-- per hour are being dropped. this will get worse as time goes on. if you have a smart phone, you know what i am talking about. you will have five cars and cannot make a call. or you go from one tower to the next and drop your call. i want to submit a rebuttals statement to the data provided. this is to respond to the data provided by the neighbors. i have to say that judge hamilton of san francisco in 2006 in a metro pc yes case we site in our brief said that anecdotal found a that is not scientific for showing a significant gap in coverage, as compared to the real-time data provided by cellular networks. it is not just me. it is judge hamilton in a san

francisco case. this is data provided by appellants. it is stuck. everybody is standing still. it is with a free app you can get of the internet. it is not accurate. they do not measure capacity, which is our biggest problem. the measure data, not a voice. -- they measyre data -- measure data, not voice, and it is all outdoors. that covers need. verizon wireless truly needs this. we think the people of san francisco needed. we have submitted to you at package that has nearly 700 text messages, e-mails, letters, and

petition signatures supporting this facility from people in the neighborhood who use their phones, need their phones, need their phones to work, neither funds to be reliable not today, but tomorrow. i have been going to these hearings for years. we get neighbors that show up and have concerns. you must understand there are hundreds of thousands of cell phone users in san francisco. 700 of them in the last week have signed up to say they need this facility. there is quite a bit of desire. it is necessary and desirable. in this packet, there is a letter from one of your former fire marshals, who used to one -- to run the 911 dispatch. he emphasized the need of cell phones 4911 service. we have a number of caribbean restaurants who say they need this for customers in buildings -- we have a number of delivery

restaurants who say they need is for customers in buildings. we have been trying to put this in for three years. this is a preference one location. it is on an existing commercial medical building. if the doctors have a concern, you would think it would not want this on a building. this is a cluster of buildings that have wireless facilities. this is a perfect place to serve the inner richmond. the inner richmond has been a difficult place for companies to serve for quite some time. lastly, i wanted to enlighten you, if i could, about the difference between necessary, desirable, and compatible, and a significant gap. in terms of necessary to the community, we think we have provided you lots of letters to show the community wants this. in terms of significant gap, which for rise and wireless has to show, it is that they have

the capacity or coverage gap which have shown you today. it is the equivalent of coverage gaps we have cited in our brief in federal cases. what i put down here is the agreement you all signed a few months ago. you agreed with the community it was not necessary. but the federal court realized there was a significant gap for t-mobile. because they had chosen a means to put that facility, your advisers encourage you to sign a settlement agreement to allow that to go forward. you can make your decision, but ultimately, federal law says that where we have a significant gap and have shown the preference one location -- in our materials, we also showed the other preference one locations -- you are compelled

to avoid a ban of service. i leave you with those ideas. the capacity constraints are happening now. there will happen in the future. finally, a significant gap. we do provide robust information, more data than most. i know i do not get a rebuttal. i want to savor verizon wireless and other jurisdictions will agree to go to a third-party engineer to look at our data. president chiu: colleagues, any questions to the project sponsor? thank you. what we hear from members of the public that wish to speak on behalf of the project sponsor? >> my name is mark leech. i worked for aaa, which is

located one block away. we had calls cut out using verizon. we also had a to drop. i have also experienced data drops down the street at the library on ninth avenue. these are places where our children go to school. we are san francisco, the no. 1 tourist destination in the world. if these tourists come and look at us and cannot find where they are going, cannot find where the boat races are, how are we going to look at america's cup in 2013? the time is now to put our infrastructure together. we want to be the top in education. our citizens, even in the richmond, want their children to be at the top of the education pile. the only way they can do this is with information, technology. over 700 people wrote e-mails

supporting these towers and the infrastructure. just over the last few days, we have collected several dozen more, which i would like to submit. back to where we were. we depend on tourists for business. if a tourist calls home and says, "i did not get your pictures because the data dropped," we are in a sorry state of affairs. thank you. >> my name is ron lee. i am here in favor of the cell phone antenna going up on the hospital. i want to stress that verizon, our disaster system is connected to this. it is important we have the

system up in a more efficient manner. they by day, month by month, we have more demands than ever before because of the data packets. they are going to come up with 5g. it will demand more and more transmission. we have to be able to supply the transmission. i worked in telecommunications for 30 years. i am very familiar with antennas. i worked around and, as for many, many years. i am living proof that working on all of these cell sites, putting on these lines -- i never got sick. nothing ever happened to me. today, the new antennas are not ionizing. there are very low amounts of radiation. it is so nominal, sometimes even

