Miraloma Life Online – March 2011

  • Miraloma Church Cell Tower Neighborhood Alert!
  • Follow-Up Report: JP Murphy Clubhouse Meeting on Parks Privatization Plan
  • Update on the Proposed CVS Drugstore
  • Sunnyside Park Surplus Dollars Community Meeting
  • Neighborhood Emergency Response Team (NERT)
  • Community Police Advisory Board – Crime Alert Posters
  • MPIC Board Welcomes Shannon Chu and Says Goodbye to JoAnn Eastep
  • From The Legal Files:  Boundary Issues
  • Summary of Minutes of MPIC Board Meeting of February 3, 2011

Miraloma Church Cell Tower Neighborhood Alert!

by Jane Risk, Norman Nager, and Judith Dauphinais

T-Mobile has re-submitted their proposal for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to install eight flat-panel antennas in the steeple of Miraloma Community Church. The Classis of Central California (a region/diocese of the Reformed Church in America) now owns the Miraloma Church property, and has appointed an Interim Board of Directors to manage it. This board has recommended selling the property but feels bound by the contractual commitment between T-Mobile and the prior building owner. Reverend Mike Hayes, Treasurer of the Board, has assured us that he understands our community’s concerns and is willing to meet with us.

The T-Mobile proposal will be heard before the SF Planning Commission in the next few months, with hearing notices posted near the Church and in the newspaper 20 days in advance. Members of the public can testify and submit signed petitions at the hearing. Planning Commission rejection of the CUP would kill the project unless T-Mobile appeals to the Board of Supervisors. Planning Commission approval could be appealed, but only within 30 calendar days and by at least 20 percent of all property owners within a radius of 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the church property. The Board of Supervisors could disapprove the action of the Planning Commission by a vote of at least two-thirds of the Board.

The April 2010 issue of Miraloma Life contained a detailed list of reasons to object to the construction of a cell tower in the church steeple, which can be found online at http://www.miralomapark.org/miralomalife/miraloma-life-online-april-2010/
Although possible health risks are a major concern, because Section 704 of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 forbids opposition on health grounds, our testimony at he hearing must be limited to the following issues:

(1) The proposed cell tower is not necessary. This must be addressed by checking cell phone reception in T-Mobile’s supposed “dead zones.” In the June 2010 issue of the Miraloma Life we asked neighborhood residents to fill out a survey rating their cell phone reception. Of the 27 people who returned that  survey, 15 stated that their cell phone service was excellent, 6 very good, 1 good, 2 fair, and 3 poor. We need many more people to fill out that survey. In particular, we need T-Mobile customers to test both their voice reception and their ability to download data from the Internet.

(2) The proposed cell tower is not desirable in this neighborhood. We have been going door-to-door to gather signatures on a petition stating that a Miraloma Community Cell Tower would NOT be desirable. We need more people to gather petition signatures.

(3) The proposed cell tower is not compatible with this neighborhood. Miraloma Church and its surrounding neighborhood is zoned RH-1, single family, residential. We oppose using our neighborhood as the site of an installation originally approved only for industrial or mixed-use areas.

No comprehensive citywide plan for installation of wireless facilities exists. Instead the wireless companies are flooding the Planning Commission with proposals, each trying to gain control of the airwaves. T-Mobile alone has plans to increase its antennas from 582 to 1530 citywide in the next five years.

Verizon, AT&T and Clearwire have also filed new five-year growth plans with the City. (see sfexaminer.com, June 13, 2010). The Miraloma Church tower has the potential to become the “Sutro Tower” for such antennas in this neighborhood, automatically depressing property values.

We need your help! Contact us at miralomacelltower@gmail.com to receive updates. Come to a neighborhood meeting to help plan our course of action:

Place: MPIC Clubhouse, 350 O’Shaughnessy (corner Del Vale)
Date/Time: Thursday, March 17 (St. Patrick’s Day), 8:00 PM

Get involved! We need help conducting field tests to prove that this cell tower is not needed, taking cell phone reception surveys and gathering petition signatures. Sign a petition or complete a survey form to present to the SF Planning Commission, the Board of Supervisors, and City Church San Francisco. Petitions and surveys are available from Jane Risk at miralomacelltower@gmail.com or by calling (415) 586-4549.

