submittal guidelines are we voting today to say we're creating something called the guidelines is that distinct from the other guidelines you have to help me. >> the plan submittal guidelines. >> yes. >> it was as opposed to be a distinct and separate. >> i was told that. >> that's correct. >> there's a decision who to create the submittal guidelines and talk later what goes into that it was included if the packet of the proposed language. >> it was. >> it was a clarifying document. >> so then basically what was documented today is current practices if we choose to take an action to create the hearing guideline. >> that's correct. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah on the issue of whether or not to keep in the action the

item about alternating want and vice president i think that is fine to change it slightly to acknowledge the practice of often alternating wanted and vice president mayoral or appointees that speaks to what is often been done but not always about this done it says we should look at it as we go forward i suggest this is amended to the subcommittee or to the full board. >> my - it seems like there's convenes to omit. >> yeah. omit. >> that sounds fine to me otherwise i think everything else is fine and leaving the noticing is k34r5ik9d question we should look at it in the future but it seems like we

should stay with what has been done in the past wear not voting. >> on the submittal hearing guidelines. >> we're submitting to the rules and regulations as well and just for clarity the director performance evaluation didn't have to be wrapped into the rules themselves but is a practice to the commission to simply initiate that closed session. >> could the city attorney weigh in on that. >> deputy city attorney susan cleveland knolls i agree that the directors performance evaluation can be a completely separate matter. >> how said it not specifically. >> it doesn't mean you don't do it but include it in the rules and regulations of the commission itself.

>> commissioner richards. >> on the hearing submittal guidelines what i think i've heard throughout the last 6 or seven months we had a way of doing it before we introduced the process bra we sent out the graphics and change a slight change before and after but most of the feedback from the public i remember one on the number of days we went around and around at least openly it up whether we do with the traditional change is up to us but having a discussion given the amount of public feedback. >> okay. >> i want to open up to commissioner johnson i made a mistake and didn't call for public comment commissioner johnson. >> so sorry about that on the

directors evaluation one of the things very a lot of practices and i'd like to be one of the a ways ones and it is something that happens every year and whether or not we have closed session and have doughnuts we don't need to make that that specific but that part needs to be officially part of the process and technically the only staff members of the planning commission employees and directed to manage and hire a planning department so i think that niece e needs to be part of the process and in terms of of the submittal guidelines it is unclear i'd like to hear others weigh in we personally should approve the hearing submittal guidelines as written today it reflects the practice and have something that codifies and continue to have the conversation whether or not we

should amend that but y079 to center the process in limbo nothing officially as part of the rules. >> okay. >> commissioner richards. >> regarding the directors performance whether or not it is in the rules it is okay being in and out i want it okay in it is a document. >> commissioner moore. >> the hearings from the submittal guidelines as stands are current practice it is just our need to have the public have us discuss it more time i think we know our obviously issues under the new rules that require scrutiny so there is nothing to approve we have rules but owe it to ourselves based on what we had sent to us from all of you all of us together to discuss that. >> commissioner hillis and if

we could finish this comment so - >> i move and wait one second and i'm not to suspend the comments opening it up for public comment one speaker one speaker card. >> (calling names). >> good afternoon. i'm the chair for the coalition for san francisco land use commission and this is a comment regarding our letter regarding the hearing submittal guidelines schedule is not pragmatic within the city has 80 deteriorated to the point it takes three to four

days to receive the commission packed are posted 8 days prior to the hearing but the case reports are not due until after the posting 7 days prior to the hearing it causes it to be invisible to the public at large, however the agency it impacts the public in regards to public process for even commenting perhaps information would be to start the process earlier to insure public gets the information whether by snail mail or electronically before hearing 8 days prior as the commission pact is are posts the dimension has been fair so, please adapt this proposed 21 18 or o 167 days in advance the

snail mail details the letter of may 28th addressed to you thank you very days in advance the snail mail details the letter of may 28th, addressed to you thank you very , 16 days in advance the snail mail details the letter of may 28th, addressed to you thank you very 16 days in advance the snail mail details the letter of may 28th, addressed to you thank you very 16 days in advance the snail mail details the letter of may 28th, addressed to you thank you very much. >> good afternoon commissioners i have the overhead for this? we're actually concerned about some of the language we even is being challenged anticipation a it is proposal is replaced with the correspondents records we're not sure how the comments will be recorded if it is replaced with the commissions correspondence records we would like to know if planning has a system by which

the public will be able to see when the documents were submitted know when they were submitted, who, who submitted them and how and once the commission gets the documents who reviews the comments from the public where's the transparent and the process the way it is suggested? thank you >> thank you. >> may i have overhead please thank you mr. chairman and members of the commission i'm john sinclair a resident of san francisco since 1986 i attended the hearing by a group of people

