than one minimum work time skill is part of the work, refreshes the reflective cooperative community. exchange work with basic needs [speaker not understood] approximately 2 to 4 hours a day for five-day week, with two-day or expanded weekend leisure. longer workday would mean sort of workweek. the exchange for our basic healthy needs. elected representatives [speaker not understood] expression and vote. basic needs of public administration constitution like the healthy right to work, organized labors [speaker not understood]. >> thank you very much. next speaker. want to welcome back our former colleague, supervisor chris daly. good afternoon, president and board of supervisors. my name is karen [speaker not understood] and i stand here with seiu, [speaker not understood] representation. we come this afternoon to say special thank you to supervisor

cohen for having today at 12:00 noon over 100 people gathered in front of the city hall in recognition of equal pay day and the resolution trying to be put in san francisco making today equal pay day. we are happy today and thank you for the supervisors that participated as well. we are here today. we have a video that we would like to show that features supervisor cohen, president of seiu local 10 21, [speaker not understood] sanchez, and also laura hahn is also featured in this. again, we thank you and ask if item number 21st agenda of your meeting today in support of the resolution for equal pay day in san francisco. thank you. can we see the video? [video presentation] >> more than ever men and women have a better day. >> women are leading in business. [speaker not understood]. they are lead intion government.

>> women are helping society move forward. too many women are falling behind. >> this is the idea of san francisco. that's why we are recognizing the national league for pay day. >> april 9, how much the woman will have to work to make the average amount the man-made last year. [speaker not understood]. >> that's why we need common sense laws and politics to end discrimination in pay. support paycheck equality. >> support paycheck equality. >> support paycheck equality. >> support paycheck equality. >> [speaker not understood]. ♪ ♪ >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. i'm michael, i'm a member of the park merced coalition,

and the community improvement team. i'd like to thank both supervisors for the work they have been doing on this. very, very challenging issue. it's been a pleasure to be involved in participatory democracy. ~ and i would just very briefly like to ask that supervisor kim's new legislation be given a full vetting in hbc and planning before it moves out of committee and onto the full board. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. next speaker. well, today's message comes from john and luke. the high priest then asked jesus of his disciples and his do trim and jesus said, i spoke openly to the world what i ever taught in the synagogues. and in the temple where the jews always resort. in secret have i said nothing. why ask me?

ask them what i said to them. be hold, they know what i said. and then when he had thus spoken, one of the officers that stood by struck jesus and everything jesus says is touche, but this is particularly touche. he says, if i have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil. but if well, why do you smite me? and then he was brought off to pontious pilate. jesus said, are you saying that of yourself or did others tell you of me? he said, to this end was i born and for this cause came i into the world to bear witness to the truth. everyone that is of the truth hears my voice. the world has never seen as rough as a preacher of the lord jesus christ. in luke chapter 13 they came to him and said, what pilate, the same one he stood before in chapter 18 of john, had just killed some jews. we're not giving any

information about that other than they were killed by pilate. you know what jesus said? he said, do you think they were worse than anybody else because they suffered this? he said you all will likewise perish. he wasn't saying a roman government was going to kill them. he was talking about judgment day. and then he brought out another tragedy about how 18 people died when this tower fell on them and killed them. he said, do you think they were any worse than anybody else because that happened to them? unless you repent, you'll all and believe in me, you'll all likewise perish. think about it. >> next speaker, please. good afternoon, board of supervisors. my name is rose hillson. i appreciate that the c-e-q-a california environmental quality act procedures community alternative legislation written at the urging of neighborhood groups, environmental groups and preservation advocates has been

introduced today. i look forward to reading it and having it heard before both planning and hpc, historic preservation, as requested. hpc meeting date is may 1st. i was not sure if the community alternative legislation will be at land use committee eight days prior on april 22. anyway, i look forward to reading it and for it to be thoroughly vetted so the public is given fair and meaningful opportunity to opine. it is hoped that the full board in future will also support the community legislation that may balance everyone's concerns. thank you very much all for your time. >> thank you. next speaker. and if there are any other members of the public that wish to speak in general public comment, please line up. [singing] ♪ ♪ good night city good night city

welcome to chris daly today good night city here comes chris daly coming back today we're going to the lull a by of broadway that's what the civic heights is, it's up your supervisor way hello. ♪ i don't even know your city name, but i think and love you just the same the last time i felt like this i was sewing in city love, falling and ceiling, i never felt such love the gov the last time i felt like this was long before i knew to how to keep the city green and blue the last time i felt like this i was falling in city love

falling in ceiling i never felt this way in love gov the last time i felt like this is long before i knew a city that's like you ♪ walk my way [speaker not understood] instruments aren't on strike today never knowing my right hand from my glove and city from gov and no contract in this d and contract love on my own should i wonder with all the $155,000 a year and all alone and i'm so glad you got a contract city >> thank you. next speaker.

