that role, you know, to make sure that we are not just listening to staff reports and approving them, but that we're asking residents to speak up. i attend meetings on the island, and i have gotten to know a number of residents, and i enjoy their participation. so with that, i would like to ask you for your consideration and approval of my re-appointment. thank you very much for the time. >> thank you. any questions, supervisors? >> no. >> seeing none, okay. thank you. any public comments? >> i'm sorry, i have a question. >> larry. >> okay. >> supervisor breed. >> can you tell me what your thoughts are around how fast you believe the development of treasure island is moving versus how fast you think it should be moving?

>> good question. well, it's moving a lot slower than i would like to see it move. there have been a number of setbacks, which you may be familiar with. the questions regarding the environmental impact studies, the lawsuit, now the appeal. that has been a major factor in slowing us down. recently we were excited that we saw that there were going to be a large amount of funds invested in the island through the developer from the bank of china. and as we know, that deal did not come to fruition. i am still very optimistic that working together, the city, the developers, our board, and your board are going to be able to put together the financing plan

to provide the funds that are necessary to continue and do the development to east answer your question, it's not moving fast enough for us >> i did actually work for the treasure island development authority as a development specialist, where my primary job was attracting the film industry and at that time there were a large number of films that were renting out the hangars there for film productions. i was able to get "the hulk" and other movies here and a lot of work, but a lot of it was the city under its film commission and the treasure island development through its marketing efforts attracted the film industry and that has changed over the years prior to your joining the treasure

island development authority and the number of films that have not only relocated to the island, but have relocated to san francisco in general have declined significantly and therefore, taking with them significant millions of dollars in revenue. whether it be jobs for the fx and his crew and others throughout san francisco, the hotel industry. do you have any thoughts on what we can do in order to basically get some of what we have lost back on treasure island? what we could do in terms of working with the authority and working with the city as a whole to attract films and bring them to san francisco by utilizing the resource of treasure island? >> i think part of the answer was just in your question actually, that i think it's going to take a coordinated effort from a number of city departments and the board of supervisors and the mayor's

office and so on to be able to make it a priority to market once again. i did note that you had been involved in that and it must have been good work because there was a lot of stuff going on at that time. i know there are commercials being made on the island "myth busters," some of the filming is done on the island, but nothing like the past. there is a bit of activity going on, but i happen to think more activity should be going on and it's maybe something that our staff and the film commission folks maybe ought to be talking about. and i think it's a very important economic development activity. so i think that the whole city should be interested in it as a job-creating opportunity, business-development opportunity, and generally an economic-development

opportunity for the city. so i am very supportive of that kind of marketing and bringing back more films to treasure island. >> it's just that maybe some of the hangars have been vacant long enough, where there might be some even more problems than there had been in the past, because they haven't been utilized more consistently. that might be a challenge now. >> i think it would be a challenge, but i think there are solutions to that. that you know, when folks put their heads together and work in a coordinated way, i have found in my experience that once people are willing to work on finding a solution to bringing those hangars back into operating condition and doing the work that is necessary for that, and raising the money that is necessary for that, we can certainly do it. >> thank you. >> you are welcome. >> thank youed. >> thank you. >> any public comments on is

this this? >> i am here to speak in favor of larry de carlo's re-appointment to the board and not only for his work to the community, but understanding the importance of supporting unions in general and our plight with regards to a sustainable/livable wage. our most recent work is, like supervisor breed said was the treasure island and maintaining ored at least trying to maintain a livable wage for the people that maintain the grounds out there. so we strongly urge and ask your support for his re-appointment. thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon,

supervisors, once again mani flores local 22, and supporting the re-appointment for larry del carlo. you have the right man for treasure island and he has a passion for training and work opportunities for local residents. also the man has -- you know he has got a big heart and he is a hard worker, and he loves challenge because he says, "this is how we're going knock it down." he won't back down and is he a straight-shooter and a decent and good man and look forward to your support. thank you very much. >> mr. yee and members of the committee, my name is vince courtney, with the alliance for sustainable growth and i have known larry for 40 years now. he is an outstanding individual. as for the relevance for this