that are here but no affiliation with the group i'm concerned the submittal process, however commissions chef summary says members of the public have asked for the case reporters two weeks in prior to the hearing the guidelines produce provide for a 7 day royals i realize i'm an attorney and litigator and as a matter of legal procure i have 20 to thirty days to evaluate the in coming motioning motion it seems like 7 days as a basis in comparison is very, very, very short time with the complex documents and planning department staff and commissioners have weeks and months in advance the promoted timeline is arbitrary in repgs

relation to get the information out and or tray from the time as necessary for the public to evaluate it i'd ask for a longer period to be meaningful retaliation thank you. >> sue hester first to plea the planning commissioners and public speak into the microphones did of any person(s) responsible for the ringing or use of a should remind people because it is very hard to hear when our sitting in front of the door or sitting back and expect a voice to be carried please we want to hear our words of wisdom and secondarily i think the

action list item your as i understand is a very good one because the action lift item is the planning commissioners even the public gets into them prioritizing things to be harder at the planning commission right now the process is pretty much controlled by staff marking to the secretaries and putting case numbers on there needs to be issues of general discussions and they need to be heard really importantly i give the academy of art because there needs to be some things some way to get items there are not site specific to the commission and i don't want to have to figure out how to get through the planning commission want and vice president and planning director you're the agent of the

public planning commission third item hearings submittal guidelines is not clear to me if you're intending to vote on them today they need to be omitted and have real thought given i find it is treatment by the individual staff that are prep projects one has quite bludgeoning when is the staff report going to be prepared to be sdwoenld outside of the planning department and it is tuesday people say oh no i'll do mine on thursday what's the rules the people that have the most damage done are not the people that gets 311 reports they've had information for 2 weeks 2 months in advance, 2 months is

short but the eastern neighborhoods are wiped hot out no environmental review everything is an exception they come at the last minute at the planning commission has abolished two week reports on the front line of staff reports that are meaningful we won't have it unless this commission committee really gets going into the weeds on the staff reports and not go oath not considering it anywhere you're hurting south of market potrero and the mission. >> thank you. >> overhead please.

my name is rick hall what i have to say is very, very simple the meeting minutes of may 14th are extremely stretch i didn't i think you had to be in attendance know what happened the same for earlier minutes this says it all this is the draft minutes it is nothing thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm a resident in san francisco since 1980 and overhead please

proposed process did not address public two weeks notice the case packet inform and the planning summary explained the timeline or what happens to the documents staff didn't send to mail explain the future changes done administratively done with the input to the process and rational for changes for delay and posted in the packets only good for geeks not snail mail. >> thanks. >> rose high on a hill it calls to me son overhead please please hand those out to the

commissioners, thank you. >> this is in regards to the rex for the draft hearing submittal guidelines i call them graft guidelines it is what you have in our paycheck showed showing shows the draft submittal guidelines those are in your packet that is a draft guidelines if you think you're voting on something day da today your incorrect i showed this calendar because what it shows is the spokesperson and the dr requester this a real calendar the submits the information at this stage so some days before this hearing as in the draft hearing guidelines the commission transmits to the mail and the planning commission packet gets posted to the

website wow. the surprise part the staff case packet separate from the commission packet is not included in the public view the public is blind to it then you have mail all the documents in paper form this is planning they're not going to stuff one thousand envelopes next day you have sunday unfortunately, a holiday forces snail mail and oh, unfortunately labor day and phenomenal not likely snail mail gets their stuff the public's request for two weeks is not shown here the green box is probably when the snail mail should be delivered that's why i handed you the calendar the planning commission

calendar and for the historic preservation commission it is sort of a graphic guide okay. so planning has all the case reports and planning rush to adapt this schedule for snail mail is slow a detail and the public again sailed is blind we need to support the coalition timeframe and the actual mailing and repro mail should w be before snail mail i have a lens hundred and 50 word written document i ask to be not limited to to the sunshine ordinance. >> is there any additional public comment. >> my apologies for taking that out of order. >> director ram. >> i just wanted to ask that when you have the discussion on

the submission performance we have a couple of staff members here to have it it with you if you want to change is it we want to work is it into our process and have a little bit of time if you choose but it would be great to have a couple of staff members here to understand the process. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i can understand the need for certainty when the noticing is going to occur i haven't seen too many controversial projects where the opponents have not shown up because the technical itself projects are continued over and over again it doesn't seem like people are having trouble finding out about things they don't like so i don't want to put another tool into our realize that gives another opportunity to use the process

