Just for clarity, the SFPC is supposed to have 9 members, they currently have 8. When Councilor Pat Starr asked planning staff at the city council meeting Tuesday night about how an agenda item can pass the SFPC with just 3 votes the staffer said that they are short a member right now and that the chair cannot vote and with 2 recusals they could only get 3 votes for approval but was considered ‘quorum’.
I love how they just make the rules up as they go along.
I have argued for a long time we wouldn’t have these issues if there wasn’t so many conflicts of interest on the board.
I hold nothing against members who invest in development and contracting work, they are volunteers after all, but this position shouldn’t be a stepping stone to make sure your deals go thru and with turning most of the agenda into ‘consent’ we have NO clue what projects are getting approved that they are involved with.
Every member should be required to say what specific item they have a conflict with and why. Some members have done it in the past but most just say ‘I have a conflict, bye’.
I feel sorry for the members of the public who have to address the SFPC, because by the time an item makes it to the board, the decision has already been made and they kick it over to the rubber stampers to seal the deal.
During the Active Transportation Board meeting yesterday a constituent asked how they can get more involved and a city employee told them they need to start going to subcommittee meetings. I told this person afterwards that is the runaround the city gives you when you try to make changes to city ordinance. I told him I work directly with my elected officials. We elect them to help us with reasonable requests, they can go to the 9 AM meetings on a Wednesday morning and report back.