a microwave will limit -- emit more radiation than 8 cell phone antenna. let me tell you about batteries. all telecommunications systems have a backup battery. they have been around for many, many years. they are proven to be safe. they are necessary, especially in an emergency. thank you so much. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. as a resident of the richmond district and a wireless customer, i support construction of additional antennas. in addition to using my cell phone for telephone calls, i also use it for web browsing and access to e-mail. i know that more antennas are needed to support increasing demand, more than just for verizon customers affected by

call quality. verizon is among the largest phone companies in san francisco, so many people are affected when they call other users. even if it is not your cellphone company, could sell phone service is essential to our city and safety to people like me. most 911 calls now come from cell phones. many families do not have a landline phone anymore. i hope you will support the project. thank you for your time. >> good afternoon. i am a consultant to the project and helped with some of the outreach aspects. sitting here today, i recalled a book i read about elfin -- alvin

tofler, called "third wave." the first was agriculture in the country, and there was resistance to the change. we moved into the industrial revolution. there was resistance to the change. we moved into information technology. there will be resistance to the change. further today, there is environmental technology. it is natural, because we are faced with uncertainty, that there will be resistance. you have people that come out. we have to be compassionate and lend our ears to them. but at the end of the day, what we do is sit down. this is a lot bigger than 4141 geary, san francisco, the state of california, and the united states. it is global. we have requirements we have to meet. does the project have any

aesthetic negative impact? it does not. does the health department have new information we did not have before today? they do not. therefore, the companies come in and meet the guidelines. they meet the requirements. we come here. we have an interesting conversation. at the end of the day, we are governed by our laws and should uphold the permit. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i want to make mine short. i live in san francisco. i have a cell phone. i also constructed the small antennas. that was not a sulfone power.

they are 4 feet high. the tallest building in the area is the kaiser building. thank you. >> hello. i support the intent of because currently i run a news websites -- the antenna, because currently a run a news websites. in order to get a story out as quickly as possible, in as informed a way as possible, i need to make sure that whatever connection i have in the community, whether on the west side or the east side, i can get

a good signal on my cell phone reception. i have a letter from paul chin, which serves the senior citizens of japan town. this letter is in support of the verizon antennas to be located on geary. i write both as a former fire marshal for the city and county of san francisco, and in my capacity for kimochi. as a former fire marshal, i know these applications are reviewed not only by the planning department, but also by the health department and the fire department, and to protect the public these agencies ensure the

safety of all antennas. the rf report must be included on all plan submitted -- plans submitted, signed by a professional engineer with expertise in the technology. as an officer of kimochi, it is important to me that we have connectivity. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> good evening, supervisors. i support construction of more antennas on geary boulevard. it is absolutely silly to be concerned about a location that is so far away.

this is over 1,000 feet away from the street. it is important for us to have capacity right now. families need to stay in contact with children and grandchildren. we are unable to get a good signal. service is going to be terrible. we need to add more antennas. the city health department has reviewed them. please approve this project. thank you.

>> good afternoon, supervisors. everybody has a cell phone. the younger generation -- everyone has one. everyone carries one for the internet. i would say it is really important. the radiation is very, very low. [unintelligible] thank you. president chiu: next speaker. >> my name is nathan williams. i am a local resident. i support the antennas.

i use my cell phone a lot in business and school. not only are they safe by federal standards, but that are vital for medical personnel to use to communicate in emergencies. the police station across the street will tell you the good connections are important for public safety. i experienced crop calls a lot. it causes problems when i am talking to prospective clients. anytime we call someone from verizon, service in the richmond district gets worse. it will be awful and less so coverage is approved. thank you. -- unless some phone coverage is approved. president chiu: next speaker. >> good evening. i have authored several of the attachments to this presentation. i am here to answer any technical questions you may have. i would like to speak on a

couple of things. you were shown a picture of a smoking power. this happened in texas about six years ago. the tower is not owned by verizon. it is owned by american tower. verizon had nothing to do with the cause of that fire, nor did our equipment. someone else talked about a fire in san francisco at 15th and valencia. the fire department had not come up with an answer for this, they said. but the chronicle put it out the fire marshal reported it was due to someone falling asleep in a chair while smoking. that was started in an apartment two floors above our equipment, not started by our equipment. the rise and wireless in my 17

years with them -- verizon wireless in my 17 years with them has never had a fire. our equipment is made in the united states. some of it comes from sweden as well. other things i wanted to stress is the capacity need. ourself on site at st. mary's hospital, the other day when we had a small earthquake, it went into overcapacity mode. we turned away 4% of the calls. this will get worse as we get closer to the first of the year. with that, i am here to answer any questions you may have. supervisor mar: let me try to be really brief. thank you, mr. bentsen, for your work on behalf of verizon. there were questions from the public. they claim you have not met your burden of showing that there is

