Political consultant Jim Stearns, who is representing the labor organizations behind the recount effort, said after reviewing the cost estimates provided by the Department of Elections late Friday, the group decided it was simply too expensive. Elections Director John Arntz estimated that it would cost nearly $80,000 to manually re-tally the 35,140 ballots cast in the race and that a machine recount would cost about $7,000 less. In a Monday letter to Arntz announcing their intent to cancel the recount request, lawyer Jim Sutton wrote that a complete recount could cost as much as $120,000.

A recount has never been done since San Francisco instituted ranked-choice voting eight years ago, and it appears to be two to three times as expensive as in a normal, two-candidate race.

“We still believe that the election was close enough to merit a recount, and believe there was good chance that results could have changed,” Stearns said Monday. “But given the prices from the Department of Elections, we simply can’t afford it. At these costs, it’s hard to see how any individual campaign or organization other than the most wealthy ones could ever afford a recount.”

Considering the costs, Stearns said, city officials may want to consider whether taxpayers should at least partially fund recounts under ranked-choice voting. In the letter, Sutton urged city officials to consider “adopting a rule whereby the city would pay for a recount should the results be within a certain margin, as is done in several states,” or to explore a change in city law, which currently limits the amount a candidate can raise from their existing donor pool to $100 per person. The letter noted that $120,000 is more than many candidates raise during their entire race.

- Marisa Lagos

On the move: Mayor Ed Lee is focusing on former Building Inspection Commissioner Mel Murphy as he looks to fill an open seat on the city’s Port Commission, an influential panel that will consider major developments planned for the waterfront, including a proposed arena.

Lee on Monday took a break from holding up his end of the bargain on his World Series bet with Detroit’s Mayor David Bing to tell the Insider he was waiting for a completed background check of Murphy before making an appointment.

“He’s a contender for sure,” Lee said.

Murphy, co-owner of Murphy O’Brien Real Estate Investments, is also a director of the Coalition for Responsible Growth, a political advocacy group funded largely by developers and others with real estate interests.

If appointed, his confirmation could face opposition from some on the Board of Supervisors’ left flank who consider the group too conservative.

Last year, Lee’s election campaign said it had returned seven contributions from Department of Building Inspection employees totaling $2,150 that were donated at a fundraiser at Murphy’s home. City law prohibits commissioners from soliciting city employees for campaign contributions.

- John Coté

E-mail: cityinsider@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @SFCityInsider.

Article source: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/SF-election-loser-drops-recount-request-4088402.php

Up to two people will be allowed to live in the micro-apartments, which legislation sponsor Supervisor Scott Wiener said would help those who want to live alone but can’t afford most of the studio apartments on the market.

“To confront San Francisco’s rising housing affordability crisis, we must be creative and flexible,” Wiener said in a statement. “Allowing the construction of these units is one tool to alleviate the pressure that is making vacancies scarce and driving rental prices out of the reach of many who wish to live here.”

But for the legislation to pass, Wiener had to agree to cap the number of micro-apartments at 375. Under the legislation, the City Planning Department will analyze the effects of the new units once 325 of them are built.

“Family-sized housing is important and its development should be encouraged,” Wiener said. “But many – including seniors, students and transition age youth – do not need as much space or cannot afford it. These units will be a viable alternative for those who don’t want to live with roommates.”

The SoMa neighborhood and other densely populated city locations would be the likely location for the new units, which include a living room, kitchen and bathroom. Supervisor Jane Kim, who represents SoMa, said that neighborhood’s population could increase by 32 percent as a result of unlimited micro-apartments.

The cap seemed to satisfy skeptics who say that micro-units are not the solution to the city’s housing problem. Supervisor David Campos, who supported the measure, said he visited one of the proposed units and was struck by how expensive rent would be for such a small space.

Concern about rents

The micro-units are estimated to go for $1,300 to $1,500 a month. The average studio apartment in San Francisco rents at $2,075 a month, according to real estate service RealFacts.

“It’s not a lot of space for $1,500,” Campos said, adding that he was concerned it could raise rents across the city. “If 220 square feet is going to rent for $1,500, what does that do for the rest of the places in San Francisco?”

Supervisor John Avalos was the lone vote against the proposal, arguing that the city should be more focused on keeping families from moving.

“This doesn’t make a lot of sense for the San Francisco I know,” he said.

Mayor Ed Lee, who still must sign the measure, told reporters after his monthly question-time session before the board that he hadn’t taken a position on micro-apartments yet.

“I’m always concerned whenever people are changing the standards, but I do think there might be good policy reasons,” he said.

When the Planning Commission reluctantly approved a cap on the number of units last week, some commissioners worried that limitations would confuse developers. But tenant and affordable housing advocates said the cap was crucial to their support.

“We still have concerns, but this way, the impact would be softened if those problems came to fruition,” said Sara Shortt, executive director of the Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco.

Looking at tenants

Ted Gullickson, director of the San Francisco Tenants Union, said he hoped the Planning Department study conducted before the cap is reached would shed light on who is moving into the units.

“If they become urban crash pads for high-tech employees, then we fear they could have a gentrifying effect on the neighborhoods as they get built,” he said. “We do have a strong need for family-size housing as well as affordable housing, and we have limited development sites in San Francisco.”

Neal J. Riley is a San Francisco staff writer. E-mail: nriley@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @realdealneal

Article source: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-supervisors-back-micro-apartments-4055493.php