true, and there is some items that are on here that are due to practice, that essentially, we have always been doing it or, you know, and so we have included it in here. and probably you noticed that as well. and so, >> i appreciate the work. and i find it very, very useful to have all of this together and organized by, it looks like you have it organized by general subject area, the budget and the capitol budget and you also have it organized by the month and the year and i find it extremely good to have it in one place and the question that i had was similar to commissioner loftus was there any reports or anything was eliminated if they were not, that is fine, that is just organizing what we already have

and does not change anything and it just makes it more clear for all of us, and that makes a lot of sense to me. and it is a reminder of the responsibilities that we have as a commission to over see all of this and there is a lot of aspects in the department to look over, you know, even on the consent calendar and i appreciate everything that goes on before us and to discuss them and it is good to have it on the perspective here and then the last question was that i just had about the appendix b. and excuse me, exhibit b, and i was just trying to follow what this was for? >> and it does, that is a little, that is an oddty and those two requirements really only come up one every ten years and even though they don't come on the calendar annually and it is putting it in a separate exhibit, seem to clarify it. and so it can either remain as

an exhibit, b, or we could put it with a notation, under exhibit a, and in the months of december and just make a notation, that is essentially after ten years. >> i think that the notation would be a great idea that way that you have it all, i love how clean this is, and terms of having it in one calendar if you are okay with moving that. >> absolutely, and city attorney and i talk about that and just decide for the clarity at this meeting and that it can be condensed. >> perhaps a date would be good here. >> >> and that makes a lot of sense to me, thank you. >> thank you. >> and dr. marshal >> and not to prolong this discussion, but again, i want to thank you for obviously for

organizing this in the systematic manner but commissioner loftus just to add to what you are saying, and saying these names, and i can remember when a lot of these things like the king resolution and the sparks and you know, i guess that the best way to say it is that we seem to add and never subtract and i think that it is a good point and that i am not necessary, but i remember when the commissioners felt that they were, at this point, necessary, will you we seem to continue to add, add, add, and then we will say maybe this is not necessary, now, and so i think that after what this has done, and someone is willing to tackle and say do we really still need to have this? >> because we are going to continue to have it and going to get big and her bigger that is a good point to make and thank you for doing this, but i do think that at some point do we need to do this and as we did in the past? and at this particular report? and the way that it is done. good comment. >> thank you for your comments, commissioner. >> commissioner loftus?

>> i guess that i would just say that the part that i have the question about is the resolution aspect of this and because to the commissioner mar shl's point, the point that i am making i feel that as a commissioner myself i without knowing, and i know that, it seems strange to adopt a resolution that requires us to follow the requirements already required of us. right? so, if it is required of us, then the question is, we have got a list of things that are required of us and i would be interested in a process to look at whether we want to take action and still have that be required of us over the next year, but the thing that i am hesitant to is to take a pro-active vote to again, say, yes, these are what are required of us and we are going to pursuant to this authority, we adopted these requirement because for me i feel like i don't have enough information and it is already required of us and it is already required of us and me to take a action without some more. >> i have the same question.

do we, we don't have to take action on something that we are already doing. >> exactly. >> but you do not have to take a vote on it. i mean, because that is... the discussion is for the action and but this is just going, and it is not really a resolution, this is just the document presented to us so that the secretary can get organized and you know, when these things will come about and help me with that because i was confused about that myself. >> and well, we are not adding anything too. >> but we are, and we are organizing it around a calendar, >> okay. >> of the year and making sure that we put in place a process in which we are doing the things which we are required to do as of right now. and later if you want to change those things, i think that is... >> so this is more of a calendaring and agendaizing document than it is... >> and that is the spirit of the resolution. >> okay. >> and i would like to move, that we adopt this resolution.

and with the changes that we just discussed in >> yes, thank you, with the two changes that were introduced one to item 15 and the other adding, moving the exhibit b integrating it into exhibit a. >> second. >> favor? >> i have the public comment, any public comment regarding this resolution? >> yes? >> good evening, commissioners, sorry i am an analyst and... and there are a few things, very good points, and commissioner loftus, and totally agree, and i am kind of, i agree with adding the date or the next year that these ten-year reports are due, and can add it to this with asterick at the bottom and there are no resolutions attached and it is not

organized by organization, you know, what is sfpd need to report on, what is the occ need to report on what does the commission need to provide and in putting it on the calendar is great for the hearings but for the public it is, you know, when i go to the occ website, i look for say policy changes, and i see that there is a gap of i think, 2008 was the last time that the policies were posted. and then in the chief's report, there is some, items that are pending that are not updated in the following report or you kind of have to reconcile and it is hard to do the math so to speak. so just before adopting another point, adopting a resolution and things that are required,

