Sponsored link
Thursday, March 28, 2024

Sponsored link

News + PoliticsThe lessons of the Ferris Wheel

The lessons of the Ferris Wheel

Does SF need to overhaul its City Charter to create better departmental oversight -- and limit the potential for corruption?

-

The Board of Supes, after a pretty weird discussion, failed today to block a five-year contract for the Golden Gate Park Ferris Wheel – or maybe they didn’t.

Everyone on the board seemed to agree that this is not the most important topic at a time when the city is still under COVID lockdown, people are dying, homelessness is growing, and kids aren’t back in school.

And some, like Sup. Hillary Ronen, said that in these bleak times, something that offers fun for kids is important. (I agree – my kids are off at college, but if they were still young, that ride would be a godsend, a diversion. You can only take so many hikes and bike trips to the park before they get bored.)

Does this debate show the need for City Charter reform?

But there are a couple of larger issues at hand – and one complicated bit of city law.

Sup. Connie Chan said she hadn’t even seen a final contract for the deal, between the Recreation and Parks Department and a private company based in St. Louis.

Sup. Aaron Peskin said the company running the wheel was owned by family of the Koch Brothers, who clearly don’t need any money from San Francisco. And the first at least $200,000 of the revenue the city will get goes to a private nonprofit linked to the ongoing corruption investigations.

(UPDATE: Nick Gass, who works for Koch Industries, sent me the following: “To be clear, there is no familial relationship between the family that owns Koch Development (and thus SkyStar) and the family that owns Koch Industries (my employer).”)

“The contract does not exist,” Chan said. “It’s just a series of permits.” She noted that “corrupt government hurts all of us.”

Peskin: “This whole thing is funky from top to bottom.”

Yes, it is, and the Rec-Park director loves to find ways to monetize (that is, privatize) the parks. This is a $25 ride (with some free tickets to low-income kids); Sup. Shamann Walton said that a public attraction in a public park “should be free.”

There’s no question that the City Charter says the supervisors need to approve, by a two-thirds vote, any new “structure” in Golden Gate Park. But the City Attorney’s Office is arguing that the wheel is only temporary – albeit for five years – and so doesn’t count as a new “structure.”

(Weird role for the city attorney – the office represents Rec-Park, which says the wheel isn’t a structure, and some of the supes, who say it is. And the City Attorney’s Office isn’t the state Supreme Court, and its advice is only that – advice.)

Peskin argued that the wheel has a big concrete base that will not be taken away when the ride leaves, and that’s clearly a “structure.”

The only time I can find that anyone actually defined “structure” was in 2005, when the Planning Commission weighed on landmarks in the GGP concourse.

“Permanent signs,” the commission (no doubt with city attorney advice) determined, were those that would be in place for more than three months. “Temporary” installations were those that included “movable furniture, tents, temporary art installations, and portable performance stages.”

More: Chan noted that by the time this five-year deal is done, the money to the private company will exceed $1 million – and by law, no department can enter into a contract worth more than $1 million without board approval.

Sup. Dean Preston noted that he’s seen examples of city departments trying to find ways to manipulate contracts to avoid board approval. And, he said, Rec-Park could have made a better effort to reach out to Chan – it’s in her district – and agreed to more oversight.

The supes who wanted to support the wheel – and keep if there for four more years – had this possible bind. If they voted against the Chan resolution, which would approve the deal for another year, then Peskin argued they were voting against any authorization of the contract. “If you vote no, and two-thirds of the members don’t approve, then the authority (to allow the wheel) has not been granted,” he said.

The measure went down, 5-6, with Sups. Walton, Chan, Gordon Mar, Peskin, and Preston in favor.

So what happens now? The wheel probably stays where it is, since the city attorney and the mayor are on the side of the installation. (Unless somebody sues, which is highly unlikely and would involve a whole lot of money and effort on all sides).

But the Ferris Wheel has created an important debate that needs to continue, and probably will require a new look at the City Charter (long overdue anyway). Right now, the Mayor’s Office has far more authority than the district-elected supervisors, and departments under the mayor can approve contracts without adequate public oversight.

Maybe the next step is a Charter Reform working group and a hard look at accountability, corruption, and who runs the city.

48 Hills welcomes comments in the form of letters to the editor, which you can submit here. We also invite you to join the conversation on our FacebookTwitter, and Instagram

Tim Redmond
Tim Redmond
Tim Redmond has been a political and investigative reporter in San Francisco for more than 30 years. He spent much of that time as executive editor of the Bay Guardian. He is the founder of 48hills.

Featured

Screen Grabs: Fur flies in wrenching ‘The Fox’ and ridiculous ‘Dogman’

Cuddly canines comfort in Franz Streitberger’s World War II drama and kill in Luc Besson's new thriller.

SF prepares to evict people living in vehicles on Bernal Hill

After years of tolerance, parking enforcement set to start this week—but residents are already getting citations.

‘Dogman’ thriller’s stars dish on canine pasts—and strength of human connection

Luc Besson's latest features dozens of live pups, but Caleb Landry Jones and Jojo T. Gibbs were drawn to working with each other.

More by this author

In mayoral race preview, supes reject Breed veto of Peskin zoning bill

Mayor's move was all politics, not policy, most board members agree.

Can SF get an independent study of toxic risk at Hunters Point?

Plus: Preserving history on the waterfront, and preserving the waterfront from sea-level rise. That's The Agenda for March 24-31

Hundreds rally for Preston kick-off

Spirited event seeks to draw a clear line between the billionaires and the rest of the city.
Sponsored link
Sponsored link

You might also likeRELATED