particular re-appointment, is he one of the strongest advocates for collective bargaining and works hard to work out compromises to make it happen. he has been an outstanding commissioner and i urge you to support his re-appointment. thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners, joshua with brightline, speaking in strong support of the re-appointment of larry del carlo. i got to know larry, director del carlo through work in a collaborative called the emerald city collaborative with folks to help green our city. he had a project that, like you said, he wanted to have local hire and do some energy-efficiency work and he wanted to be all union and he wanted to do it all together through a project labor

agreement and he said i want it to be real local hire and i want some of the folks working in san francisco to be at the table. and some folks said, well that is -- i don't know if you know this, but at times local hire has been a bit controversial and he said here is the deal. if the community folks aren't at the table to negotiate local hire, i'm not doing a project labor agreement and he got us to the table, first ever time in history that the community has been able to negotiate on a project labor agreement and it was great. we work with the building trades and worked with larry and got the job done. it was great. about 70% of the work was local residents and i'm very grateful for that opportunity to actually participate in a project labor agreement negotiation. he is coming up big with community and labor particularly around landscaping. there has been tons of questions how the landscaping services are being performed at the island and he has been the

outstanding support for quality and leadership that we hope continues for a long time. potentially citywide reform, really soon, not to say too much, but really excited. please support the re-appointment of director larry del carlo. thank you. >> thank you. any local public comment? public comment is closed. [ gavel ] i have known mr. del carlo for many years and i have been there watching his professional development. i really feel like the treasure island development authority would be very fortunate to have somebody of larry's experience and caliber and i will be supporting your re-appointment. so any other thoughts, colleagues? seeing none, can we

have a motion to confirm the nomination of larry del carlo for the treasure island development authority board of directors to the full board without objection? >> yes, so moved. >> seconded. >> with no objection, it is moved. [ gavel ] >> thank you, and congratulations. [ applause ] >> madame clerk, item no. 6. >> item no. 6, ordinance amending the administrative code to establish the bayview hunters point citizens advisory committee, to provide policy advice to the city and county of san francisco on planning and land use matters for zone 2 of the bayview hunters point redevelopment project area. >> supervisor cohen will be speaking on this item. >> thank you colleagues for hearing this item today. the ordinance before you today will establish a new bayview hunters point citizens advisory committee that would be responsible for reviewing and providing recommendations to

the planning commission, the board of supervisors and other city departments on land use matters in zone 2 of the bayview hunters point redevelopment project area. i know supervisor breed is extremely familiar with the structure and process associated with the redevelopment plans, for those of you who are not, i will give a very brief overview of the city adopted the redevelopment plan for the bayview hunters point neighborhood in 2006, and subsequently amended it in 2010. as a requirement of the california redevelopment law there was a project area committee established that was charged with reviewing land use decisions and projects in the neighborhood, making recommendations to the redevelopment commission, and implementing the redevelopment plan. now in recognition of the structure, the requirements of the california law, the planning department and the redevelopment agency entered into an agreement that specified the process for providing notification to the

project area committee, and required that the committee hear items before the planning commission to make recommendations. now as a city, we have spent a significant amount of time dealing with the impacts of the governor's decision to dissolve the redevelopment agencies. however, one issue that has not been received -- that has notice received as much attention is when our local redevelopment agencis were dissolved, so were a number of our project area communities. as a supervisor who represents an area by the bayview hunters point redevelopment plan, i have been particularly concerned about the loss of the citizens advisory committee. the bayview is a neighborhood that is experiencing change, much of it for the better, but in other words, for the change beneficial, the community needs a voice shaping it. so i think that anyone who has an experience with the cac

recognizes it is no a perfect structure, but where community members with share concerns about proposals for the neighborhood and i think this structure made projects a lot better. that is why i am working with many of my neighbors and the planning department, as well as the city administrator's office to craft the ordinance before us today. this ordinance builds off the existing agreement placed with the planning department and establishes a new citizens advisory committee group for zone 2 of the bayview hunters point project area and portions of survey area c in india basin. i know the map of the area contained in your packet is a little fuzzy and i provided a better copy to show you area that is covered by this legislation. this legislation establishes a 12-member body, nine voting members, three non-voting members, appointed by the district supervisor, the mayor, the city administrator, who will be in charge with reviewing land use proposals,