supervisors, tom gilberti, [speaker not understood], official greetings to all our new ones. i'm here for noise. that's my priority. i'm the only one in the city that's time has come. it's not on the environmental impact reports. we don't need a thousand people to find out that, you know, its time has come to address that situation. that's number one priority. number two priority, two years ago my rent went up 8.9%. last year it went up 9.5%. this year it went up between 10 and 14%. the difference in one rent check this year is $390.

we have -- we're asking the city to give up 2000 plus prime rent control apartments and drop those people into the toxic soup of market rate apartment, and a market rate apartment is first and foremost a vehicle for investors to make money. second, after that is a vehicle to make profits and where does the edge start when you go into prove tiering. -- profiteering and topped by 5%. what you've got here is say situation that's happening. when we top it off with 5%, we want to keep our community, our city stable. that's the number two priority. number three priority, sc-4, market and dolores, 88 condos, i'm seeing 26 condos.

i'm seeing 26 cost of living apartments. i'm seeing 26 lower income units and 10 section 8 people. it looks good. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker. hi, i'm edmond [speaker not understood]. happy earth day [speaker not understood]. i'm at the wrong place. >> that's the right microphone. [speaker not understood]. >> if you could speak into the microphone. i haven't been here in so long. okay, i can talk from here, okay. okay, i would like to say, you know, it's 4:20 coming up and i'm so glad the world is starting out with 4/20. this is going to be the greatest day coming out of san francisco state [speaker not understood].

everyone is african, you know that. you hear me -- they're going to be talking about public policy, about medical marijuana consumption rates, legislation, environmental, physical mental health, [speaker not understood] families of the nation list of first violence, understanding aides and impact across communities, gun violence, what is all the fuss about. affordable housing, health care, owe boom a care, mayor's equality and the black community, is it [speaker not understood] to us, young gift and had black presentations. ~ obamacare this year you know themes all around the city, it's earth day here at city hall 6 o'clock, the [speaker not understood] is what i came from 4/20. el rio is having a benefit for the foundation. [speaker not understood] a beautiful black man. and eat the rich. and, so, i really hope you know you guys are doing your part in earth day 4/20.

i was at [speaker not understood] college up in the hills and they have a new word for racism and home owe phobia. it's called ignorantism. it's called fear. i think in our city we should want to follow-up with that word ignorantism when it comes to racial or sexual genderisms in a city that can cover everything. we can do a better job here me city. thank you, board of supervisors. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. good afternoon, supervisors. i'm peter war field, executive director of library users association. last week the library commission heard that it's

important open hours survey is ready. it's important because, in part, certainly hours open is an extremely important aspect of library service. but also it's important because the voter approved sunday guarantee for the library, prop d in 2007, guaranteed the library very generous funding, but mandated that hours had to be reviewed every five years. so, the library commission was told that the report was ready, that there was no 120-page report for the public available nor the supplementary 160 pages that had been prepared . all that the public got was an 8 page of executive summary of which essentially only two pages were text. and as far as i can tell, the whole purpose of the report is to blurb rather than clarify

what it is that people can't in the way of library hours. in fact, the surveys that were given out never actually asked the members of the public, what specific hours do you want the library to be open? or what additional hours, and in particular, what hours do you most want the library to be open? i could read you the questions from the survey. there were some that talked about what would happen to you if there were reductions and then people were asked to specify what those would be, but there was no comparable question about what was an additional time period that the library provide to you. i have more to say about the survey and i'll sure you'll be hearing from the library. it's intend today blur that people most want weekends and evenings in the library's own previous surveys. >> thank you. next speaker.

