maybe this is a question for our counsel. i do not know the extent to which the ethics commission would make a presentation and how it what happened in a land use proceeding. there might be limitations on what ethics can actually say. to the extent that ethics acts as a body, i don't know that one individual can come down here and make the presentation. i like what supervisor campos is talking about. in some ways, it speaks for itself. that will be a question to our

counsel. >> thank you. the issue here is a little different from a planning commission hearing. the ethics commission does not have a staff member with expertise in misconduct that can answer questions in expertise. they make recommendations and pass those on to you. it is an issue as to whether or not you could ask them questions. those recommendations were voted on by the body. somebody may not be comfortable or be in a position to explain beyond what the written document is. it is a unique situation.

as i have been council for the ethics commission, my interpretation of what the ethics commissioner would do when it comes to you is provide you with a written record, be here to describe the process that they went through if you have any questions about the process that they went through, answer any questions. i think it would justifiably be uncomfortable trying to explain or expand upon any recommendations or findings made. those findings were made by the body as a whole. as a background, the fundamental issue is the party is being provided with due process. i do not think this issue is a due process issue. whether you want to hear from the ethics commission, whether you do not want to hear from them. whether they talk to you for 5 minutes or 20 minutes, i do not

think it is a due process issue. >> if i could follow up with one question, you said the amount of time, five minutes or 20 minutes, does not necessarily affect the due process issue. you could have a 5 or 810-minute presentation instead of a 20- minute presentation. i would throw that out there as a possible idea. supervisor tells burned. -- elsbernd. >> you took the words out of my mouth. i appreciate the theoretical legal discussion we're having. let's also consider the practical. i have heard supervisor campos and supervisor avalos. supervisor cohen nailed the point of what we are doing. we would be asking them questions to understand their

rationale there is probably going to be an hour, 2 hours to question. they are still going ot speak. i am all for cutting it down from 20 minutes to 10 minutes. they are going to be talking for a good deal of time. i would expect us all to have questions. that is one of the reasons they should present, especially for the public. we have all experienced the way the media summarizes things. they are not necessarily right. the public would very much

benefit from their presentation. the broader sunshine. and disclosure point would be better served. let's be real. they would be up there for a very long time. >> i would not be supporting the motion by supervisor avalos. it might do understand -- i do understand his point. i do not see any downside to a provided for a presentation by ethics. it could be a very brief presentation. there is not very much they can answer depending on the questions that counsel has raised. it could be very beneficial for

us to hear the rationale orally, or whenever it is that they can say. for the public to hear that and not just to have to go on line somewhere and find a document and read it. we want to make sure that whenever we are doing that it will be broadcast as widely as possible. people understand the recommendation and not ultimately understand the decision of this board. the supervisor is ultimately right. any member of this board can say, and ethics commission, can you please describe to be your recommendation and the rationale for it? they would have a 20-minute presentation. having a structure in place where they get a maximum

allotment of time with the ability to communicate that information would be useful. i do not agree with that for a couple of reasons. i do not want to predict how ethics will communicate its recommendation. it would be healthy to speculate one way, that could be talking about both sides. i do not want to presuppose about how they make a recommendation. this is a board of experienced, sophisticated elected officials who make decisions. there are plenty of times when you have public comment or emails in one direction.

i am not concerned that we will be unduly influenced if there is more time based on the recommendation of ethics. >> colleagues, i appreciate the discussion. i want to first say thsat the challenge and the structure is that we want to hear that the ethics commission does not use their time to argue. they are simply laying out what is potentially in their written record. i also agree with the sentiment that if we don't give the ethics commission any time to present, it will be confusing to the public as to what will be an contextual.

