Genser on Council Vote: No Sense Paying More for Less

September 12, 2003

Dear Editor,

Your reporter apparently misunderstood the motions that were under consideration by the City Council in its recent deliberation on the proposed community meeting room in the Civic Center parking structure. ("Council Dumps Meeting Room from Parking Structure," Sept. 11, 2003)

This room was first proposed to allow the public to enjoy the spectacular views from the top floor of the new parking structure planned for the Civic Center. It was to be paid for by restricted funds that could not be used for general government purposes.

Council members Feinstein, McKeown and I voted in favor of the "partially isolated" fifth floor option for the community room. Staff estimated the total cost of this option to be $960,000 over base costs; it would have eliminated 25 parking spaces. This room on the fifth floor would have a panoramic view of the coastline.

Unfortunately, we were unable to get the necessary fourth vote to pass this motion. Instead, our other colleagues appeared to favor a motion for the "fully isolated" first floor option. The estimated cost over base costs for this option was $1,270,000 and it would have eliminated 39 parking spaces. Depending on exactly where on the first floor this room would have been located (this was unclear,) there could have been a limited view of the coast, or no view at all.

It made no sense to me to pay over 30 percent more for a room with no special view -- and which eliminated over 50 percent more parking -- than it would have for a room with a spectacular view.

Community rooms with no special view can be provided in other places in the Civic Center at far less cost. Therefore, I made a substitute motion -- approved by the council -- to eliminate the room from the structure altogether.