that is proceeding from the west end to the east end, completing in mid-2014. so the excavation off-haul route. this shows the main routes into and out of the project from the east bay and won a one. trucking will come in on fremont street. and from 101, we will come in on folsom street. zoom in for the excavation work over the next four years. excavation will start in this zone. it will be there for 10 months. we will be entering the site at this location, which is a couple hundred yards from second street. they will load up here and exit

going out to the bridge and turning left again on howard. after about 10 months, excavation will start work in this area, which we call the central zone. they will come in on fremont and expit the sites, tgoing out for street. because the projects extend underneath beale, fremont and first street, we have traffic flowing across the street. we will construct temporary bridges for the traffic to allow the construction to proceed. temporary bridges will be constructed next to the existing roadways, and then installed over the roadways on a long weekend.

the schedule shows that started later this year. as you can see, the bridges contain that read full lanes. -- contain three full lanes. in addition to the bridges, we have temporary access running down the center of the project. because the project boundary extends all the way out to the thomas street and they are directly at jane that -- adjacent, you cannot build them from outside working in. this trestle gives us the opportunity to do that. trucks will and toenter using te trestle. they will be doing excavation from the trestle, coming back up with the concrete. once you are at ground floor,

the trestle will go away. here is a view taken from the model. basically you're standing at howard street looking no. so the temporary bridge, to lane of traffic, pedestrian sidewalk off to the left. another view would be of the same thing but a different location. standing on beale street in looking west. that is the fremont bridge and beyond that the first street bridge. so we can go on to the video now. can i push a button? this is flying across the project from west to east with the trestle and the middle -- trestle in the middle. the next three is free mall. this is a view of fremont street looking north with the traffic

flowing across the temporary bridge. same street looking south. the old terminal is now being demolished. this is at fremont street looking north. this is the west end looking east. old terminal and new terminal. that is it. supervisor kim: any questions on this item? director reiskin: the lane that you are building that goes through the middle -- >> we call that the access trestle. director riskrecessiiskin: is tt

accessible? >> there is a gate that opens and closes. the existing -- there are three peru lanes and a turn lane. -- three through lanes and a turn lane. >> that does conclude that item. members of the public wanted to comment on it, we could turn to the next item? item number eight, approving minutes of the december 8, 2011 meeting and members of the public indicated they wanted to address you on that item. >> move to approve. >> all in favor? any of stain? to-- abstain? >supervisor kim: any public

comment on this item? there are no other items on this meeting. the meeting is now adjourned. thank you. >> the question when i started 11 years ago when i started doing resolution work is can anything be presented on a really low resolution device where it is potentially a digital image? can anything be presented that way?

or will it feel cold and electronic? >> the imagery will change. there will be four different sets. it is a two dimensional image. it is stretched out into three dimensions. the device is part of the experience. you cannot experience the image without the device as being part of what you are seeing. whereas with the tv you end up ignoring it. i make gallery work more self and budget and public art work

where i have to drop this of indulgence and think about how people will respond. and one of the things i was interested in the work and also a little fearful of, it is not until you get to the first and second floor were the work is recognizable as an image. it is an exploration and perception is what it is. what are you seeing when you look at this image? one of the things that happens with really low resolution images like this one is you never get the details, so it is always kind of pulling you in kind of thing. you can keep watching it. i think this work is kind of experience in a more analytical way.

in other words, we look at an image and there is an alice going on. -- and there is an analysis going on. going on. impossible. announcer: when you open a book, you can explore new lands... [bird screeches] meet new friends, and discover new adventures. there are amazing possibilities when you open your mind to reading. [roar] you can log onto he library of congress website and let the journey begin.

commissioner: i would like to call the meeting to order. welcome to the meeting of the san francisco ethics commission, january 3, 2012. i will take role. commissioner studley, commissioner liu, commissioner hanyon. item number two, public comment on matters appearing or not appearing on the agenda. >> once again, i do not see my agenda item on the agenda. the sunshine task force were for all on case number 11-013 and 11-014, which i sent you months ago.

you have not yet scheduled a public hearing on my item, and it should not take you five months to either recused him from this case, since the task force had a finding of willful failure and official misconduct bore him on both cases, so for him to recuse himself and this body to schedule a hearing on my case, i wonder when you are going to tell me, commissioner hyr, -- hur, when you are going to schedule my hearing on the agenda? commissioner hyr: -- hur: thank you for bringing it to my attention. we will look into it. >> excuse me. i have had a hearing loss since i was a child.

commissioner hur: i said thank you for bringing it to our attention. we will look into it. >> that will be the third time you have said you will look into it. >> we have been here six or eight times before this body. the ethics committee is the only city body empowered to enforce violations of the city -- laws. i -- from 2004 to 2011 without having a single hearing or taking a single vote, the ethics commission rejected every one of 26 public record enforcement cases sent in by the sunshine ordinance task force. during that eight-year period, the commission membership has turned over almost three times, and the commission has held over 100, over 100, meetings. the only constant player in all

of these 26 rejections over the entire eight-year period has been john, your executive director. wrongfully using the ethics regulations and its default, and he handled the entire process from start to finish without the participation or involvement of even one commissioner. managing any staff investigations, determining whether there was probable cause for a commission year and, selecting the facts for his report and recommendation to the commission, and is sending a it, no hearing, no vote, case closed. his views of the task force are no secret. in the new york times, he said that the work of the task force

often lacked due process and that his department had an obligation to review the cases. that statement was blatantly false. he knew that. the task force has an exhaustive procedure, including at least three hearings. the ethics commission, on the other hand, has none. that statement and others in the article are gratuitous comments intended to discredit the task force work and discourage members. prop 59 adopted in 2004 by an 83% majority created the public constitutional right of access to public records. the commission complete lack of involvement in these cases and the executive director misuse of this position has denied those