If the Planning Commission rejects our plea, we will have just three weeks to present signed petitions of all homeowners within a 300-foot radius of the Miraloma Community Church, asking for the case to be heard by the Board of Supervisors. If each of ten volunteers takes just one block, we could easily cover this area.

Write or call Reverend Mike Hayes at City Church San Francisco. Let him know that you appreciate his willingness to talk with us about our concerns.

Contact him at:

City Church San Francisco
1388 Sutter Street, Suite 412
San Francisco, CA 94109
Phone: 346-6994 x103
Email: Mike Hayes <mike@citychurchsf.org

Very important! Write to the decision-makers noted below. Ask them to reject T-Mobile’s application for a Conditional Use permit at 480 Teresita Boulevard. Be sure to reference Case #: 2009.0695C.

Adrian C. Putra, Case Planner, SF Planning Department
1650 Mission Street #400
San Francisco, CA 94103
Phone: 415.575.9079
Email: adrian.putra@sfgov.org

Carmen Chu, District 4 Supervisor, Board of Supervisors
1 Dr. Carleton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244, San Francisco, CA 94102
Carmen.Chu@sfgov.org
Telephone: (415) 554-7460
(Sean Elsbernd, our District 7 supervisor, has had to recuse himself from this case because construction of a cell tower could affect the property value of his home.)

All members of the San Francisco Planning Commission, whose contact information is online at http://www.sf-planning.org/index.aspx?page=7

Stay informed! Get involved! Contact us at miralomacelltower@gmail.com.

Follow-Up Report: JP Murphy Clubhouse Meeting on Parks Privatization Plan

Forest Knolls Neighborhood
(http://forestknolls.info/2011/02/01/report-jp-murphy-clubhouse-meeting)

Nearly 100 neighbors attended the February 1, 2011 Department of Recreation and Parks (DRP) meeting at JP Murphy Clubhouse to discuss privatization of the facility. Attendees rejected the DRP’s planned format for the meeting: breakout groups reporting on their findings at the end of the meeting. Bob Palacio of the DRP (present with Nicole Avril, Lev Kushner and Alex Randolph) said that the concept was intended to address complaints about previous meeting formats. An attendee pointed out that the problem had not been with format, but with DRP’s failure to listen and take notes. After some resistance, the DRP representatives agreed that if the agenda were followed the meeting could be held with attendees in a single group. The DRP representatives wanted answers to five questions:

1. What sort of recreational programming do you want to see at JP Murphy?
2. What programming have you liked at other recreational facilities, and what did you like about it?
3. What age groups should be prioritized here? (The choices were tots, pre-kindergarten, youth, after-school, tweens, teens, adults, seniors.)
4. When did you last use JP Murphy, and for what type of activity?
5. Do you know of any non-profits that offer these types of programs?

The DRP’s goal, said the facilitator, was to find a lessee able to provide the kind of programs neighbors want. Currently the Murphy clubhouse is rented out for birthday parties and similar events. If it were leased out, only the clubhouse would be leased. The lessee could use public areas like everyone else, but would not have exclusive use. The bathrooms, outdoors and indoors, would remain open and available to the public. “Would such a lease ever preclude access?” a resident asked, since in other RPD leases, the lessee takes precedence in a conflict with community users. The DRP rep answered that exterior areas would not be blocked by a lessee, but this assurance was called into question when a resident pointed out that a lessee program at Diamond Heights temporarily ropes off an area to avoid confusion about which kids are to be picked up.

Many ideas for programming were for small children, and someone noted that the playground’s configuration—enclosed, back from the road—made it especially safe for little ones. Other popular ideas were Community College classes as suggested by John Rizzo, President of CCSF Board of Trustees, and NERT training.