and these are all required and for making the reports in the back up the charter and the board of supervisors requests, and things that the reports and those reports and to kind of match that to the reports in the data so that you have a better idea of what they are all but to the public, it is, you know, it is just something to consider before you can move to resolve this next week, once everything has been matched up and the purpose of the reports are put there. i mean it is a lot of work, i dig it and it is a lot of detail. but adopting something without having verified it. and i think is probably, not the best practice, >> thank you for your comments. just to address that, it would

be a binder, about like that, you know to put everything together. but, i heard that you are technological and most of the charter can be found on the internet and the city attorney has, you know, gone through by the way to see the attorneys and all of the background. >> and right, i have a copy of that report and the various requests from the police to here to there and i have had to root around and they are not obvious, and this was knots posted on the website and so the public did not have access to this and kind of to verify and not to have the input on it and could have been prepared but it is great to hear and it is a great start and just let the board of supervisors require, you know, going in there annual reports from each,

you know, and thank you, thank you. >> thank you, do we have any further public comment, and the public comment is now closed. do we have a vote? >> yeah, we do. >> first and a second. and all in favor? >> aye. >> and it actually passes thank you very much. >> no you have to ask for any nos? >> yes, no. >> no. >> do we have a no? >> we have one no. >> roll call please? >> president mazzucco. >> aye. >> vice president turman? >> aye. >> commissioner marshal? >> aye. >> commissioner dejesus is excused. >> commissioner chan? >> aye. >> commissioner kingsley? >> aye. >> and commissioner loftus? >> no. >> the motion passes, 5-1. >> thank you, please call the next line item. >> purchase su ant to all

manners containing to item 7 below, closed session, including public comment on the vote to whether to hold item seven in closed session. >> this is public comment regarding our closed session, matters which are litigation matters, and disciplinary matters which are protected by confidentty and it is now closed and call item 6. >> vote on whether to hold item 7 in closed session, including whether to assert the attorney klie ant privilege in regard to item 7, a, b, c, and d and the san francisco administrative code, section 67.10 action. >> thank you, do i have a motion? >> i move. >> and we go to closed session. >> all if favor? >> aye. >> and thank you very much and we are moving to the closed session, thank you.

>> president mazzucco we are back in the open session and you have an open quorum. >> thank you very much and could you call the next line item. >> line item 8 vote to elect to hold or disclose any or all discussion on item 7 held in closed session. >> the san francisco cold section, 671.2 a. action. >> i move not to disclose. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> thank you, please call the last line item, number nine, the adjournment. >> adjournment, line item nine. >> and thank you very much and as i stated earlier tonight, the police, commission i move to adjourn in the honor of former san francisco district attorney investigator debbie waterfield who passed away recently, she was a very pro-active member of the officers for justice. and prior to joining the san francisco district attorney office, and the da investigator she was a san francisco sheriff's deputy. and she has had affiliations

with the police department and some of us on this commission for many, many years, and miss debbie and i was there when she married kelley water field my dad's old partner and i have known him for a long time and she is great, when you told her that it was your wife's birthday she had no problem driving you to nordstromto make sure that you got the right gift. >> i just want to echo, commissioner mazzucco comments, debbie was very good to many new district attorneys and very kind hearted person and she will be greatly missed. so, condolence to her family, and just glad that i got to know her. >> commissioners, i move that we adjourn in honor of retired inspector debbie waterfield. >> so moved. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> thank you. >>

>> we will call this meeting of the historic preservation. >> welcome to the regular meeting for wednesday november 6th. if you have any mobile devices please silence them. i'd like to take roll at this time (calling names) commissioners first on your calendared is the consent calendar. the public may address the

agenda items but the item when it's reached during the meeting and each speaker may have up to 3 minutes >> mrs. haas. >> commissioners i'm you jim haas. i'd like to - these microphones you have to swallow them to make them work properly. i want to condominium on the heritage report. i served on the federal advisory council on historic preservation under president carter in the 70s. at the time that the secretary

standards were being developed. those were developed for a narrow purpose to deal with the tax credit and to protect the tax treasurer. i've you witnessed the expansion of those guidelines and scope of application in ways i've never expected and it's had an effect on people in their be feblt to use the historic resources. there's been a reaction to that in the 21st century from a gentleman at notre dame. some of you attended his lecturer. i have a paper that summarizes the theme. that has brought forward a go robust discussion on the

secretary standards. now the spear heritage report overlooks that doesn't mention that. i find it startling and i've interviewed 5 members of the committee that said it wasn't discussed. that's quite extraordinary. now, when supervisor wiener was preparing pious election regarding the prestige i lent him the professors book. he's familiar with the whole issue of secretary standards and that's one of the reasons he suggested the local guidelines be presented now you have in your work plan an item to prepare thosegles and budget item for it. as i've not seen any activity towards that. that should be your first that priority. the items litsdz listed in the

spear heritage report are nice preschooler things by in getting into the business in san francisco the first order t is to straighten out the order like they did in charleston and portland and i urge you to move in that direction >> mr. paul scott your item is coming up during staff report, would you like to speak that then? thank you in the meantime any any public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. yep. yes >> it probably would be best for paul scioto speak at this time because it was not an agenda item it's only an informational report back to the commissioners so -

