Planning Commission delays response to Civil Grand Jury report on Park Merced to allow commissioner input

Planning Department staff presented a draft response to the San Francisco Civil Grand Jury's report on the Park Merced project and reminded the commission that agencies must state whether they agree or disagree with findings and whether recommendations will be implemented.

Joshua Switzke of the planning department said the response is required by statute and that multiple agencies (department, commission and mayor's office) must each file separate responses. Commissioners debated the tone and authorship. Commissioner Moore said the draft letter reads like a legal rebuttal and does not reflect the commissioners' voices; he asked for more time and input from commissioners so the commission's response could better reflect their deliberative record. Commissioner Antonini and others argued a department-prepared legal draft was appropriate and accurate.

Commissioners also noted an error in the grand jury covering letter about the deadline; staff and commissioners clarified their statutory timeframes and requested the department notify the grand jury of the correct 90-day timing. After discussion, the commission voted to continue the item and scheduled it for the August 4 meeting so commissioners could forward specific suggested language to staff to be incorporated in a revised draft for consideration.

The vote to continue carried 4 to 1. No final response was submitted at the July 21 meeting.