good afternoon, supervisors. my name is douglasyv. -- yip. i couldn't resist seeing two people in this chamber, mr. givener and chris daly. for the record, i'd like to note and mr. givener, in my opinion, did not do an adequate investigation regarding residency of supervisor sean elsbernd before -- before he was reelected in 2008. just thought i'd mention that since both of them are in this room by sheer luck. secondly, i'd like to remind all critics of local government that the fbi does have a public corruptions unit on golden gate avenue. there's a little plug right there. thirdly, i'd like to thank the examiner and the chronicle for

putting forth recent articles regarding the mayor's trip to china. let's put it this way. i would bet plenty of money that the chinese know exactly what they're doing and it wouldn't surprise me if they have certain volunteers arrive in san francisco to do their deeds. also, i would like to mention that in regards to treasure island, i keep hearing on the radio news about what's going on there and the different problems. and i think it's only fair to have mr. tony hall testify in these chambers regarding what happens' going on at treasure island and what should and shouldn't be done there. ~ what's going on also, i would like to mention why doesn't gao committee on thursday have on its schedule a discussion about mr. henry alvarez? and i think the mayor should

donate his retirement check to the people that live in the projects. thank you. >> thanks. next speaker. mr. president, board of supervisors, my name is [speaker not understood], i live in the north of market. i just heard on the conservative radio that the blue angels were canceled. i know this body some years ago had a pretty significant discussion about the safety issues involving the blue angels, and it occurred to me that over and above that, if we're in a government that is not being sufficiently funded and people are cutting corners, you know, safety could be an issue in a program where safety is really critical. and i know it's potentially a big hit to our city particularly the marin a district, but, you know, if you're cutting corners and you can't account for safety, then there's other kind of programs that actually should get cut. thank you. ~ marina >> thank you very much. are there any other members of the public that wish to speak

in general public comment, please step up. appreciate it [speaker not understood] to the other members here. i guess i'm having a problem with community having a partnership in that you have a staff member, a desk clerk stacey harris who has gotten into a fight with one of the tenants. and what happened is instead of like firing him or suspending him, they just transferred him to a building with family women and children and adults. what i've experienced is that he is overbearing and like abusive. the other thing, too, is i

would appreciate if somebody does something about the culture of violence in the community housing partnership. i have video and i have e-mails regarding some of the incidents. i am thinking of three incidents in particular. when i've tried to address them through different people, they, they use word games to negate the problems. the other problem that i'm having is when i've tried to go pay the rent there, i get several excuses as to why i need to come back. my bank just closed. i'm going home. it's several issues. i'm just getting concerned that will i ever be able to pay my rent? i've been paying it, but why do i have to get excuseses when i try to come pay my rent at community housing partnership?

the other thing is there is also a history of problems being neglected, negated. i personally have a small stack of [inaudible]. >> thank you very much. any other members of the public wish to speak in general public comment? seeing none, general public comment is closed. madam clerk, can we go to our 3:00 p.m. special order. >> items 13 through 16 comprise the public hearing of persons interested in the decision of the planning department's determination dated april 18, 2012. that project located at 61 1 buena vista west avenue is exempt from environmental review under the california environmental quality act. item 14 is the motion affirming the planning department's determination that the project is exempt. item 115 is a motion reversing the determination by the planning department. item 16 is directing preparation of findings.

>> thank you. ladies and gentlemen, for today's hearing we will be considering the appeal of the environmental review exemption for the project at 61 1 buena vista west avenue. for this hearing, we will consider the adequacy, accuracy, sufficiency, and completeness of the planning department's determination that this project is categorically exempt from environmental review. as far as today's procedures, we will first hear from the appellants. we will have up to 10 minutes in total to describe the grounds for the appeal. we will then take public comment from individuals that wish to speak on behalf of the appellants. each speaker will have up to two minutes to present. we will then hear from the planning department who will have up to 10 minutes to describe the grounds for their determination that the project is exempt from environmental review. following planning's presentation, we'll hear from the real party in interest who will have up to 10 minutes to present. we will hear from individuals speaking on behalf of the real party in interest, and each speaker will have up to two minutes to present. and finally, the appellants will have up to three minutes

for a rebuttal argument. colleagues, any questions or objections to proceeding in this manner as we typically do? and supervisor wiener as the supervisor for the district in which the project is located, do you have any opening remarks? >> thank you, president chiu. i am looking forward to hearing today the arguments of both sides relating to the appropriateness or lack thereof categorical exemption on this project. and i'll leave it at that. thank you. >> so, with that why don't we start the proceeding. let's hear from representative for the appellant, ms. brandt hoy. good afternoon, president chiu and members of the board, supervisor wiener. i'm susan van holley, i'm here representing the appellants. and i'd like to start out by talking about categorical exemptions in general and of course as they apply to this project. and then i'll take some time to submit in pictures and documents for the record.

