guidelines that are there and are in place, and we would like to see that move forward and actually get enacted. that is pretty low lying fruit that would be pretty easy to do. >> the commission would have to amend the voluntary seismic retrofit program we already have in place. >> this is actually a different issue. so we know that the policy -- the city currently has a policy in place that we know is not very good. it did not work very well after loma prieta, so one of the task was to develop a better policy, so what you have is a policy that is extremely specific and ready to be adopted. we believe that is a very easy

activity to do. >> the purpose is to make sure we can get enough funds, people who have damages can help get the funding to help fix. we started this about five years ago. the state provided the information to us. i agree. i think that if there is -- maybe what we could do is put that on the next agenda to talk about or have you look at it and see if we are ready to do that. >> right, and we can bring that also to the code advisory committee because it will have to be amended. >> i have a question for john and laurie. on the category of the evaluation criteria and as a requirement upon sale, who and where does the report come into play as to a requirement for -- on the deed, and/or by real estate disclosure item, or --

i'm just asking whose court is it going to be on? >> this is a policy question still unresolved, still up in the air, and there is no answer to your question. that is the issue that will be with the cao's office. they will come up with guidelines. the issue right now is how do we move forward with our seismic retrofit efforts? we need to have that happen. we know there is vulnerability. we want to identify the most vulnerable buildings, make sure we do not bother the owners of buildings that are not as vulnerable. and we took a look around and we saw that one group of building owners who did not have much of a problem was the loma buildings

because you have sophisticated lenders, sophisticated buyers, tenants, what have you, and there was a flow of information in the marketplace that worked very well on many of those buildings, creating an environment for voluntary retrofit of those, and until there is a funding source in place, are we going to be providing public funding for private property? i do not know the answer to that. that is going to be a policy question. in the past, there has been a strong political feeling that we could not require a mandatory retrofit ordinance until we could provide financing for supportive financing on this, and obviously, the current budget issues are making the

issue even more bleak, even more difficult, and when we took a look at what was successful, if we can get buildings evaluated, and it has been suggested upon sale, there is no answer in terms of who is going to do the retrofit yet, or who is going to be required, or will it be on the deed, or will it be part of a report -- those are all issues that need to get resolved down the line, but i think i'm safe in saying that most of us are feeling very strongly that in the interim, we can at least get these evaluations out there and make the findings of these evaluations done. in your report, you have this matrix of what we propose for a time line.

>> you have all these together. >> it is part of the mayor's executive. >> the recommendations were that there would be a spread out timeline. the first buildings we would like to see that we move ahead on are the soft story buildings. that was our previously tass report that came out a year or year and a half ago. and there was pushing. we would like to certainly recommend those. that is the first group of buildings we would like to see evaluated. and then there is a suggested timeline on that matrix on how long this will go, so it is certainly not something -- maybe

in our dreams it would happen next year or year after next. i do not see that happening. it is going to be a long, spread out process, but we are hoping to get these items, starting with the evaluations moving forward, and if we had some guidelines for those -- we started thinking about it. i think we're going to need the retrofit standards first. before that, if we could adopt the recommendation in item one, that would be good, but these are the items we believe should stay under our department with the technical issues. >> i guess i'm confused. are we acting on anything here today or just hearing an update? >> i, i think that's -- since we are already working on some of

this stuff, i would like to have bus support continuing this and prioritizing this and working with the city administrator's office to look at the group they are putting together to get their help when needed. i think there are things we probably should be doing on our own, like establishing -- #one is really our thing. we have to do the post- earthquake repair. that is our job, and i think the director is already doing that. it is really important if we have an earthquake now that those are in place so that people can get help, financial help, otherwise they do not. >> given that we do not really need to take action on the reports as they have fulfilled their obligation necessary to meet the contract, i would just like to personally and professionally commend the

effort, given how long the challenges and how big they were, and more importantly, that the collaboration that is needed to keep moving this forward with the momentum that it has -- it is not as if we have reached just the apex. it is a continuous climb. thank you so much for your hard work, and looking forward to your participation, both professionally and also as citizens of this great city. >> thank you, commissioner. we certainly have a very supportive bic, and we would not be where we are today if it were not for the support. most of us are very enthusiastic about how the chips have fallen here with all the politics inside city hall. ed lee is entirely behind us. i'm thrilled to see jason elliott remaining on the second

floor. amy brown attended a number of our meetings. she is on board. most of you have attended some of our meetings and are supportive on this. i think there is an incredible joint cooperative effort and feeling that we need to move things forward, and we are going to continue to do that, but thank you to each of you here. them a second that. >> thank you. one more item i wanted to add is on my concern, especially on the disclosure side is that we do not get into a category much like the toxic assets that has evolved from the refinancing, structuring, and all that, that on the seismic side, that the passing of the buck does not

ultimately become problematic on not doing what is required or recommended to be done for the buildings. >> on that matrix clinch that commissioner clinch reyes and showed you, we started with several stages of the valuation. we can take a look at what happened, and there are 40 buildings -- is that about right? that have not been retrofitted yet. that ordinance came into play -- was it 15, 20 years ago? are those within the category of the toxic assets that you might be discussing? some fear that you have these things that nobody wants to touch, something like that.