in the project area, and making recommendations to the city agencies responsible for approving these projects. now consistent with the previous agreement, and the recommendations of the planning department, the types of projects that would be subject to the cac review in this area include: there are a few of them. first, projects that create six or more residential units or building in addition of 10,000-square-feet or more of non-residential space. second, a project that are subject to the planning codes residential guidelines and require public notice under sections 311 and 312. third, projects that will result in the loss of any residential units. fourth, conditional use applications. fifth, any zoning amendments, and sixth, any planning department-led streetscape and public realm improvement plan.

colleagues before you today are a series -- are also a series of amendments that are the result of recommendations made by the planning department, as well as the planning commission, who have heard this ordinance and have made recommendations that are for your approval today. these amendments before you today further specify the noticing procedures for the cac and establishes a 60-day window where the cac must elect to hear or not hear an item before the planning commission hearing can be scheduled. they also make technical changes to the ordinance to specify that the cac will provide their comments on projects to the planning director and requires that planning staff report to the commission on comments of the cac. in our discussions with the deputy city attorney, john givner, i have been advised these amendments are substantive and will require that this ordinance be heard -- be heard today, amended and continued until our next rules

committee meeting. we have got a planning department staff here today, camia hadadon, who i would like to bring up for brief remarks. please come up, thank you. >> good afternoon supervisors. thank you for the opportunity as supervisor cohen mentioned the planning commission heard this item on may 9th and provided recommendations. and those recommendations mainly focused on the types of projects that go before the cac for their review and the notification process. and the cac -- the process the cac provides comments to the planning department. so what we tried to do is for the type of projects that go before the cac, we tried to use the

triggers that are already existing in other parts of the planning code. so there is consistency in terms of finding out which projects will go before the cac, to use the triggers for the projects that are used in other processes. like the preliminary project assessment. and that the department has been practicing for the past couple of years, and also other triggers that are specified in other parts the planning code, like section 311 and section 312. the other big chunk of the recommendations were around the notification process and the idea was that project sponsors will bring the project before the cac not too early, not too late, during the process of the project and development. so we

provided -- we provided two sets of timelines. one at 30-daytimeline, where the cac receives the notification from the department. so within that 30 days the cac will decide or communicate to the project sponsor whether or not they want to hear this project. and under another set of timeline, is a timeline starting from when the cac hears a project, they have another 30 days to provide their comments to the planning commission and in case of my complicated projects that would require multiple hearings before the cac, the cac can always request a time extension from the planning director. so that is basically a brief summary of our recommendations. i am here for any questions. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you very much.

we can take public comment on this item. >> thank you. are there any public comments on this item? seeing none, public comment is now closed. [ gavel ] . >> thank you. thank you, colleagues, i would like to make a motion that we adopt these amendments, and then ask that we continue this item to the next rules committee. >> okay. supervisor breed? >> just some comments and i want to commend supervisor cohen for her leadership on this matter. during the time that i served on the san francisco of san francisco redevelopment agency commission, there was a very active citizens advisory committee and the bayview hunters point and the controversy area of the shipyard and to have voices from the community, that were active in that committee and

come from different parts of that neighborhood, with difference of opinions, but also the ability for them to come together and put together a plan for the community was really important, as well as their push to make sure that the residents of the bayview hunters point community were hired in many of these job opportunities. now that redevelopment is no longer in existence, it is important that we take on the leadership and make sure that there are community groups that are able to provide us with insight on how we move forward? whether it's decision as round planning or whether it's decisions around what we do with workforce development and what have you? so again, i want to commend you on your leadership moving the community forward in this regard and i look forward to the final version of this change. thank you. >> thank you, supervisors breed and yes, thank you, supervisor cohen for your leadership on this item.

