Shall it be City policy to use Pier 45 as the site for a public educational facility focusing on the San Francisco Bay and operated by an independent non-profit organization?
The Port Commission has selected a for-profit developer to build a San Francisco history museum at Pier 45. This proposition would declare it the policy of the City and County of San Francisco to create a public educational and interpretive facility at Pier 45, operated by an independent 501 (c) (3) non-profit organization, not subsidized by San Francisco taxes. It would also declare it to be the policy of the City and County that the Port Commission shall not enter into any agreements about the use of Pier 45 unless the Commission and the Board of Supervisors have determined that the use is consistent with this Declaration of Policy.
As a policy statement, the measure would not legally require any action. However, should the proposed policy be adopted by the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors, in my opinion, it may reduce the amount of revenue that could be charged by the Port of San Francisco for use of Port property.
- Summary of Arguments FOR Proposition R:
- If this proposition passes, the Port Commission would reconsider its decision to award development rights to a for-profit company, and work to find a non-profit educational organization instead.
It is inappropriate to give a private developer access to an important piece of the San Francisco waterfront. The developer selected by the Port Commission would create a "Disneyland-style" theme park inconsistent with San Francisco's traditions.
This proposition would direct the Port Commission to ensure that Pier 45 is for public use and not for private for-profit use; it would direct the Commission to ensure that any development at Pier 45 be of an educational and interpretive nature.
This proposition would support the preservation of traditional maritime activities like commercial fishing on the San Francisco waterfront.
- Summary of Arguments AGAINST Proposition R:
- A Declaration of Policy has no effect; this proposition would not be legally binding on the Port Commission, or on the Board of Supervisors.
The developer selected by the Port Commission is the best able to create an institution at Pier 45 that will attract visitors and present San Francisco's history to them.
This proposition provides no funding for the interpretive and educational center it proposes.
The proposition was put on the ballot by an organization that was not selected by the Port Commission to develop Pier 45. The competitive bid process should be respected, and when a decision is made it should be allowed to stand, not revisited in the political
arena.
|
|
Nonpartisan Information
League of Women Voters
News and Analysis
San Francisco Chronicle
Links to sources outside of Smart Voter are provided for information only and do not imply endorsement.
|
League of Women Voters of California