i know the board is particularly familiar with categorical exemptions recently in light of the chapter 31 proceedings that are the amendments going forward. so, i won't take a lot of time. but basically the legislature that's allowed categorical exemptions because some projects are so minor that they don't warrant taking the time or spending the money to do environmental review. there is just to reason to do an environmental review for a lot of projects, thousands and thousands of them go forward in this city and around the state all the time. and so it should be. there are, however, circumstances when a project, even though it fits into a categorical exemption class, is not appropriately categorically exempt. and that's when you have an atypical project that has potentially significant environmental impacts. and that's what's before you today. there are some complications at the outset with this project because we have -- i was thinking about -- trying to figure out what makes this

project so different and what's so troubling and it starts with the fact that it's a segmentation. c-e-q-a, the california environmental quality act, requires that when a project is being reviewed, you look at the whole of the action, quote-unquote, the whole of the action of the project all at the same time. otherwise, you can segment environmental review and the cases and the statute and the guidelines say that you should not, you know, once you chop up a project into pieces, each piece may seem not to have an environmental impact but you have to look at the whole. and what happened here was 10 years ago there was a proposal to build a home on this very small site in between these two very large historic buildings. one is an 1895 queen ann victorian, the other a 1906 combination of an edwardian and craftsman style home. one is listed and one appears to be eligible for listing. anyway, the siding question is a small lot that had a carriage

house initially for the house on the corner of the queen ann victorian. and when the project was proposed, there was a lot of concern about it and there were fully discretionary review requests made to the planning department. that was settled at that time and part of the agreement between all of the neighbors with the project sponsor whos was the same project sponsor before you today, was that the third story would be removed and that's what happened. and i did have the plans that we obtained from the planning department that show -- can you see that or not? >> we can see it. final approved plans, and i'll submit those for the record. and, so, now fast forward, the house has been built and now the project sponsor is back asking again for this story that was not approved. so, when you really look at the project at issue here, it's the project that's before you today as opposed to the project that

was -- that occurred -- update approval was made 10 years ago and it was subsequently built. and the problem is that this looks like a small thing, 600 square feet plus instead of looking at the whole project, which was mitigated essentially, but the impacts of this project were mitigated by taking off that extra story. when this went to the planning commission, two of the commissioners, commissioner ant anyone i and commissioner hilless both discussed adding a story and actually denied voting against the project because they were concerned that of the impacts on this very important architecturally significant neighborhood, that the character defining features of these two large historic homes on either side of the proposed project would be blocked by this third story. ~ there are other environmental issues relating to the blockage of views from buena vista park and blocking a view from a park -- an oceanview from a park is an unusual circumstance.

also, the light and glare caused to the neighbors, the lack of privacy to the neighbors, and inconsistency to the number of the city's residential guidelines, can including compatibility with adjacent buildings and introduction of light and glare ~. and i've put them forward more in my letter. at the planning commission, commissioner sugaya agreeing -- by the way, commissioner sugaya announced for the record he's an architectural historian, that the project -- the two buildings on either side are in fact historic exceptional resources. so, we're dealing with impacts to the historic resources here and the context is very important and c-e-q-a provides for that. to mitigate the acknowledged impacts from public views of these magnificent historic resources in this neighborhood, the planning commission attempted to make conditions to the project that would resolve some of the problems. and because of the way that it

occurred, and we put that on the record, and also because of the fact that the -- this building, the site plans for the original building were not accurate and this, in fact, the property on the corner is actually setback four feet further than is represented on the site plans approved 10 years ago. so in order to protect the views of the turret one would have to move back the setback quite a bit more. adding all these things together, you have a project that potentially significant environmental impacts and unusual circumstances, and therefore you can't make a finding and the city was incorrect in making a finding that there's no possible environmental impacts. you have a very dense project, glass, light, glare, blocked views and an architecturally significant neighborhood. that does not qualify for exemptions. >> supervisor wiener, do you have a question? >> yes, thank you, mr. president. >> can we hold the clock while you're asking the question.