it's been moved. is there a second? >> thank you. >> with no objection to the amendments, the motion is moved. >> excuse me, supervisor, would you like to adopt the amendment before you vote on the continuance? >> i think we have. >> so i think the answer is yes. >> yes. >> thank you. [ laughter ] >> okay. >> can we have a motion to continue this item, all right 6 to the call of the chair? >> as amended? >> as amended. >> as amended. >> yes, thank you. second. >> and seconded. with no objection, this motion is moved. [ gavel ] madame clerk, item no. 7. >> item no. 7, ordinance amending the administrative codes mode modifying the structure of assessment appeals board no. 3, that board no. 3 is the same as board no. 2,

provided for stragering terms of initial board no. 3 members and remove provisions regarding board member not meeting current state requirements and adding a public comment timing option and making non-substantive clarifying revisions. >> okay. i guess don darren. with the assessment appeals board and deborah landis from the board of supervisors' clerk office are here to speak on item no. 7. >> good afternoon, supervisors. deborah landis, deputy director and don duran is also here today to modify at the assessment board 3, which is currently inactive and we proposed to change the board as part of a collaborative effort to improve the city's property tax refund process.

to streamline the process for taxpayers and in conjunction with the treasurer/tax collector and controller, our department will implement very changes to help alleviate the current property tax refund challenges. as part of, this the assessment appeals board plans to hear evening appeals for properties 1-4 units in size, beginning in october. to eliminate the current backlog of approximately 8,000 pending cases. and the board 3 modification is necessary to be able to hold those hearings, so that we can shift the board's hearing responsibilities from commercial to residential. after we modify the make-up of board 3, we will be able to start the recruitment process for commissioners to have them in place for this fall, for the hearings that we would like to begin in october. and as part of that process, we will come before the rules

committee again to appoint those commissioners. please let us know if you have any questions or want additional information. >> thank you. are you going to speak also? any questions of deborah? supervisor breed. >> dawn duran, i am here to answer any questions that you have regarding the assessment appeals board composition and again, what our plans are going forward to assist in the refund process. >> i don't think we have any questions. it's pretty clear-cut. at this point, are there any public comments for this item? you have two minutes. >> good afternoon, supervisors. trisha on behalf of the assessor recorders office, here to express our support of this legislation.

i would like is to start off by thanking the board of supervisors for hearing this item and tackling this important issue. it's very important to our office. as you might be appear the assessment appeals board works directly with the assessor's office and by way of background, your clerk, the controller, the treasurer/tax collector and assessor recorder have been working on a project to stream line the process for taxpayers in san francisco. there is currently a backlog of 8,000 appeals pending with a statutory deadline to be heard within two years of filing. as you know, when the market took a downturn in 2008, we saw an uptick in appeals before the aab and you know, that number has been staggering for our office, requiring much staff time, which has impacted the operations of our department. so we are here in support of the legislation and hope that will you move it forward. thank you.

>> thank you. seeing no other public comments, public comment is now closed. [ gavel ] any thoughts on this? would you like to make a motion? >> so moved. >> the motion is to move item 7 to the full board without objection and see nothing objection, the motion is seconded and it's moved. do i have to account -- she had to step out? [ inaudible ] >> thank you. all right 7 is closed. [ gavel ] thank you very much. >> thank you. >> for item 8-14, can you please calls the items madame chair. >> items no. 8 through 14 are

items regarding existing litigations. >> before we entertain a motion to convene closed session, is there any member of the public who wishes to speak on items 8-14? seeing none, public comment is closed. [ gavel ] colleagues, is there a motion to convene in closed session? >> so moved. >> i will second it, and seeing no objections, the motion is moved. [ gavel ] members of the public, we will now be convening in closed session. we would ask you to please leave the >> deputy city attorney john givner, during the closed session the committee voted 3-0 to forward items 9, 10, 13 and 14 to the full board with

recommendation. voted 3-0 to table item 12. and continue item 11 to the call of the chair. for item 8, the committee voted to recuse supervisor yee from participation because of the personal relationship with the attorney representing the plaintiff. and by a 2-0 vote, continued that matter to the call of the chair. >> thank you. colleagues can i have a motion to not disclose what happened in closed session? >> so moved. >> is there a second. >> second. >> with no objection, the motion passes. [ gavel ] madame clerk, is there anything else on the agenda? >> no, mr. chair. >> if there is nothing further, the meeting is adjourned. [ gavel ]

my (calling names) commissioners first up on your calendar is the