The DRP facilitator explained that, lacking funding for staff directors, DRP would find a non-profit to lease the clubhouse and provide activities, presumably for a fee. The non-profit would have to be approved by the community, although criteria for measuring community approval have not been determined. One agency would act as “lead agency” and other agencies would provide additional activities. At one SF DRP clubhouse, for example, Self-help for the Elderly leases the clubhouse in the mornings, but keeps it open for other activities in the afternoon.

Attendees were concerned that in order to address the budget shortfall, the City might assume that the DRP could raise fees or start charging for formerly free activities, and so could reduce DRP support even further. Though San Franciscans support their Parks, regularly passing park bonds, many felt they do not receive the services for which they have paid.

Priorities for activities established before the meeting ended included programs young children, latchkey, and classes for adults and seniors (e.g., aerobics), perhaps led by volunteers. Responding to complaints of inadequate notice, DRP reps promised to improve notice of future meetings by working with community groups, email lists, the Friends of JP Murphy Playground Facebook page, and signage at JP Murphy. Please address any comments on the above issues to nicole.avril@sfgov.org.

Update on the Proposed CVS Drugstore

by Gary Noguera

The MPIC Board of Directors has been in communication with the CVS Caremark Corporation and their representatives concerning their proposed new store at 701 Portola at Fowler, the current site of Miraloma Gas. CVS plans to adopt the architectural design developed by Walgreens for its now-abandoned plan to build a full-sized store at that site. This design accommodated MPIC’s request for design improvements to the original “big box” plan presented to the Miraloma Park community. CVS applied for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) from the Planning Department on February 1 of this year. A CUP is required because the total area of the proposed store exceeds the maximum allowed by the NC1 zoning of the Portola shopping strip (allowing small, varied retail businesses) and because CVS Caremark is a “formula” business, i.e., having 11 or more identical stores nationwide. A hearing will take place before the Planning Commission in late March or early April.

CVS has assured the MPIC Board that store management will promptly eradicate graffiti on the building and that street trees will be planted at the site. However, we are concerned with two points of disagreement:

1) Hours of operation are still not finalized. CVS wants to open at 7 am and close at 11:00 pm. The Board feels that the 11:00 pm closing time is too late and would potentially disturb nearby residents and alter the quiet character of the neighborhood. MPIC has requested that hours of operation be 8 am to 9:30 pm.

2.) The sale of alcohol-containing beverages is part of the CVS business model, and CVS has announced its intention to apply for a license to sell alcoholic beverages at this proposed store. The MPIC opposes increased sale of alcoholic beverages on our 2-block long Portola shopping strip, which already hosts four outlets for alcoholic beverages: Tower and Miraloma Markets, the Miraloma Club, and the liquor store. In our view, a fifth outlet for alcoholic beverages within this small area will result in increased illegal and nuisance activity and will present an opportunity not presented by the liquor store, markets, and the bar for youth to shoplift or illegally purchase alcoholic beverages. The potential to attract unsavory customers later in the evening is a real concern. We believe drugstore liquor sales will degrade the character of this neighborhood shopping area.

The Chief of SF’s Juvenile Probation Department, located at Woodside and Portola, and the Principal of SOTA and Academy of Arts and Sciences (sharing McAteer Campus with SOTA), both oppose CVS’s plan to sell alcoholic beverages. We are also communicating with St. Brendan’s to learn their view.

The MPIC Board has notified CVS of our opposition to liquor sales at the proposed Portola store. To sell alcoholic beverages, CVS will need a California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control license, which must be approved by the Board of Supervisors. The MPIC Board intends to contest the Alcoholic Beverage Control license application.

The MPIC Board would like to hear from you. Please send your comments about our concerns to miralomapark@gmail.com or, if by letter, to MPIC, 350 O’Shaughnessy Blvd., SF 94127. We will continue to work to enhance CVS Caremark’s understanding of what is best for our unique neighborhood!

