Amidst ongoing confusion about the meaning and intent of Supervisor Maxwell’s Eastern Neighborhoods Resolution (See previous article), the Board of Supervisors voted 9-2 (Maxwell and McGoldrick dissenting) to continue the item until January 9. The continuance motion was approved following the Planning Department’s announcement that it would issue critical new information about the Eastern Neighborhoods in February. This raised questions about the wisdom of passing the resolution prior to that time.

Based on feedback I received to my article this week about the Resolution, the many questions Board members had about the matter at Tuesday’s meeting were no surprise. The text of the resolution and the process surrounding the Resolution has exaggerated the differences between the various interest groups, creating unnecessary conflict when a broad consensus may well be within reach.

Whether that consensus can be reached before January 9 is unclear, but someone needs to try. I have talked at length to opponents and supporters of the Resolution, and their vision for the Eastern Neighborhoods is not as different as the emotion and rhetoric makes it appear.

By all accounts, the process surrounding the Eastern Neighborhoods has been deeply flawed. Fortunately, the success of the Western Soma Task Force shows an alternative approach, so that the city may have learned its lesson.

The central questions surrounding the Eastern Neighborhoods are twofold:

1. How should owners with projects already under environmental review be treated?

2. If this group is allowed to build their projects, and a market-rate construction moratorium or ban applies to all other parcels, would this result in more market rate housing than Maxwell and her allies find acceptable?

If the answer to the latter is no, than a permanent solution, rather than additional months of conflict, could be at hand.

Send feedback to rshaw@beyondchron.org