Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Appeals denies rehearing for Brotherhood Way tree‑removal permit after conflict claim
Summary
The San Francisco Board of Appeals denied a rehearing request over a Mission Development Group permit at 800 Brotherhood Way after an appellant alleged an undisclosed relationship between Commissioner Michael Garcia and the developer. The board voted 5–0 to deny rehearing and later adopted findings supporting the permit with tree‑planting conditions.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on a unanimous 5–0 vote denied a rehearing request for the Mission Development Group permit concerning 800 Brotherhood Way, rejecting claims that a commissioner’s relationship with a developer warranted reopening the April 4 decision. President Randall Knox presided over the session.
Appellant Julian Lagos asked the board to reconsider and told commissioners he believed Vice President Michael Garcia had “not disclosed his entire relationship” with a developer he said would benefit from the permit. Lagos also submitted press articles alleging past sunshine‑law problems and said tenants had felt “intimidated” at the earlier hearing.
Commissioner Garcia responded that the relationship was limited and disclosed. “There is no deeper relationship,” he said, describing a single occasion when he invited the developer to speak to a class and later took a business card; he told the board he had no reason to recuse himself.
Representatives for the permit holder argued Lagos had presented no new facts to warrant reopening the case. After discussion of the legal standard for rehearings and whether new documentary evidence (phone‑book entries and a title search) would change the outcome, Commissioner Frank Fung moved to deny the rehearing. The motion passed 5–0.
Later the board considered adoption of amended findings reflecting the board’s decision and technical edits from the city attorney. The board adopted the amended findings by the same margin.
What happens next: The board’s action leaves in place the conditions previously imposed on the permit, including requirements for tree replacement in consultation with the Department of Public Works’ Bureau of Urban Forestry. The rehearing denial and findings close this appeal unless new legal grounds or evidence are raised in another proceeding.