Sunnyside Park Surplus Dollars Community Meeting

by Andrea O’Leary

On Wednesday, March 23, from 6:30 to 8:00 pm, Dan Mauer, of the Recreation and Parks Department (RPD) Capital Division, will return to Sunnyside Park Clubhouse to review with the community the list of items identified for spending a second surplus of approximately $100,000 from the original capital remodel budget. Sunnyside Park Families & Neighbors (SPFN) has spent over two decades collecting ideas and negotiating with RPD on behalf of the neighbors to include as many “Community Wish List” (CWL) items as possible to provide the greatest variety of recreational options for all types of park users, including the often overlooked teenage and adult groups. In September 2009, RPD staff, including General Manager Phil Ginsburg, were invited for a walk-through at Sunnyside with members of SPFN to review repeatedly prioritized items for inclusion in this third remodel project in the Park. Mr. Ginsburg agreed to both the RPD and CWL priorities, assuring a timely completion of the project. Final confirmation of dollar amounts per item before contracting and installation is still required. This final community meeting will give everyone a chance to review the project and revitalize community involvement, waning after years of construction in the Park. Once surplus projects are completed, SPFN will explore currently available community engagement opportunities.

The RPD’s budget is so strapped that it is seeking every opportunity to sell permits for use of park facilities. An RPD first of its kind “kitchenette” installed at the Sunnyside Conservatory has proven to be very popular for private parties as well as events, concerts and workshops provided by Friends of Sunnyside Conservatory. A similar version at the Park off the Plaza (below the Sunnyside Clubhouse building) is proposed on the CWL list, to permit hot food and beverages with access to electricity, hot water and counter space. The Plaza is a beautiful outdoor space for gatherings, particularly those oriented toward adults and teenagers. Instead of having to rent both the Plaza and the Clubhouse to access kitchen facilities, a small food preparation space would allow more sophisticated and involved events to occur all on the same level. With this facility, RPD would have a unique space to promote for permit sales, and the community would have an outdoor recreation space removed from the noisy, child-oriented playground on the field level. This concept has broad support. The General Manager agreed to its inclusion on the combined list for dollars expenditure and drawings were developed to use half of an existing extra storage space.

Discussion at the March 23 meeting will include a proposal to eliminate the kitchenette in favor of other projects, what truly can and cannot be funded by “capital” dollars, confirmation of costs, and encouraging RPD to bring this project to a conclusion. All residents are strongly encouraged to attend and lend their support to the efforts of SPFN, the CWL list, and the many years of neighborhood volunteerism that has made possible this project and the unprecedented two budget surpluses. Sunnyside Park Clubhouse is located half way up the hillside park at the corner of Teresita Blvd. and Foerster St. There is ample parking at four entrances: two at the top of the hill on Teresita and Mangels and two at the bottom of the hill on Foerster and Mangels. For more information on the items on the RPD/Community Wish List, visit www.miralomapark.org/boards/index (Ideas & Opportunities), www.sunnysideconservatory.org (Sunnyside Park and Clubhouse), write SPFamilies@aol.com, or call 334-3601.

Neighborhood Emergency Response Team (NERT)

by Bill Jeong, Miraloma Park/Mt Davidson NERT Coordinator

Hi Neighbors! As your neighborhood NERT coordinator, I have the privilege of explaining what
this group of folks will do for us, our families, and our neighborhood. NERT is a registered, FEMA-compliant, Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) program. The San Francisco Fire Department (SFFD) sponsors this program, and its professional first responders are the instructors. The program is free to all who live and work in the city of San Francisco. It is a community-based training program dedicated to a neighbor-helping-neighbor approach. Individuals learn the basics of personal preparedness and prevention skills in order to take care of themselves, their families, and their neighbors. The training also includes hands-on skills that will help individuals respond to a disaster/emergency and act as NERT members.

