and. >> i don't know about that one. >> i'm sorry. right forget that one sorry. >> you know, i'm not sure this is the right way to go about this i mean, if he's not here to discuss this if it were one or two changes maybe but i'm not inclined to have this be a standard practice. any objections from the commissioners? >> i would move to adapt the minutes as presently drafted and second. >> all in favor, say i. i. opposed this motion passes 5 to

zero. the next item on - what. the next item on the agenda it the discussion of the executive director report >> i don't have high highlights other than to say our initial budget hearing it june 16th i'll attend if necessary a supplemental hearing will occur both mondays. by the way, on the previous matter i wanted to note there was no public here so the executive director report my comments from the commissioners? and mr. syncountry on item 7 about the form seven hundred can you remind me that the f pb credit have jurisdiction >> yes. we cannot enforce the

filings or enforce in my case misleading filings or incomplete filings we can only fine people for filing late other than it's the sole province of another department. >> mr. herrera is outside of our. >> completely outside our jurisdiction we'll have to refer that. >> commissioner andrews >> can you remind me of the process around budget dean season did you submit anything to the mayor's office. >> quite a bit we had a commission discussion about this several months ago. our budget submission this year boiling it down to the bottom line we requested that we get the same budget that we had this year including the ad back it

the board of supervisors had added so that's our request. ultimately what the mayor's office does obviously is up to them and, of course, it going to the board. and just is adding to the record there's money for the campaign by the way, that's statutory that's an be automatic funding approximately $2 million >> any other questions on the executive director report. no public so no public comment the next is items for future meetings. public comments >> i have a comment on the subject for future meetings. >> a question more than

anything else there's have been statements made at the last two meetings for topics do we keep track of those and if so can we get a list (inaudible) at those hearings that i i think we put them on as soon as they were suggested. >> i don't have my pending ones my but inform annihilation. >> how do we treat the public. >> symptoms we put them on and sometimes not. >> the agenda is set by the chair in consultation so one of the things that's our previous

recognize of being the chair. >> i want to around the lobby discussion - i'm sorry what. >> the lobby reform to make sure we have a discussion around that. i know it's ultimately going to come to us but it's worth us finding out where they are that there's a few iterations they've had exemptions to that. i want to correct it's not going to come here >> not. >> because there's no amendments. >> my understanding is that chiu intends to bring it before a board vote in june i don't know go whether or not it's a true. >> it's true it was voted out of committee so it will be before the full board in june

i'm not sure when the first reading will be. >> jessie i believe it's june 10th. >> commissioner andrews would be like discussion of that based on our next agenda. >> yes. i said i think from its original more broad definition of what lobbying activity was to ultimately it's worth it to be knowledgeable even though it doesn't come to us >> understood no public comment is there a motion to adjourn the meeting. >> i move to adjourn. >> second. >> all in favor, say i. opposed none that motion passes 5 to zero.

the meeting is

(clapping.) ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ i think we have more companies anywhere in the united states it's at the amazing statement

we're not trying to be flashy or shocking just trying to create something new and original were >> one of the things about the conduct our you enter and turn your your back and just so the orchestra. the most contrary composer of this time if you accountability his music you would think he's a camera come important he become ill and it was crazy he at the end of his life and pushed the boundary to think we're not acceptable at this point for sure it had a great influence he was a great influence on the harmonic language on the

contemporary up to now. i thought it would be interesting because they have e he was contemporary we use him on this and his life was you kill our wife you get poisons all those things are great stories for on opera. i was leaving behind a little bit which those collaborative dancers i was really trying to focus on opera. a friend of mine said well, what would you really want to do i said opera what is it not opera parallel. why isn't it are that i have the support now we can do that. i realized that was something

that wasn't being done in san francisco no other organization was doing this as opposed to contemporary we are very blessed in san francisco to have organizations well, i thought that was going to be our speciality >> you create a conceptual idea for setting the opera and you spear ahead and work with the other sdierndz to create an overview vision that's the final product felt opera. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> i was very inspired to work with him because the way he looked at the key is the way i looked at sports looking at the daily. >> so much our mandate is to