>> pardon me mr. scott. >> thank you, commissioner. as many of you may know there's a fire at the case he will there was a torch on the roof. but there's a story about it in the paper i don't know how many details argue interested in are i want to let u.s. you know we're open it and we've had numerous people on the site to inspect it to try to maintain the materials to have a complete

picture how to rebuild and but i knew this would be of concern to you folks. i wanted to check in with you. we've provided some pictures to the planning staff i assume it will show you the condition of the roof and we'll be taking spepz steps to put that back together. we've got enough information from the materials we have to rebuild it exactly as it was. that's the plan. the only other thing i wanted to add in our last visit that was a discussion - we received a copy of final motion and there's a discussion around this fence wail the tiled wall on the property that seems to be going

in a different direction so i wanted to have you folks be aware of that and perhaps consider the language that was used under it was different from what i understood the commission was going. i understood the consensus on the commission was to maintain the wall in place with perhaps eliminating some things but the language is to basically eliminate this wall above of the dirt line, you know, for the reasons we've explained i can show you a picture of it. this is the hi and actually, i work with staff on that. >> i remember it very well. >> sorry to divert you from the

agenda if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them. >> okay take care. >> any member of the public wishes to speak on any item seeing none, public comment is closed. >> commissioners that places you on department matters item one announcements. >> good afternoon, tim from the staff the director's report is in our packet if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them. seeing no questions >> the review of the staff report and nominates. >> commissioners tim fry again, a couple of items i have nuke u nothing to report from our previous planning commission hearings although congratulations to mr. john for his appointment as commissioner commission secretary.

last week myself moss he is and commissioner andrew accepted on honor at the national trust prestige convention n in i said i understand regarding the twin peaks. moss he is spoke to the h pc designation work programming program to designate properties that have significance beyond the architecture. other properties like marcus book store and other awards included the new york city aids memorial which is currently under design and construction and near i can't recall the name of the hospital but near the lower east side >> the st. vincent's hospital.

>> and the lgbt contact statement that is currently underway by authors shawn, watson and donna graves with the partnership with the lgbt historic society and they received some funding prosecute with the development of that document. to follow up on mr. scott's comments there was a small fire at the julissa castle i have some photos that were submitted. apparently, there was some reroofing on the deck the contractors were using below torchs and there was not a fire marshall observing the work and a fire broke out but the fire was contained pretty quickly.

the pit was destroyed but there's enough material to build it. there was some water damage to the interior and i believe that's still under that examtion. finally, i want to let you know i'll be at the mayors graffiti board talking about the h pcs process for the permits alternate. their primarily looking for ways to work with the department and the h pc to curb situations like what just happened at the bank. so it's a high he concern and

they want to address it in a meaningful way in law enforcement and abatement. i'll report back to you on the finding at you're next h pc hearing if you have any questions, we'll be happy to answer them >> thank you prosecute fry seeing none, no questions. >> i want to remind the public please silence all electronic devices. >> that places you under wants reports and announcement. >> no formal announcements. >> draft minutes brawl special meeting and a regular meeting. >> commissioner. >> myself may i ask the question that mr. scott raised about the motion is that to - i

was going to offer a motion 40 to a approve both sets of minutes. >> public condominium first. >> on the minutes. >> do we have a second. anyone wish to comment on the draft minutes for either the special or regular meeting any public comment? seeing none, move open. we have a motion >> second. >> thank you. >> on the motion then to adapt the minutes for october 16th special and regular meetings. (calling names) so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 7 to zero and places i under item 5 condominiums and a questions. >> commissioner pearlman. i can tell even about the

graffiti it's been removed. there's still some ghosting of that and they're adding the shool. just an update on the project itself pits moving forward and they're starting construction either january or february and there's some permit issues being looked at. the final removing of the graffiti will happen during the restoration of the building >> thank you. i think that mr. haas raised some interesting and legitimate concerns. you know we're going to embark on this project to study the secretary of interior standards and any local application. i think it is so important that

this is going to take several meetings i up. i think that it should be discussions in an atmosphere or a forum where we're not simply considering heritage reports. it should be broadened so other members of the historic preservation community have an you been opportunity pr i think we should invite them and they should express their feelings so we can get the broad it possible spectrum of opinion and pressure from all those various groups and that will better allow the historic preservation commission to