it would not be appropriate for me to put them into the public record, but we can reasonably expect in-public response from 140 van ness. i've been like to see a table today, but if it is not turned down by the board of supervisors tomorrow, but it is reasonable to ask people about vested interests. the answer always comes back as a note. also, the contract year is very slippery. as it now stands, this contract will be administered by kit -- administered by caltrans. it may be permissible to go beyond 20 by 60, but this contract, i have been after the billboard industry for years and stranger things have happened.

alerting the system to digital -- digital billboards. this is just a flavor of the type of pressure is behind there. if it will be 20 x 60, it should read that way. the city stands to make a lot more money if illumination is somehow permitted through our local procedures. there will not be a lot of worry over the relocation permit process, when all of a sudden you thought you did not sign anything, but we have. i did not want to go beyond my allotted time to indicate that this is contrary to broader policy perspectives, including the change in zoning, which the

mct3 designation restrict billboards -- sorry, 300 square feet on a relocation permit. this sign is four times that size. say no to this contract. supervisor olague: next speaker. >> good afternoon. i am the city planner and also a board member of san francisco beautiful. i am here on behalf of san francisco beautiful board members. there are extensive and i will try to fit them into a few minutes. and we are not opposed to the

contracts such as this one. however, we are challenging the direct conflict occurring, including police in a rezoning, as mentioned. also the policies established by cac. i would like to invest in a wonderful mix use development next door, but you never know. we are not challenging the legality of these efforts at all. 10 years ago in march, 79% of the people of san francisco approved the sponsor of the initiative, which prohibits new billboards on private property. but i understand this is public property. november of 2009, voters approved the disallowance of any new buildings on public property, deciding that other

goals superseded additional billboards. this building houses the planning department. it is sad to see a degraded, as it produces likely miniscule revenue while disparaging the use is proposed under the octavia market plan. this building will be exudes civic pride, and does, and should, as it has a unique set the place and undoubtedly the planning department neighborhood, with development staff, we certainly hope so. we urge you to vote against the billboard contracts. thank you very much. >> i am a private citizen. where does it end? do you have a list of every

single public building that is not a landmark that could have this type of billboard on that? not only city buildings, but school district buildings. are we setting an unfortunate precedent? there was a scrap about five, six, seven years ago when there was a billboard that showed up on permitted just north of the planning department on the other side of otis street. it took forever to get it down. it was very controversial and was kind of an embarrassment, for this to be the planning department, the planning department, which regulates signs, or is supposed to regulate signs, and that is some reason to excuse them. this is going to be a very lucrative political billboard. which supervisors will take this site. i put that out to you, because that is the real world market

street has some political billboards. there is a little bit of -- ok, this is a billboard, but it is political as well, potentially. i do not think we should sell our birthright on public buildings for this kind of stuff. we have a revenue problem? when does it end? of what is the justification for saying that every school that is not a landmark can have billboards? i do not think it you can draw the line if you do not draw it here. this is the planning department, folks. thank you. supervisor cohen: any other members of the public it would like to comment? seeing no other members, public comment is closed. colleagues? >> -- supervisor chiu: -- supervisor olague: i would like

to ask a question. 20 by 60, is that written in or not? >> i would have to refer to the size of the contract. >> and leased premises is the side facing the wall. it is 99 feet by 28 feet. regulatory sizing is 20 by 60. we could choose to amend -- at a minimum i would like to -- there is a proprietary interest. >> one way to ask that. >> ideally, i would like to see more public process, where we would have input from the market octavia group, who spent so much time gauging in planning in this part of the city recently. but based on where we are in the conversation right now, at minimum i would like to see an

amendment that specifies that. but i think that this is an important conversation that highlights the fact that the devil is in the details. but it would appear that we will be caught up in this situation and at some point we can hopefully have a conversation about what the city can do to regulate some of the billboard activity that goes on on publicly owned land. i would like to thank for this being brought to attention. supervisor cohen: thank you. is there a motion to move this? supervisor wiener may make a comment. supervisor wiener: as i said last time, i do not take a categorical view on billboards. i am supported in some situations, not so much in

others. i am supportive of advertisements in public property on some places, not others. to me it is a case by case situation. i have every confidence that the department struck the best deal it could. i know that there was a process and i know that the economy is bad. i know that we only allow limited signs, said there is a variety of reasons why the pricing has been reduced from one quarter of a million dollars to $63,000. i am assuming that the department could, and i know that there are reasons in terms of cost to the billboard company, and so forth, that absolutely makes sense and justifies the price from a market cents. the question for us is not whether this was the best deal we could strike, or whether it

is a rational pricing, but if it is the best price we could get, is it good enough given the countervailing situation? that is something that i struggle with. though it is not in the big scheme of things a lot of money. i continue to have concerns, but i do believe that we should forward this to the whole board without recommendation. that is my motion. supervisor olague: ivan like to amend the contract, if you're willing, tuesday 20 x 60. >> what can we do and what can we not do? >> the board does not have the authority to make an amendment.

the parties could agree with you. supervisor olague: thank you for that. i would support no recommendation also. supervisor cohen: so moved. madam clerk, are there any other items? >> there are no further items. supervisor cohen: thank you. all right, ladies and gentlemen. this meeting is adjourned.