there are some useful buildings out there that have not been retrofitted, and are delinquent. so we are going to have some issues, and i guess, we all need to figure out how to best manage those issues, but the good news is that 95% of the buildings did get retrofitted. so we are a lot safer from damage, loss of life, injuries than we were in the past, so, hopefully, we can start moving forward on these other buildings and have similar success. >> i'm proud to also say that san francisco, in your efforts, is leading the effort on this level and category of concern for the health, safety, and welfare of citizens of any city

that is prone to earthquakes. >> thank you. >> just for clarification, we are not taking any action on these items. >> correct. >> is there any public comment on this? seeing none, we can move on to item 10, which is review and approval of the minutes of the august 18, 2010 meeting. the minutes are approved. >> we are now on item 12. at this time, commissioners may

make inquiries to staff regarding various documents, policies, practices, and procedures, which are of interest to the commission. i'm going to bring up one that commissioner murphy had asked for for this meeting, and he needed to give the department time to be able to put the information together, and he wanted a 90-day compilation of how many complaints we get and how many of those are anonymous, and how many of those anonymous ones are bogus complaints. that is he specific, or throughout the apartment? >> he had asked specifically for housing, but i do not know if he would want to include those. he was concerned about how many anonymous complaints we get.

i can clarify with him exactly, if you won. >> if you could clarify it is just one division or two or five. what is the most interested? because the records are all in different places. >> having a reference to the fact that some of the complaints come in, based on the bedbugs, that are separate from housing specific that have bedbugs. so we narrow down the target. >> right, i think rose mary provided that information already, but i will get it again. >> ok, great. >> are there any other inquiries to staff? item 12 is future meetings and agendas. i sent everybody an e-mail to

let you know that we do need to hear the budget twice before it can be sent to the mayor's office board of supervisors, and i heard back from most of you that you are available on february 3, i believe, which is a thursday at 9:00. >> do we have a room for that already? >> right here in room 416. 9:00. and then we will have our regular meeting in february, which will be the second hearing, and it is also important that everyone attend the meeting because we do need five members to approve the budget. >> on that note, are we still trying to target the joint meeting with planning? >> we are trying to target a joint meeting with planning and the small business administration. >> is this separately or together? >> separately.

>> two different meetings, or one meeting? >> one combine meeting. i think. mel had asked for one combined meeting, but i will check with him again. >> kansas clarify, it is february 3 at 9:00 in this room? >> yes. -- can i just clarify. >> any public comments or other comments on item 12? seeing none, we can move to item 13, which is an adjournment. >> move to adjourn. >> second. >> we are now adjourned.

i'm the president of friends of mclaren park. it is one of the oldest neighborhood community park groups in san francisco.

i give a lot of tours through the park. during those tours, a lot of the folks in the group will think of the park as very scary. it has a lot of hills, there's a lot of dense groves. once you get towards the center of the park you really lose your orientation. you are very much in a remote area. there are a lot of trees that shield your view from the urban setting. you would simply see different groves that gives you a sense of freedom, of being outdoors, not being burdened by the worries of city life. john mclaren had said that golden gate park was too far away. he proposed that we have a park in the south end of the city. the campaign slogan was, people need this open space. one of the things that had to open is there were a lot of people who did a homestead here, about 25 different families. their property had to be bought up.

so it took from 1928 to 1957 to buy up all the parcels of land that ended up in this 317 acres. the park, as a general rule, is heavily used in the mornings and the evenings. one of the favorite places is up by the upper reservoir because dogs get to go swim. it's extremely popular. many fights in the city, as you know, about dogs in parks. we have 317 acres and god knows there's plenty of room for both of us. man and his best friend. early in the morning people before they go to work will walk their dogs or go on a jog themselves with their dogs. joggers love the park, there's 7 miles of hiking trails and there's off trail paths that hikers can take. all the recreational areas are heavily used on weekends. we have the group picnic area

which should accommodate 200 people, tennis courts are full. it also has 3 playground areas. the ampitheater was built in 1972. it was the home of the first blues festival. given the fact that jerry garcia used to play in this park, he was from this neighborhood, everybody knows his reputation. we thought what a great thing it would be to have an ampitheater named after jerry garcia. that is a name that has panache. it brings people from all over the bay area to the ampitheater. the calls that come in, we'd like to do a concert at the jerry garcia ampitheater and we do everything we can to accommodate them and help them because it gets people into the park. people like a lot of color and that's what they call a park. other people don't.

you have to try to reconcile all those different points of view. what should a park look like and what should it have? should it be manicured, should it be nice little cobblestones around all of the paths and like that. the biggest objective of course is getting people into the park to appreciate open space. whatever that's going to take to make them happy, to get them there, that's the main goal. if it takes a planter with flowers and stuff like that, fine. you know, so what? people need to get away from that urban rush and noise and this is a perfect place to do it. feedback is always amazement. they don't believe that it's in san francisco. we have visitors who will say, i never knew this was here and i'm a native san franciscoan. they wonder how long it's been here. when i tell them next year we'll get to celebrate the 80th anniversary of the park,

>> the public wants to access particular information about your house or neighborhood we point them to gis. gis is a combination of maps and data. not a graphic you see on a screen. you get the traffic for the streets the number of crimes for

a police district in a period of time. if the idea of combining the different layerce of information and stacking them on top of each other to present to the public. >> other types of gis are web based mapping systems. like google earth, yahoo maps. microsoft. those are examples of on line mapping systems that can be used to find businesses or get driving directions or check on traffic conditions. all digital maps. >> gis is used in the city of san francisco to better support what departments do. >> you imagine all the various elements of a city including parcels and the critical infrastructure where the storm drains are. the city access like the traffic lights and fire hydrants.

anything you is represent in a geo graphic space with be stored for retrieval and analysis. >> the department of public works they maintain what goes on in the right-of-way, looking to dig up the streets to put in a pipe. with the permit. with mapping you click on the map, click on the street and up will come up the nchgz that will help them make a decision. currently available is sf parcel the assessor's application. you can go to the assessor's website and bring up a map of san francisco you can search by address and get information about any place in