try to enter disis particular work there's great dancers and theatre actresses and choirs we've worked with and great video artists is a great place to collect and collaborate. i had a model they have a professionally music yes, ma'am assemble and as a student i benefited from being around this professional on and on soccer ball and as a conductor i'd be able to work with them and it's helped my growth i had a dream of having a professional residential on and on soccer ball to be an imperial >> it operates as a laboratory we germ a national the ideas

technically and work with activity artists and designers and video all over the on any given project to further the way we tell stories to improve our ability to tell stories on stage. that's part of the opera lab >> i was to investigate that aspect of renaissance and new work so that's why this piece it is important it was a renaissance composer. >> there were young people that are not interested in seeing traditional opera and like the quality and it's different it has a story telling quality every little detail is integrated and helps to capture

the imagination and that's part of the opera how we can use those colors into the language of today. >> so one of the great things of the stories of opera and story combined with opera music it allows people to let go and be entertained and enjoy the music instead of putting on headphones. >> that's what is great about art sometimes everyone loves it because you have to, you know, really great you have to have both some people don't like it and some people do we're concerned about that. >> it's about thirty something out there that's risky. you know, disliked by someone

torn apart and that's the whole point of what we're drying to do >> you never take this for granted you make sure it is the best if you can. >> ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> hello, i'm nona along with the legacy of voters in san francisco i'm here to discuss 19th street only june 3rd the

city and county of san francisco through it's port commission mfrtsz 3 and a half miles of waterfront along the bay and it currently regulates the maximum allowed heights they run from 40 to 84 feet they usually need approval by the planning commission and the board of supervisors those changes don't currently require the voters to approve it prop b has height limits in effect unless the city voters approve the height limit any ballot question to there those must specific the proposed height limits in you vote yes. you want to prevent the city

from port property to exceed the heightened limits unless the city voters have approved the vote limit increase in you vote no. you don't want to make the change. i'm here with lewis former city attorney and proponent of prop b 82 >> thank you. >> and joined by on opponent of the measure thank you. i'd like to start with opening comments that from each of you ms. renee your opening statement. thank you to the league. i think we all agree the san francisco waterfront is a truly special place. and if you do we're asking the voters to, yes on b and, yes open b is support by is sierra club 78s be neighborhood alliance and affordable housing alliance and others citizens.

prop b is simple and scared u straightforward it says waterfront height limits should be enforced and when the planner of the ports want to exceed those limits they should put the question to the voters. the yes on b campaign is really part of the out growth full only 8 washington we'll have a high-rise twice the size of the old embarcadero freeway and fortunately over 67 of the voters said no, we don't want a wall on of the or high towers but proposition g or b says if the planners seek to exceed the height limits then the voters have a changing chance to say yes or no it's a vote and choice

by the voters and mr. valenzuela 10 a statement >> thank you to the league for having you will say here today first of all, i'm a volunteer in and out a developer no are developers are involved in our support of the no on b campaign we're a coalition of community activists my environmentalists and small property owner and housing advocates. we're in the middle of our greatest affordability in san francisco and the problem with prop b is takes the complexities of the balance and boils it down this is a concern we should be discussing how to build more affordable housing but we are talking heights limitsthanasia that's an important discussion but it leaves out the public

benefits that may come out of the progress one or two tall buildings may gives a significant amount of affordable housing this proposition could kill 6 hundred affordable housing units and 20 millions of housing fees and cause significant problems for the ports so far as developing and fixing the problems with the port lands. we're in the enforcement of the nova valley club and the indemnification and a host of others >> mr. valenzuela 10 bring up the perspectives of job how do you feel about that. >> there are 3 issues that were brought up first, the ballot box planning no, it isn't if the planners don't exceed the height limits no problem only if they

do if you look at san francisco history since 19th street 68 when the bureau ton act there's been 18 other ballot measures effecting the front the ball was effected and the hunters point shipyard we're talking about port property that is owned by the public. and if you take a look at port property it's held in public trust and the housing agreement is a red herring because as a matter of fact, if port property is held in publicly trust you can't build housing there and number 3 if that were done there's nothing in prop b that says you can't have a project being approved so the howard's altering argument is truly a red