>> good afternoon petraeus i am hearing to present -- i was told over the weekend, no, i would go present and entered as the person who will be receiving the award this year. i said, when is that coming at the lunch? the end, the grand finale? she said, no, it is the first award. i said, isn't this the international women's day and we're giving a man the first award? she said, oh, they have to go back to work. i said, we have heard that before. so the man of the year.

when we think about who the right person should be and is deserving of such an honor, believe me, we're not looking for a man who is in high political office or the ceo of the major companies. instead, we're looking for someone who has demonstrated over time that he is committed to advancing equal rights and opportunities for women and minorities, someone who has talked the talk and walked the walk. i know we have a number of guests from other countries at this year's women's summit. and at many levels. and it is universal. we're talking about advice for education. jobs and economic opportunities. and in the political arena. when i first became active in this community, thanks again to many of my friends who are in this room who are my inspiration and give me all the

encouragement that i have had, i have come to learn that we must have a place at the table. that is what was referenced issue today. this should be the theme this year, to be at the table. we're talking about in the corporate world, the board room, the state legislature, the halls of congress, or at city hall. well, i am very proud of the recipient of this year is a man of the year award, our mayor, mayor at least pujols -- mayor ed lee. [applause] the mayor is the chosen one. not because you have the title of being the mayor. the mayor was the chosen one because over the last 30 years,

he has a history of promoting justice and advancing equal rights and opportunities for women and minorities in the city and beyond. when he graduated from law school across the bay, and instead of adding to a corporate law office, he decided to work for the asian law caucus, fighting against discrimination, against women and minorities. when he became the first asian- american to be in that position in this great city, again -- that was less than three months ago that when the mayor was sworn billion, he took every opportunity he had to advance women. when there is an opportunity to appoint a member to the board of supervisors, and for those of you who do not live in san francisco, that is our city council. among the list of qualified candidates, he elected christina olague . i believe supervisor olague is

with us today. [applause] and in a short three months when he has had an opportunity to nominate and appoint somebody to the very important position which he firmly held as the chief administration officer of the city and county of san francisco, and again he immediately nominated noami kelly to be our cao. [applause] we're living in a city that we're very lucky, and we know that women around the world and in many other cities are not as lucky. when i look around their room, i see that we have many city departments headed by women. of course there can always be more. but i see melanie, miriam, emily. i mean, there are quite a few and we're very proud. i am looking at the next four to eight years, and i can see there

will be more and more women leaders in our city government. so we're very fortunate to have somebody at the top of the city that really believes in making room for women at the table. now i would like to invite the one and only surely bell to join me in presenting this award, and please join me in representing the man of the year, mayor ed lee. [applause] >> wow, thank you, claudine and shelly.

thank you for this distinguished meant. very much appreciated. i am is sitting here listening to the introductory remarks, and i have flashbacks of decisions that made in the past. but if it begins with i think having different attitude because i had a strong mom who had to raise kids by herself and understanding how single mothers have to survive and raise a whole family gives you life lessons. i also need toothache -- to thank anita because she appointed me her husband. so i have to return the favor. [applause] but you know, i can go on about a lot of things we have done, but i am more excited to signal to all of you to really work hard with us.

there is just a lot more to do. because there will be efforts that tried to hold us back as a society, but then we have to continue moving forward. we cannot let the the kind of radio talk-show hosts and things like that hold us back. i, too, have to express my personal shock and just in this day and age how such a vicious language can be used that when someone is invited to present their expertise as a law student about the needs of women, and it has been such almost spoiled, i guess, to be in san francisco, because this is often our culture, to listen and to follow-up with the articulation from advocates, from people who have served in all kinds of government and business, educational institutions, the private sector, the public sector, to listen carefully to

the needs that our children, our young girls and our women in need to not only survive but to go well beyond that and succeed in society. i am often reminded who holds half of the sky up in the city. so i am going to continue inviting all of you, particularly speaking to the women here who do have experience and knowledge and foresight to advise me and advise my administration of how we can do better in all aspects. nationally, locally, and internationally to keep advocating strongly how we can protect and nurture and how we can make sure that our society is of equalness. that is why i said at the beginning that the flashbacks of being at the dpw and human rights commission, recalling the advocates the came to meet with

me and said how important it it is for a city to sign on to united nations convention to eliminate all forms of discrimination -- [cheers and applause] that is still important. and then a decade later, to realize we're still one of the only cities to have done that. how can we still be alone in this effort? realizing we have got a lot more work to do. and to say to you that if you do not continue advocating, if we do not have opportunities for you to speak out enough for us to listen and to absorb and to integrate into our policies, then you are god have voices of their that suggest -- then you're going to have voices out there that suggest that the issues you bring out are private matters. that cannot be accepted in a city like san fran.