Organized Labor

Say Proposed Historic Preservation Measure Would Destroy Jobs, Grants Too Much Authority to Bureaucracy

By Paul Burton
Contributing Writer

Hundreds of construction union members rallied at San Francisco Civic Center Plaza May 5 to send a message to the Board of Supervisors that the union workers who built the City need jobs – and a seat at the table when issues of development versus historic preservation are discussed and voted on.

“What this is about, first and foremost, is you,” San Francisco Building & Trades Council Secretary-Treasurer Mike Theriault told the gathered workers. “Thousands of you are out of work. You all know what that means.” He told of how some were losing their homes, their cars, or their health care.

He explained that in November 2008 San Francisco voters had approved Proposition J, which established a Historic Preservation Commission. The Building Trades had not worked against the proposition, he said, because they thought that if it were implemented reasonably they could live with it.

“But then we saw what was being proposed to carry it out,” he said, “and it scared the hell out of us. And this was being done on a fast track.”

Theriault described how the proposed legislation would make it possible for a small group of San Franciscans to stop a project cold, even if the sponsor had already spent large sums of money and several years to obtain every City approval short of a permit and even if the contractors for the project already had calls into union halls for Building Trades members to be dispatched. “What bank will lend for projects in San Francisco if this can happen?” he said. “This kills us.”

Theriault said that under the stricter historic preservation rules proposed for the planning code, “If the old Academy of Sciences building was still standing, it would automatically be declared a ‘historic resource’ – can’t touch it.” Similarly, he said, “If the old deYoung Museum was still standing – automatic. Can’t touch it.”

Deborah Turner, Ironworkers 377

Pointing to the Asian Art Museum across from Civic Center Plaza, he said a lot of interior demolition had been needed to create it from the old public library it replaced, but that this work would not have happened under the current proposal, nor the work to open up the interior of the Ferry Building. Even work to achieve the successful reuse of historic buildings would be prevented by the proposal, he said. “Folks wonder why we’re upset—this is why we’re upset,” he said to cheers and shouts from the crowd.

 “The good news is we’ve slowed this thing down; we have allies in the community—it’s not just the building trades that are concerned about this. We have allies in labor, and we’ve caught the attention of the Board of Supervisors. We’re confident they will work with us,” Theriault said.

John O’Rourke, IBEW 6

Ernie Zenteno of Bricklayers Local 3 said he had been recently laid off and that there was no work. He said there was work going on but it was being done by non-union contractors. Amy Lee, a plumber with Local 38, said she had been laid off and was having difficulty paying for health care and keeping up with car payments and credit card bills. “There is work out there being done, but not by our union members,” she said.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 6 Business Manager John O’Rourke reminded the crowd that Local 6 has been in existence for over 116 years in San Francisco. “I want to compliment the City Supervisors and Commissioners on their willingness to find common ground on a vision for our great city that meets the needs of both residents and workers alike. My members treasure this city and want to protect its history and character, yet at the same time we must not handcuff homeowners and business owners from making changes to their personal property that might enhance their quality of life,” O’Rourke said.

Ernie Zenteno, Bricklayers and Allied

Several other trades workers spoke about their own situation as well as the need to create employment for young people and bring them in to union apprenticeship programs. Ron Lewis of IBEW Local 6 said he had been out of work for three months, and his wife who is also an electrician had been out of work for eight months. “In all honesty, I don’t see a lot of work coming up,” he said. “The last thing we need now in this town is to shut down work that is right in front of us. Private developers want to come in here and we are ready to do the work. We need jobs.”

Tim Paulson, Executive Director, San Francisco Labor Council, thanked Theriault for his leadership, especially during the current tough economic times. Paulson said that as a 25- journeyman member of the Bricklayers and Tilesetters Local 3 and Executive Director of the SFLC, he stood with the building trades 100 percent. “But this is not something we are going to deal with as a fight,” he said, pointing out that sometimes opponents will try to divide labor. “We’re not here to fight,” Paulson said. “We are here because we have some hope that we can move forward. We know that building in San Francisco is a tradition and that it is not going to change. We believe that working with this Board of Supervisors—who many of you helped to elect—is going to be the path to make sure that good planning in San Francisco is taken care of and make sure the jobs we worked on that enable us to send our kids to college and to have a middle class lifestyle.”

Michael Theriault, Secretary-Treasurer

Planning Commissioner Christina Olague was introduced by Mike Theriault as someone who isn’t always on the same side as the Building Trades on issues of development and planning, but who is principled and honest and looks out for her constituents. He said she had taken some heat for her stand. Olague spoke about the need for including labor as well as representatives of low income communities of color in the overall planning process. “I’ve met a lot of carpenters and iron workers who love historic preservation,” she said. “It’s not about being against historic preservation as an issue. We are not against historic preservation; but we want some reason and balance to the way development is done in the City, and in order for that to happen, we all have to be at the table.”

She said there were allies on the board who she felt would work with labor and low income groups to discuss how changes in the planning code would impact development. “That’s all we’re asking for is inclusion,” she said.

Theriault introduced Board of Supervisors President David Chiu. “I applaud Commissioner Olague and Supervisor Chiu for their leadership and willingness to work with us,” Theriault said. He said that Chiu hadn’t been aware of the full impact of the proposed changes.

Supervisor Chiu thanked the Building Trades for inviting him to speak and said to the construction workers: He said he came to speak to let the workers know he was listening, his colleagues were listening and that, “We are committed to working on the legislation to figure out how to move this city forward.”

Supervisor Chiu said he had been puzzled that Article 10 and 11 had become such a big issue. He said the planning code changes came out of Prop J, which created a Historic Preservation commission, was unanimously supported by the last Board as well as a large majority of San Francisco voters. “Article 10 only impacts about one percent of the City’s land and Article 11 only a small core of land in the financial district,” he said. “We are opening up City Hall so that every single one of you gets heard, that your needs are considered, and that we strike the right balance for working families, for folks who need jobs, and for the history of our city and the future of our city. I look forward to working with you,” Chiu said.

Mike Theriault thanked Supervisor Chiu, saying, “That’s all we are asking for. We may not agree with your analysis of how much of the City the proposal will affect, but we are going to have a process now and we are going to figure these things out.”

He told the assembled working men and women that, “It was critical that you were here today so the Supervisors see how important this is to us. We will work through the process and get something that works for everyone. Only together can we bring this economy around, only together can we ensure that decision makers understand the significance of public policy and how it affects working people, business owners and residents.”