Supervisors not expected to override Mayor's veto
on JFK closure
By Angela Hokanson, Bay City News Service
May 22, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO (BCN) - It appears that legislation that
would have mandated the closure of sections of John F. Kennedy
Drive in Golden Gate Park to cars on Saturdays is one vote shy
of the two-thirds majority it would need at the San Francisco
Board of Supervisors to override San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom's
veto.
However, the chances of the board voting to overturn the mayor's
veto are "probably remote to zero," according to Supervisor
Jake McGoldrick, one of the sponsors of the legislation. McGoldrick
doesn't think any of his colleagues against the measure will change
their minds.
The legislation proposed closing JFK Drive to motor vehicles
on Saturdays for a six-month trial period to allow people to more
easily use the park for running, walking, and other recreational
purposes.
How the legislation might impact access to the park's cultural
institutions and access to the park for the disabled, as well
as parking and traffic in nearby neighborhoods, were some of the
concerns expressed by opponents of the legislation.
The board of supervisors is expected to vote Tuesday on the mayor's
veto of the ordinance.
The road closure legislation was approved by the board with a
7 4 vote on May 9, but the measure now needs at least 8 votes
to pass over the mayor's veto.
Newsom vetoed the legislation on May 15. The board has until
June 14 to vote on the legislation, after which time it loses
it ability to override the veto.
McGoldrick plans to work with the mayor's office to craft new
legislation on Saturday road closures in the park that would address
the concerns raised by the measure's opponents.
The new legislation would take into consideration issues like
access to the Conservatory of Flowers, which proved to be a stumbling
block in the initial legislation, McGoldrick said.
Copyright © 2006 by Bay City News, Inc. -- Republication,
Rebroadcast or any other Reuse without the express written consent
of Bay City News, Inc. is prohibited.
####
|