26 complainants that right. i think the time has come to recognize that that right exists. thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. my name is dr. washburn. i am a member of the sunshine ordinance task force. i occupied seat number five and was appointed by or recommended by -- of san francisco. i also share the compliance and amendments committee of the sunshine ordinance task force. i appeared before you in november at your regular meeting to urge you to meet with us jointly about your proposed regulations for handling sunshine enforcement cases, and i think that the consensus seemed to be that that would be a good idea.

i then sent a letter. it was dated january 6. 2012. asking again for a joint meeting, suggesting the week of february 6. it is probably too late for that to happen, but i am here today to again requesting a joint meeting. i think that the matters before us are complicated. the history between our two bodies is strained. we look to the sunshine ordinance task force, and citizens look to you to help enforce the city's public records laws, and this has not been happening, so i hope to hear a response to my letter in a few days' time so that we can schedule a joint meeting. thank you so much for your consideration. commissioner hur: thank you.

>> thank you very much for the time clock. it is in the morning that even though this meeting is relatively sparsely populated but the handouts are already exhausted. i begin by saying with the public library do not accept things from the public library and the friends of the public library. you will remember that the president of the library commission was found to have created a willful violation and that her conduct was below the standard for a public official. later that month, the library commission, during a discussion of a service for the public, one of the commissioner said, and i quote him verbatim, "you know last monday when we had met," the commission meets on thursday, "last monday, the commissioners had met, and we talked about how the changes to the printing system would potentially impact staff, as

well. i was just wondering if it would be worth it to speak to the public about how it impacts them, as well." you do not have to be a genius to figure out that this is a blatant omission of a non announced meeting of the commissioners. it goes without saying that there was no announcement of a meeting on the previous monday and no explanation offered about why this was a blatantly illegal meeting. i have mentioned this several times. of course, my mentions of it were never documented in the library commission minutes. finally, at a meeting on december 15, that same commissioner said, again, into the microphone, and i transcribed him directly, "there is just a thing in reference to the illegal meeting, which was simply a briefing. i just wanted to be clear. there is no such thing as an illegal meeting. it was purely a briefing."

well, this is an example of them simply flaunting their power, . they have a commission president to has been found in willful violation. you have no concept of how corrupt these people are. i certainly found nothing comparable in society. they are ripping off a public institution of millions of dollars, and a finding of being unethical or violating sunshine ordinances and laws is just an opportunity to show how impervious they are and how we any sort of democracy is compared to the influence of money and corporate power that they possess. the fact of the matter is if you come to this ethics commission meeting and just shuffle paper, you need to be aware of how much damage you are doing because you are demonstrating how powerless

democracy is, and of course, the laws cost more than the money. thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. my name is dr. -- after 20 years at laguna honda hospital, i became a whistle-blower, and then i was laid off. in the past six years, you have dismissed 29 consecutive sunshine complaints. even though you substantiated 20% of them, none resulted in any enforcement action, and only one was granted a public hearing. all of them were dismissed. this wrongly implies that the complaints were not valid, and it also allows city officials who violate the sunshine ordinance to claim that they were exonerating by the ethics commission. your handling of a whistle

blower retaliation complaints is similarly one-sided. every single retaliation complaint has been dismissed since the commission was founded. meanwhile, the government accountability project has provided a legal aid to some 5000 whistle-blowers over the past 30 years. here is what they advise in the whistle-blowers' survival guide. it says, "you will surely suffer retribution for blowing the whistle, because bureaucracies instinctively eliminate anything perceived as a threat. academic studies confirm that more than 90% of whistle- blowers report subsequent retaliation, and they give references." now, if experts say that retaliation occurs in 90% of the cases, why do you report in

retaliation rate of zero? please consider two possibilities. number one, your investigations are biased against complainants. and number two, your decisions are based on opinions from the city attorney, who has a duty to defend the very same city officials that we report for wrongdoing. thank you very much. >> good evening, commissioners. maria. i was pushed out and forced out of the kahane after over 20 years of service to the city. two years ago, we made three whistle-blower complaints to the ethics commission. the first one regarded health

director michel --mitchell katz, with a group that had an affiliation. this complaint was dismissed by ethics. our second complete recorded davis john s. sicilians, who was awarded a $2 million department of public health contract. the white, a high level dph executive, played a major role in awarding the contract. after two years, the comptroller revoke the contract siding, quote, irregularities. this complaint was also dismissed by the ethics commission. the laguna honda gift fund was reported as well. it is a charitable fund for poor patients that was being plundered for staff parties and perquisites by the laguna honda