know i will schedule in a timely way and hopeful we can get it out of committee and to the full board where it passes or not. it is unclear to me why folks are so adimate that it go to the rules committee when it fits into the submat matter jurisdiction of either and why that matters to the folks who advocate it go to the rules committee because i have a concern that this may not come back to the full board. i'm being transparent about my concerns and think that is a important factor to take into account >> i am not sure it is help ful to continue the discussion. maybe we should vote. [inaudible] it is a request of a study so i think anything

pertaining to our ballot measure should go to the rules committee. again, i think we are repeting ourselves and understand supervisor wieners concerns as well. i thipg we should just talk a vote on the motion >> supervisor co00 >> i wanted to reiterate, supervisor ye agreed to hear the item on march fwent and that is reasonable time for us to deal with. when you-it is a reasonable amount of time. supervisor kim acknowledged there could be a opportunity for a special committee meeting which is a additional meeting to handle the rules xhilty agenda. supervisor wiener, i understand the concerns of the

board and the desire to see it sent tothe rules committee because that is the established pat squrn the process and we are a process driven body. part of your concerns that you just articulated are because you are afraid people will ubinstruct the process and we have seen it happen before, but i am confident in supervisor yes ability to move something through the committee so with that said i will withdrawal my motion off the floor. >> supervisor hundred withdrawal her motion >> i would ask phrvisor wiener if he was support odf

withdrawaling motion as he may not be >> i'm not but would take over the motion as the maker of the mogess and work with a second and we can compete on the vote [inaudible] >> second [inaudible] supervisor bree, further discussion >> i just wanted to be clear this is a ballot measure that is my understanding it will be up for a vote in june? and for my perspective i think we should have already begin the process so to send it through a lengthy process of committee is a concern. it isn't a question that it will get a fair shot, with land use it can be scheduled next week or the week after soon toor get to the board and that is what i'm concerned about is getting it

to the full board to be voted on because it is about capturing information in a time ly manner so we can provide this nnchgz to the public. what is the ballot measure going to do in terms of changing the face of development in the water front? that is important and iant to see data that shows that information and it takes time. for me it is a issue of time and since the city attorney said-this isn't break thg rules under the city terns advice that this particular resolution falls under either category. i just don't understand why we can't low it to be heard in land use sooner so we can get it to the board for a vote. that is qulaut i'm concerned about and scheduled for march

20 delays >> call the question >> at this time supervisor wieners motion to send this to land use committee is on the form. >> when do we vote? >> supervisor wiener? i. ye. no. avlose. no. bree. i. comps, no. president chew. no. cohen, no. ferrule. i. supervisor kim. no. supervisor mar. no. supervisor tank. i. there are 4 i and 7 no. >> is there another motion?

supervisor co00 is there another motion? >> make a motion we send to the rules committee. >> seconded by [inaudible] let me say thing. either committee should be fine, but all you know i don't think we should play gamewise our committies as far as bottleing things up. the idea is to move things out to the board without recommendation and that is qulaut i believe will be likely out of the rules committee, but i do think it isport to have a full [inaudible] conversation. i wasn't prepared to smoret this today, but think it is appropriate to go [inaudible] supervisor wiener >> thank you i won't support this motion for the reasons i

stated. i do [inaudible] i am [inaudible] where you were as a chair. i won't be able to vote for this motion. >> vote on motion >> motion to send item to rule >> no. ye. i. supervisor ovlose. i. bree. no. comps. i. president chew. i. co00. i. ferrule. i. kim. i. mar. i. supervisor tank.

tang [inaudible] the resolution anonesing arizona [inaudible] a lot that [inaudible] veto 1062 expanding the boy caught of the state of arizona and arizona based business if it is passed and endorse the cities offer to challenge a >> [inaudible] made a motion to adapt the resolution. is there a second? [inaudible] any public comment on this item? public comment is closed. we have the serious injury finding. can quee call the role

>> wean, i. ye. i. ovlose. i. bree, i. comps. i. chew, i. co00, i. ferrule, i. kim, i. mar, i. tang. i. 11 i's. todays meeting is adjourned in the [inaudible] on behalf of marion sullivan. supervisor ovlose for mrs. mausha [inaudible] supervisor coen had for dorses j [inaudible] supervisor wiener for blake with a ross. [inaudible] edward [inaudible]

>> madam clerk is there anymore business for the board >> that's concludes the business. >> at this time the meeting is adjourned.