that is clear as stated in the right -- resolution that the ethics commission may make an oral presentation is not to exceed 10 minutes. at that point, we can ask as many questions as we want. it can extend the time. i want to mention for the public watching this discussion that it is our practice that as long as colleagues can ask that. i would like to make that motion to move this conversation along. >> is there a second? at second by supervisor weiner. >> i am willing to reese in my motion. i would like you to restate years. >> the only thing that would change about my amendment is

changing the time frame from up to 10 minutes to up to 20 minutes. the rest would remain the same. >> that is only pertaining to the ethics information, correct? >> just to be clear, that is only pertaining to the ethics commission. both the mayor and the sheriff would continue to have their opportunity to make presentations up to 20 minutes. >> this is a question to our counsel. we are talking about 20 minutes versus 10 minutes. that could be extended. what would they be saying if bay are not going to spend a ton of time arguing? >> i do not know who would be

making the presentation. i would anticipate that if the ethics commission made findings and they had written explanations as to why they found that and they transmitted that to you, if you asked a represent-representative of the ethics committee, what is really meant by x, this is the way they want to transmit their findings to you, the representative might say we cannot really tell you anything more about that. that doesn't mean there aren't a range of questions about the process. the qualification i am giving you is you may not have somebody feeling comfortable collaborating upon a finding that has been voted on.

the collaboration might not be voted on by the majority of the body. >> i agree with supervisor winner. we are experienced in dealing with these issues. i do agree that to provide context is important. they might only be reading from a written record to begin with. something close. >> it is hard for me to speculate. i will not be making the presentation. one would expect that they might not want to stray very much from the written findings. they might not want to stray from the findings by the commission. >> supervisor campos. >> i am grateful to my colleagues for this discussion. i think it has been a very

thoughtful discussion. i do not know what the right answer is. i think the point that supervisor avalos makes is a good one. i think the approach that president chiu has outlined is good for many reasons. there might be a benefit to a presentation. the second point is that it recognizes that it is a different kind of a presentation. it does not need the same amount of time. i think that it is a good way of compromising and addressing some of the concerns. >> any additional discussion? at this point, supervisor avalos' motion has been

rescinded. can we take my motion without objection? the amendment is made. unless there is further discussion, can we take a roll call vote on the memo to be approved? >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. . aye. >> it aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> there are 11 ayes. >> item 72. >> a motion cauterizing preparation for written proponent and ballot arguments for some middle to the voters on the november 6, 2012 consolidated municipal election. >> colleagues, we have

circulated an amended copy of this particular motion. i just want to summarize the assignments as they are laid out, which are the various sponsors of the amendments for the proponent and the proponent rebuttal arguments for the consolidated elections. it was suggested that supervisor weiner be in charge of those arguments for the housing trust funds. i am happy to handle that. for the motion regarding the citizens united related measure, we have united supervisor avalos with rebuttal ballot arguments. colleagues, unless someone would like to be assigned to any of

the measures that do not currently have an assignment, i would suggest that we strike items on page 4 through the end of page 6 and state that supervisor elsbernd will handle that. do i have a motion to that? we have to take the amendments and then vote to approve. can we take those amendments without objection? on the underlying motion, can we do this? the motion is approved. i understand we have one imperative hide them from supervisor mar. >> it is a resolution commending the chinese progress of revolution and declaring

august 4, 2012 as chinese progressive day in san francisco. >> colleagues, supervisor mar has provided us with the resolution. they have made a motion to that of fact. seconded by supervisor campos. any public comment on this item? colleagues, can we take this item? without objection, this should be the case. with that, could you read the en memorials. >> this will be adjourned for will lakevil -- late violet b. king. >> i know we have had a long seven months. i hope everybody gets a chance to take a break. ladies and gentlemen, we are adjourned.

>> there has been an acknowledgement of the special places around san francisco bay. well, there is something sort of innate in human beings, i think, that tend to recognize a good spot when you see it, a spot that takes your breath away. this is one of them. >> an icon of the new deal. >> we stood here a week ago and

we heard all of these dignitaries talk about the symbol that coit tower is for san francisco. it's interesting for those of us in the pioneer park project is trying to make the point that not only the tower, not only this man-built edifice here is a symbol of the city but also the green space on which it sits and the hill to which is rests. to understand them, you have to understand the topography of san francisco. early days of the city, the city grows up in what is the financial district on the edge of chinatown. everything they rely on for existence is the golden gate. it's of massive importance to the people what comes in and out of san francisco bay. they can't see it where they are. they get the idea to build a giant wooden structure. the years that it was up here, it gave the name telegraph hill. it survived although the

