Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Enforcement Fines topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public criticizes proposed $300,000 fine for 339 Golden Gate; council approves item after brief exchange
Summary
A separated consent item concerning 339 Golden Gate drew lengthy public comment criticizing the $300,000 fine as excessive and legally risky; legal counsel disputed a factual assertion about project timeliness; council approved the item after public comment and a motion.
Item 4e, addressing matters related to 339 Golden Gate, was removed from the consent calendar for separate consideration. Dr. Rothman used the public-comment time to urge council not to pursue what he called a "huge fine," arguing the city has had limited success in sustaining such fines in court and warning litigation costs could exceed potential recoveries.
"I think you're making a big mistake by pursuing this huge fine," Dr. Rothman said, urging council to reconsider whether the ordinance and time limits are reasonable in practice and cautioning about legal exposure. Legal counsel Andrew later clarified for the record that Mr. Van Son (cited by Dr. Rothman) was not present to verify the claim that no island projects finish within time limits and said that Dr. Rothman's statement was not verified.
After the exchange the council received a motion to approve item 4e; the motion was seconded and carried by voice vote with a recorded 'Aye' and an abstention by a council member who said they had been absent from the decision in question.