a lack of capacity or necessity. i think they raised some questions about the calls to monitor in the last week of august. we have a number of graphs. the number of successful calls, the number of dropped or blocked calls -- what were the reasons for the drops, and how do you know this? could it have been faulty batteries, other interference, or software on phones? there were questions raised about the burden of proof you have to show a lack of capacity. is there a necessity? i wanted you to respond to what people said. >> the data we provided came directly from our switches. we used to have a switch at granite street in san francisco. we moved that 2 fairfield. this data was taken in the last couple of weeks of august.

supervisor mar: when was the data taken? i think somebody said it was the last week of august. when was it taken? >> during the last two weeks of august, during the busy hour, which for us is between 5:00 and 6:00 in the evening. dropped calls are mainly due to people either driving out of coverage areas, or in this case we are looking at ineffective attempts. that is people's attempts to get on to the system, not dropped calls. these numbers are based on ineffective attempts, people trying to get a line and unable to get into the system. these numbers are taken right off our switches. they are right there.

you might want to repeat your second part. you cannot know if there is interference without a sticking test equipment and determining that, but we normally test drive these areas and interference shows up in our test drives. we have not had a recent test drives in this part of san francisco. anything else? president chiu: colleagues, any additional questions? thank you very much. >> if i may add, we are willing to provide much of the type of information you are talking about, but it is proprietary. we are willing to do that to

third party engineers on a case by case basis. president chiu: unless there are other comments from the project sponsor, why don't we hear the rebuttal from the appellants? >> in the past 10 years, this board has voted in favor of 14 conditional use appeals in cases like the one of verizon is proposing. one resulted in the landmark ninth court of appeals decision in 2005. it affirmed your authority to deny a permit on the same grounds appellant has provided you today. he has neglected to inform you that when the ninth circuit remanded the few remaining issues to the district course -- court to judge hamilton, metro

pcs lost the case. judge hamilton decided there was a significant gap in service, but metro had not proved it was the least intrusive means for filling the gap. verizon has not discussed the alternative of using the already-existing utility pole mounted network operated by third parties, which can handle multiple providers. unless verizon has approached those companies and been turned down, the have not explored those alternatives. they would lose in court for the same reason metro pcs lost before judge hamilton. verizon has not met its burden of proof that these are necessary and compatible with the community. unless verizon opens all the books on all its adjoining cell

sites, it cannot prove it has a capacity problem. he also reported on a recent t- mobile supplement, where the city won the first half of the case. there was not even a trial on the significant gap issue. there was a proposed settlement reached before it went to trial. that is a complete mischaracterization of what happened at about lawsuit. -- at that lawsuit. t-mobile did provide data. it showed that in a given to week -- two weeks, only 1198 calls were dropped, 0.25% of the total. that was the judge ruling in favor of you for denying the permit to t-mobile last year. how many calls went through in the two hours when 50 were dropped?

500? 5000? 50,000? verizon has not told you. unless you have that information, they cannot prove their case. listen to the neighbors. people who live in the neighborhood want you to deny this permit. there is plenty of precedent, 14 cases like this. the city prevailed at all of them in federal court. president chiu: final questions to either side of this appeal? seeing none, at this hearing is closed. these matters are in the hands of the board. i understand the house has changed. supervisor mar: i count nine of us in the room. actually, there are 10 of us. i would like us to continue this for one week, until next tuesday, hoping both sides can get together and discuss some of

the offers from verizon for an independent third-party analysis of the gap and the necessity, and also to allow our colleague, ross mirkarimi, to vote on this issue as well. president chiu: that motion is seconded by supervisor avalos. can we do that without objection? this is continued to november 1. is that right? >> at 4:00 p.m. president chiu: thank you, ladies and gentlemen. at this time, why don't we go to our adoption without committee reference calendar? >> these items will be acted upon by a single roll call vote unless a member requests discussion of a matter.

president chiu: 24. i will also sever item 26. roll-call vote on the balance? >> items 21, 22, and 23? supervisor mar: aye. supervisor weiner: aye. supervisor avalos: aye. supervisor campos: aye. president chiu: aye. supervisor chu: aye. supervisor cohen: aye. supervisor elsbernd: aye. supervisor farrell: aye. supervisor kim: aye. >> there are 10 ayes. president chiu: those resolutions are adopted. >> item 24 urges the city to give preference to certified give preference to certified organic food vendors, and to