herring and we've seen the kind of housing the port as proposed high-rise luxury condo and now they're saying only building low income housing a i'd like to see it and b that's not going to happen >> mr. valenzuela 10 any comments. >> yes. the housing is not a red herring, in fact, if you look at what the port is considering and the project in the pipeline if you follow the draft sheets that's inclusionary housing on site the problem is this is getting boiled down to if the voters like it that's great but developers can come to the ballot box with a specific or gentle thought and in the 0 voters sigh yes, no chance for mitigation under sequa or the

planning process to hopefully get parts for example, an increase in affordable housing in exchange for heights when it the park going to be developed at the front of the process or backdoor back is the affordable housing going to be done in the beginning or at the at the end e end so there's quite a few of the challenges we're not talking about the of her building or them changing their bulk and height but off the waters edge they use the word welfare because they want people to think that. >> last year the decision for the height is washington project should the voters be asked florida the height be waived on this project. >> we're saying on port

property publicly owned property not privately but on public property which for the most part under our state constitution mass been held in the public trust yes, the voters have is a say because unfortunately, we we have fined and i'm sorry to have to say this is the port and planners are not listening not people 8 washington was clear evidence of that clear evidence where a good project is proposed i have great confidence in the voters for example, at&t park was approved by the voters the of her building the hunters point shipyard critical waterfront projects. but what worries me about the current trend and i've gotten

involved there are too many people out to make our unique san francisco waterfront look like miami beach and if so, i think this would be a shame isn't it a fact i think it would be a really bad sign for the economy we're unique it's a our waterfront that makes us unique >> mr. valenzuela 10 should the voter be asked about the height. >> i think once again when we focus on the height we don't get into the discussion of the complexity of the getting the mitigations on a project and i mean folks there could be a tall building on this parcel the proponents make it out this is miami beach and it's not there's no proposal anywhere in san francisco that looks like miami beach. there is a community process in

plays that's you figure out hard to make sure that the cultural your current proposals in place have articulated buildings where we have maybe a few tall slender towers in shorter blocks and integration with affordable housing on site. they're creating an enormous distraction and pushing things into one or two word to wall and miami beach those are not the projects that anybody's it interested in seeing again, we're talking about rental housing and the projects the port needs to have the income to fix the problems they belong to all san francisco as well as the sea level rise this is not jew just about who the developers are >> we have a little bit of time left i want to get our final

thoughts ms. reigning. >> i think yes on b is extraordinarily important 0 so san francisco doesn't look like miami beach. who wants to see all along our waterfront those wind tower type buildings you see as you come across the bay bridge and interestingly enough when the voters wanted to take this off the ballot they said they explicit is have to pay attention to the height limits they can build whatever they want 10 empire state buildings it's critically important that the citizens of san francisco have a say on what happens on their property. yes on b applies to public property.

public trust property and the citizens villaraigosa a right to have a say we have in the past why not now. mr. valenzuela 10 any final remarks >> sure once again there's an numerous distraction by focusing on miami beach no one is talking about miami beach and the current process has not produced anything in prop b passes tall and short everything is going to focus on tall because they know that folks are going to be against that we could get short buildings no park and no affordable housing. and possibly not solving the problems at the port at this time. so i think i think so that we have a big challenge to our waterfront what p that looks like the public process is open

and prop b is a political campaign to focus on heights to challenge the developments that could be creating parks and affordable housing and bring people to the waterfront and do good for the city. thank you both for your comments we hope this discussion has been forgive for more information please visit the san francisco sf elections.org remember earlier vociferating is at city hall and you can vote on the two weekends before elective days please vote on june 3rd if i don't vote good afternoon ladi

gentlemen, let me first a call this san francisco public utilities commission to order at the 2:00 p.m. mrrtd read the roll >> commissioner courtney. kwaen. commissioner torres. commissioner moran is expected in a moment and commissioner torres is excused >> thank you please call the