place. Every aspect of this is discussed in excruciating detail.
People are selected to sit on a Citizens Advisory Committee. Hundreds of meetings take place. Every aspect of this is discussed in excruciating detail.
Step 4: At every step as things move forward, the haters are enraged and organized, while the supporters are like "Can't we be done yet? I thought we already made a decision???"
Step 5: Then the project goes before random things like the PUC for approvals. Finally, the project goes before the Planning Commission. They approve the proposal and rezoning.
Again, you might think this is a decision.
Again, you might think this is a decision.
Step 6: It goes before the Land Use and Budget & Finance where people make arguments like "How dare you monetize this public land in order to generate more funds to get more subsidized affordable housing on this site!"
One might have thought that we made that decision AT STEP 1.
One might have thought that we made that decision AT STEP 1.
Step 7: LAST MINUTE NEGOTIATIONS!
Could these have been done at any point in the last 6 years? Well no, because that would add predictability and we like things to be TOTALLY ARBITRARY. This drives up costs so we have something to complain about later!
Could these have been done at any point in the last 6 years? Well no, because that would add predictability and we like things to be TOTALLY ARBITRARY. This drives up costs so we have something to complain about later!
Step 8: Random delays to have MORE NEGOTIATIONS!
Someone complained. So, until they feel like their concerns have been addressed, we will continue to have more meetings behind closed doors with the die-hard haters.
Could not find a GIF for "room where hope dies."
Someone complained. So, until they feel like their concerns have been addressed, we will continue to have more meetings behind closed doors with the die-hard haters.
Could not find a GIF for "room where hope dies."
Step 9: Something gets cut.
The Supervisor needs to deliver a scalp to the haters, so something gets cut. The question is always how much.
The Supervisor needs to deliver a scalp to the haters, so something gets cut. The question is always how much.
Step 10: Everyones is unhappy and everyone believes the process is corrupt.
And like... they're not wrong.
::whispers::
by right permitting reduces corruption
And like... they're not wrong.
::whispers::
by right permitting reduces corruption
Step 11: Something passes, and the developers move on to try to get their permits from the Totally Not Corrupt Department of Building Inspection.