The underlying premise of NERT is that a major disaster will overwhelm first responders, leaving many citizens on their own for the first 72 hours or longer after the event. The goal is to teach as many San Franciscans as possible that, with basic training, they can make a difference in the lives of their families and others when, not if, they are affected by a disaster, large or small. What will NERT do after a disaster? Teams will gather to survey their neighborhoods, meet at their staging area, provide information to the SFFD, conduct light search and rescue, provide medical triage, help transport victims to a safe place, and direct untrained volunteers. For our neighborhood, when disaster strikes, the staging area is the Miraloma Playground at Omar Way and Sequoia Way.

In Miraloma Park/Mt. Davidson, we want to build a NERT organization and create a forum to share disaster and emergency information through the Miraloma Life, a NERT Yahoo Group, and/or in meetings. There is no cost for the neighborhood training, and the class sessions are approximately 3 hours. To learn more about SF NERT, visit: http://www.sf-fire.org/index.aspx?page=875.

The NERT training curriculum includes:

Class 1—Earthquake awareness, preparedness, hazard mitigation, type, magnitude, history, and probability.

Class 2—Basic Disaster Skills: natural gas, water and electrical controls—why, when and how to shut them off; types of fire and using extinguishers to put out fires; hazardous materials awareness in the home, on the road, and all around you.

Class 3—Disaster Medicine: health considerations for the rescuer, opening airways, stopping bleeding and shock position, START triage, minor injuries and burns.

Class 4—Light Search and Rescue: different types of construction and where to look for damage, how to classify damaged buildings,the building marking system, interior search patterns, lifting heavy objects and mechanical advantage, and victim carries.

Class 5—Team Organization and Management: Where NERTs fit in the City Disaster Plan, the NERT Incident Command System, managing the disaster, disaster psychology, terrorism and NERT.

Class 6—Skills Development and Application: final exam review, hands-on-training, extinguishing fires, triaging and treating moulaged victims, extricating a victim trapped by heavy timbers, interior search for reported missing persons, exterior building damage assessment, award of achievement and course evaluation.

To see the complete Training Schedule and locations, visit
http://www.sf-fire.org/index.aspx?page=879

If you have already taken NERT training, your certification is good for 2 years from the date of your training. You can renew your NERT training/ID at any NERT training location by attending the fifth and sixth sessions. The sixth session includes a review of the take-home exam. To enroll, please send an email to sffdnert@sfgov.org with RECERT in the subject line when you have chosen a class, so your name can be put on the sign-in roster.

Please let me know what you think about NERT. Your suggestions and comments are welcomed. My new e-mail address is billjeong01@gmail.com.

Community Police Advisory Board – Crime Alert Posters

by Joanne Whitney

You have probably seen the bright orange posters displayed in many shops on the Portola strip advising of an increase in street crime. People walking alone, often in dark lonely places, and listening to music through earphones, are particularly vulnerable. Your cash, purse, cell phone, IPod and computer are easily snatched if you are unaware of your surroundings and of who may be following you. The poster tells you how to avoid being a victim. Limit the amount of cash you carry, hide valuables, choose well-lit streets, walk with a companion, and do not busy yourself with gadgets so much that you don’t know what is happening around you. Important emergency phone numbers are listed. Did you know that dialing 911 from a cell phone may connect you to an area far from where you are, so you must provide extra information and lose valuable time?

These effective posters (and the wallet sized cards with similar information that many merchants are giving out) are the beginning of a project by the Ingleside Community Police Advisory Board (CPAB) to aid the police in fighting crime and maintaining safety in our neighborhoods. The CPAB was created after studies by the SF Police Department on methods to reduce crime and make SF safer. Each police district has its own CPAB, which collaborates with the police to identify problems and develop solutions, conveys community concerns to the police, and shares relevant police and safety information with the community. Ingleside CPAB has 15 to 20 members who live or own businesses in the district and commit to attend regular meetings, listen to the viewpoints of fellow members and the SF Police, and establish a dialog with any organization they represent.