structure is long gone. come to the 1870's and the city has growed up remarkably. it's fueled with money from the nevada silver mines and the gold rush. it's trying to be the paris of the west. now the beach is the suburbs, the we will their people lived on the bottom and the poorest people lived on the top because it was very hard getting to the top of telegraph hill. it was mostly lean-to sharks and bits of pieces of houses up here in the beginning. and a group of 20 businessmen decided that it would be better if the top of the hill remained for the public. so they put their money down and they bought four lots at the top of the hill and they gave them to the city. lily hitchcock coit died without leaving a specific use for her bequest. she left a third of her estate for the beautify indication of the city. arthur brown, noted architect in the city, wanted for a while to build a tower. he had become very interested

in persian towers. it was the 1930's. it was all about machinery and sort of this amazing architecture, very powerful architecture. he convinced the rec park commission that building a tower in her memory would be the thing to do with her money. >> it was going to be a wonderful observation place because it was one of the highest hills in the city anywhere and that that was the whole reason why it was built that high and had the elevator access immediately from the beginning as part of its features. >> my fear's studio was just down the street steps. we were in a very small apartment and that was our backyard. when they were preparing the site for the coit tower, there was always a lot of harping and griping about how awful progress was and why they would

choose this beautiful pristine area to do them in was a big question. as soon as the coit tower was getting finished and someone put in the idea that it should be used for art, then, all of a sudden, he was excited about the coit tower. it became almost like a daily destination for him to enjoy the atmosphere no matter what the politics, that wasn't the point. as long as they fit in and did their work and did their own creative expression, that was all that was required. they turned in their drawings. the drawings were accepted. if they snuck something in, well, there weren't going to be any stoolies around. they made such careful little

diagrams of every possible little thing about it as though that was just so important and that they were just the big frog. and, actually, no one ever felt that way about them and they weren't considered something like that. in later life when people would approach me and say, well, what did you know about it? we were with him almost every day and his children, we grew up together and we didn't think of him as a commie and also the same with the other. he was just a family man doing normal things. no one thought anything of what he was doing. some of them were much more highly trained. it shows, in my estimation, in the murals.

this was one of the masterpieces. families at home was a lot more close to the life that i can remember that we lived. murals on the upper floors like the children playing on the swings and i think the little deer in the forest where you could come and see them in the woods and the sports that were always available, i think it did express the best part of our lives. things that weren't costing money to do, you would go to a picnic on the beach or you would do something in the woods. my favorite of all is in the staircase. it's almost a miracle masterpiece how he could manage to not only fit everyone, of course, a lot of them i recognized from my childhood -- it's how he juxtaposed and managed to kind of climb up

that stairway on either side very much like you are walking down a street. it was incredible to do that and to me, that is what depicted the life of the times in san francisco. i even like the ones that show the industrial areas, the once with the workers showing them in the cannery and i can remember going in there and seeing these women with the caps, with the nets shuffling these cans through. my parents had a ranch in santa rosa and we went there all summer. i could see these people leaning over and checking. it looked exactly like the beautiful things about the ranch. i think he was pretty much in the never look back philosophy about the coit.

i don't think he ever went to visit again after we moved from telegraph hill, which was only five or six years later. i don't think he ever had to see it when the initials are scratched into everything and people had literally destroyed the lower half of everything. >> well, in my view, the tower had been pretty much neglected from the 1930's up until the 1980's. it wasn't until then that really enough people began to be alarmed about the condition of the murals, the tower was leaking. some of the murals suffered wear damage. we really began to organize getting funding through the arts commission and various other sources to restore the murals. they don't have that connection or thread or maintain that connection to your history and your past, what do you have? that's one of the major elements of what makes quality of life in san francisco so

incredible. when people ask me, and they ask me all the time, how do you get to coit tower, i say you walk. that's the best way to experience the gradual elevation coming up above the hustle and bustle of the city and finding this sort of oasis, if you will, at the top of the hill. when i walk through this park, i look at these brick walls and this lawn, i look at the railings around the murals. i look at the restoration and i think, yeah, i had something to do with that. learning the lessons, thank you, landmarks meet landmarks. the current situation at pioneer park and coit tower is really based in public and private partnership.

it was the citizens who came together to buy the land to keep it from being developed. it was lily hitchcock coit to give money to the city to beautify the city she loved of the park project worked to develop this south side and still that's the basis of our future project to address the

commissioner avalos: good