Rules Committee trims Rec & Park charter amendment after weeks of public comment

The Board of Supervisors Rules Committee on June 18 took up a charter amendment that would split appointment authority for the Recreation and Park Commission and (as originally drafted) make certain large special-event permits appealable to the Board of Appeals. The measure, introduced by Supervisor Ross MacCarrini, was the subject of lengthy testimony from Recreation & Park officials, neighborhood groups and event producers.

Supervisor MacCarrini said the amendment seeks to expand citizen access and diversify appointments, citing prior planning work (a 1998 parks plan involving SPUR and the Neighborhood Parks Council). But Recreation & Park leaders warned the proposed language was likely to add layers of bureaucracy and deter philanthropic support. General Manager Phil Ginsburg told the committee the department faced large budget cuts — including a $12,400,000 reduction in general-fund support this year — and processes nearly 57,000 permits annually; roughly 6,000 of those are treated as "significant," affecting roughly 5,000 or more people. He said adding an appeals layer for those events could delay or jeopardize longstanding large-scale park events and fundraising.

Speakers for and against the proposal packed the hearing room. Community advocates and neighborhood associations urged split appointments to increase transparency and responsiveness. Event producers and nonprofits (including organizers of Hardly Strictly Bluegrass, Outside Lands and the Kaiser Permanente half marathon) said an appeals route could introduce costly uncertainty for multi‑day events planned 12–18 months in advance and could leave organizers vulnerable to last-minute objections. Board of Appeals executive director Cynthia Goldstein urged the committee to define "significant impact" more precisely or limit appeals to a narrowly defined set of events to avoid protracted jurisdictional disputes.

In response to the concerns, supervisors amended the draft on the record: they moved to delete the appeals paragraph (section c) and adjusted appointment language to a 3–3–1 split (three mayoral appointments, three by the Board of Supervisors, and one jointly appointed by the mayor and the Board president), with technical corrections suggested by the deputy city attorney. The committee accepted those amendments without objection and continued the amended measure to the call of the chair so staff can clean up language and return the item for further consideration. The clerk and sponsor said the amended draft would be complemented later by ordinance if needed.

Supporters said the change restores balance and citizen access to appointments; opponents—particularly event producers—said the committee’s deletion of the appeals language removed what they considered the most problematic element but that future drafts must preserve event predictability. The committee scheduled follow-up work and noted it will post further hearing dates once staff completes revisions.

The committee did not adopt final language for a ballot measure; the item was continued to the call of the chair for additional drafting and return to Rules Committee.