I have been the MPIC representative to the Ingleside CPAB since its inception. The idea for posters advising of the danger of wearing earphones or being too involved in texting on a smart phone while walking in dangerous areas came from several members of the group. As part of a committee to make this concept a reality, Pam Axelson of Visitacion Valley contacted a professional designer and a commercial printer who volunteered their services. Based on our rough drawing, designer Iran Narges created the poster and wallet cards you now see. She thought the project so important that although she is well-known she declined any payment for her superb effort. Frank La, owner of Oscar Printing, produced hundreds posters and cards on high-quality paper for no charge. Both posters and cards have been distributed by CPAB members and Ingleside police officers.

The posters and cards have been so successful that more are needed. They were featured on television news programs and are also being printed in Spanish, Russian, Cantonese, and Mandarin. Additional funds are needed to pay for the translations and the expensive paper. Captain Cassanego of Ingleside Station and various CPAB members have contributed, and I am happy to report that your MPIC voted to support this project—another example of how the Club looks out for your safety and well-being. Please continue to let us know of your safety concerns and be assured that you have a voice.

Changes to the MPIC Board

Shannon Chu, Miraloma Park’s latest resident to join the MPIC Board, has a son (aged four) and a daughter (one). She is married to Schubert Chu and works as a Project Manager for the Electric Power Research Institute. Shannon is interested in finding opportunities for the MPIC and the Miraloma Parents Network to work together to benefit our community.

After many years of service on the Board, including a long stint as Treasurer and organizer of garden tours and other major events, JoAnn Eastep has left the Board to pursue new interests. We wish her all the best!

From The Legal Files:  Boundary Issues

by Mary Catherine Wiederhold, Esq.

“Good fences make good neighbors” is a cliche. But what happens if your neighbor plants trees that eventually block your view as a tall fence would?

What recourse do you have? Formerly, property owners could build a fence on their own land as high as they pleased even if the adjoining property owner lost views. In San Francisco, the term “spite fence” is commonly associated with Charles Crocker and his neighbor, Nicholas Yung. Crocker, a Nob Hill property owner and railway baron, built a huge fence around the modest residence of Yung, his neighbor across the street. Since Crocker owned all the other parcels on the block, he hoped to spoil Yung’s view so that Yung would sell his property to Crocker. The fence was so high that it required supporting buttresses. Yung refused to sell, but Crocker purchased Yung’s property after his death in 1904.

California law now forbids spite fences, defined as a fence or other structure that is “unnecessarily exceeding 10 feet in height” and built “for the purpose of annoying” the adjoining property owner. If this type of fence is built then the adjoining property owner can sue for relief and damages. In 2002, an appellate court held that a row of trees is also a “structure.” Wilson planned to build a two-story log house on her property in Yreka, a small town near the Oregon border. After learning of their neighbor’s plans, the Handleys planted a row of trees that were, in some cases, no more than 10 feet from the mutual property line. Wilson sued her neighbors, claiming that if the trees were allowed to grow to full height, then her view of Mt. Shasta would be blocked. The trial court determined that the row of trees, even growing more than 10 feet, could not be a “fence or other structure” under California law.  Wilson appealed.

The Appellate Court analyzed the Legislature’s intent in enacting the California spite fence law.  The court noted that a row of trees, like the Handelys’, can qualify as a structure “in the nature of a fence.” The Court noted that the row of trees was planted to act as a barrier between the two pieces of property, and discussed “the malicious purpose of annoyance.” In San Francisco, many residents value their views. Sometimes the view is just of the block, but it is still a view. The law requires that you be considerate of your neighbor’s view in planning how to mark your boundaries.

Summary of Minutes of MPIC Board Meeting of February 3, 2011

by Joanne Whitney and Dan Liberthson

A quorum was present, with President Karen Breslin presiding. The minutes of the January Board meeting were approved. Two e-mail motions from the past month were recorded: (1) support Coalition for SF Neighborhoods stand vs. additional high rise development at Park Merced and (2) require that board members renting Clubhouse follow same rules as other renters. Shannon Chu and Peter Renteria attended as guests.

