rae Assembly SACRAMENTO, CA 94240-0017 tom aiosor ef ne . rao a7 California Legislature em eee ‘rh rousi AND Contant SAN FRANGISGO, GaSe DAVID CHIU seven isso a rac trois EE rena Asseunusuenen SEVENTEENTH OSTRCT Seine ica vernvenr uscomursees Ar SUBSohMuTEe No.1 ON Ean ANB SONOS March 24, 2016 Mr. Harry M. Keiley Board Chair CalSTRS 100 Waterfront Place West Sacramento, CA 95605 Dear Chair Keiley, I write with regards to an ongoing investment by CalSTRS in a possible development site on the San Francisco waterfront. Ina welcome move last month, the development partnership that had proposed the 8 Washington project terminated its Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with the Port of San Francisco. My understanding is that the CalSTRS investment in that partnership continues, and that CalSTRS is considering its next steps. As you know, the 8 Washington project had stalled for over a decade, in large part because of passionate ‘opposition from a host of neighbors and citywide advocates. In order to ensure the prudent investment of the pension funds of California’s almost 900,000 teachers and their families, | urge CalSTRS to either extricate itself from this investment entirely or to only support a project with robust support from the surrounding community. Over the last decade, CalSTRS invested as much as $44 million in the 8 Washington project without it even breaking ground, Many San Franciscans shared the perspective that the project would exacerbate San Francisco’s housing affordability crisis, degrade nearby parks and open spaces, and unnecessarily demolish a recreational facility relied upon by seniors and families throughout the City. At the November 2013 ballot box, more than two-thirds of San Francisco voters rejected the height increases proposed for the 8 Washington project, and nearly 63 percent of voters rejected a separate ballot measure that sought approval for the project in general. This history makes clear that any proposal without the backing of the broad coalition of neighborhood and citywide organizations who opposed the 8 Washington project is almost certain to fail. The most recent failure by the project developer was the fourth such unsuccessful attempt at this location; all previou attempts had also floundered in the face of organized opposition, although without the investment of tens of millions of dollars of teachers" savings. Itis difficult to see San Francisco changing its collective mind on any similar project atthe site, and it is hard to see how prospects for this investment will improve. Given the fiduciary duty of CalSTRS to maximize its return, the organization entrusted with the future of California's teachers should do better. Moreover, at a policy level, itis not clear why teacher pensions should be used to support the construction of something like luxury housing that no public school teacher could hope to afford. Printed on Recycled PaperIn recent months, my office made inquiries of CalSTRS staff with regards to the plans for this investment. While | appreciate this dialogue, I write to ask you to specify the exact amount of the investment to date and to let me know what are CalSTRS' intentions and next steps regarding the project that does not have the support of the local community. If you have any questions, please contact Judson True, my Chief of Staff, at (916) 319-2017 or judson true@asm.ca.gov. | look forward to your reply. sincerely, Yawk Clare DAVID CHIU Assemblymember, {7th District cc: Jack Ehnes, Chief Executive Officer, CalSTRS Elaine Forbes, Interim Director, Port of San Francisco Lee Radner, Friends of Golden Gateway