Treasurer (T. Sauvain): A detailed budged is not necessary. Treasurer to seek better rates for insurance and better return on invested money than Schab money market. Clubhouse rental frequency and income increased in 2010. Income exceeded outlay in January 2011.

Safety (K. Wood): Illegal Unit problem at 743 Forester resolved.T. Sauvain great help in dealing with City Attorney. Blighted property at 255 Teresita will be investigated. P. Renteria described inadequate and broken lighting on lower Teresita. Will continue lobbying Board of Supervisors for more staffing at Ingleside Station. Car 4, which patrols Miraloma Park, has 70% coverage. Will work to get 100%.

Membership (R. Gee): MPIC has 514 members as of Feb 3. Special contact made for those who have not yet renewed. Thank you letters for those who have contributed over $10.

Zoning and Planning (ZAP; C. Mettling-Davis): 1 Dorcas has been sold. Proposed decks at 630 Myra seem not to be a problem. Will find out what plans are and encourage open space use.

Transportation (G. Noguera): John Maloney and guests from Del Vale are attempting to procure a crosswalk at O’Shaunessy and Del Vale, working with SF municpal transit, Sean Elsbernd’s office, MPIC, and other agencies. Mr. Maloney asked that MPIC for help. Traffic light or pedestrian overpass and a sidewalk on the east side of the road are possibilities. An MTA study showed that 6-9 pedestians cross O’Shaunessey each day, mainly after getting off the 44 bus. G. Noguera pointed out that a formal request for a study had to be made by the neighbors concerned themselves. Neighbor Daniel Louie agreed to make a formal request, which requires the signatures of at least 10 neighbors. After neighbors initiate and follow through as a community, MPIC will help.

Community Organizations: SF Graffiti Advisory Committee (D. Liberthson): Officer Putz will no longer be dedicated graffiti officer for City. Before removing graffiti, send photo of it to sfpd_graffiti_unit@pacbell.net for the records, to be used by DA and police in prosecutions. Coalition for SF Neighborhoods (CSFN; D. Liberthson): Plan to increase number of highrises in Park Merced debated; CSFN voted to oppose the development. Maintainance of facade on Methodist Church at Larkin as historic architecte piece introduced for discussion at next CSFN meeting.

West of Twin Peaks Central Council (WOTPCC: K. Breslin): Discussed soccer field renovation in Western Golden Gate Park, for which environmental review (EIR) is required. Discussed rentals of SF playground clubhouses to other than playground businesses, which MPIC opposes.

Ingleside Community Police Advisory Board (CAB; J. Whitney): Posters and cards handed out with safety information about remaining alert and aware of surroundings in public. These have been placed along Portola Strip. Posters and cards will be reprinted in Russian, Cantonese, and Mandarin. MPIC has donated $100 for cost of paper. Whitney on committee to write letters to DA on particularly egregous offenders recommending full punishment allowed by law.

Clubhouse Maintenance: Kitchen sink and floori covering will be installed in next week. T. Sauvain asked that board members check at least weekly that clubhouse is maintained. Garden and Native Plant Garden maintenance will be reviewed, with consideration of new gardener able to handle native plant garden as well as general grounds. Mettling-Davis suggested that front stairs be coated with sanded paint to prevent falls until a satisfactory permanent solution is achieved. G. Issacson looking into various solutions.

Old Business: R. Gee continues to monitor possibility of Google as phone access and is doing financial audit. G. Noguera reported Rick Crawford is Planner for all the proposed CVS stores. CVS definitely asking to sell groceries at store and list beer and wine as groceries. K. Wood reported that the Principal of Sota, Ruth Asawa School and the Chief of Juvenile guidance center oppose sales of alcohol-containing beverages. MPIC Board will submit to Planner letter opposing extended hours and alcoholic beverage sales.

New Business: Board President K. Breslin appointed Shannon Chu to Board, to be confirmed by vote at next meeting with quorum of members.