to discrepancy i'm saying and r we don't need noticing but if another technicality of a mail comes out slightly late is another way to delay things calendar are mraijd placard with continuances and the more important thing to work with the staff as the director said and make sure that everything is clear and that any kind of problems in the noticing are number one exonerate and accurate and i will think this is the proper way to approach this. >> commissioner richards. >> a couple of things first, the real concern on the timeline the guidelines we're saying guidelines before we were talking about timelines on the negative declaration on the irs there is a lot of meet that the public needs to spend time we

had a challenge on a declaration a that's one concern but granted all that i move to disproportionate number 2, number 3 number 4 with the sentence strictly around the point and vice president and move to adopt number 5 and table 6 and table 7 second. >> and tabling one. >> tabling one for future hearings. >> second. >> commissioner moore. >> no, that's fine. >> before we call the question i'd like to thank the subcommittee for a lot of work this of the heavy, heavy intense stuff it was interesting we come back with modifications not too

many, in fact, it says a good thing for the most part so more discussion. >> thank you. >> commissioner moore. >> i want to thank you to the city attorney attended outline meeting that he was extremely helpful so thank you there and the commissioner secretary. >> that goes without saying. >> (laughter). commissioners there is a motion and a second to then adopt items 2, 3, and 4 striking the not about the practices alternating want and vice president and 5 on that motion >> commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously and my thanks to you all as well commissioners shall we move on to the next item.

>> yes. >> very good commissioners that places us under department matters directors announcements. >> thank you. >> thank you, john as several things to report on today one the final budget being related to short-term rentals and commissioners mentioned you approved a budget sent to the mayor's office that included the 3 position that were provisional is the wrong word but positions to be created but not necessarily filled unless there is funding identified and the mayors final proposal voted 3 additional positions were put spot zoning administrator, what say you? office with the two agencies form an office of short-term rental that frps in the paper you saw today, we're still working on the logistics but all 6 positions will be

working together in one location at an office the public can come to register with anything with short-term rentals it is physically not located it will be likely on mission street we hope to get that nailed down that was the final disposition and the second thing i wanted to mention the work we're doing with the groups in the mission the mission 2020 plan and we'll i'll continue to chair the organizations and their representatives we had the first of the meeting last week the first top on the agenda is the interim controls that was mentioned we proposed to binge to you to initiate and the commission has the authority to

initiate and adopt the interim controls but i want to make that clear the interim controls are one aspect and you'll see in our packet we're proposing those interim controls for 6 months and we'll continue to convene those groups and have a decision about whole range of things in the mission including crowell's controls and working with the mayor's office of housing and the affordable issues some of which the planning code has mentioned the mayor's office of housing is at the table and i'm personally chairing those over the next few months so we will again, i want to emphasis the interim controls with one aspect i want to make sure that the

whole package are considered in the discussion as we move forward thirdly i want to mention that there was a request earlier a question about housing balance report that is due the staff is in the final stages we have 90 percent complete there were issues with the data that don't want to work out but we expect that next week and i wanted to mention there's been a lot of discussion about the impact of new development on the surrounding neighborhood the economic displacement there was a discussion to include that in the nexus study i think we think this should be analyzed not not nexus but we've been having those decisions and he's preceding with that as part of

scope of his work i want to report as we move forward that concludes my report unless questions. >> thanks. >> commissioner antonini. >> director ram in regards to our report are we're going to get ted egons information before we're asked to consider the disbursement controls. >> we don't anticipate it will take time we're asking you to look at the adaptation on july 23rdrd. >> will we have the reports before jill 23rd f that makes it difficult we don't know the impacts. >> we'll have that discussion thanks. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further - >> sue hester i know what i read in the paper and that's my

source of information the chart is very explicit the zoning administrator has the power to do enforcements of planning code he has the power to interpret the planning code it is a chapter power and explicitly in the planning code i ask you get a report from the zoning administrator and the city attorney next week week how to office it governs short-term rentals which are a planning code function is taken out of the purview of the zoning administrator and put under let's see the zoning administrator so i ask for a meaningful report under the charter and the planning code for how that office is going to function because everything in

the chapter makes the zoning administrator the person and interprets the code requirements and as specifically on short-term rentals how are they energy to do this under needs to be a formal report with the city attorney's advise thank you. >> commissioner commissioners, if there's nothing further we'll move on to item 8 review of the past events of the board of appeals and the historic preservation commission. >> good evening aaron with the planning department staff this week at the land use commission they heard two items one was the establishment of the fillmore commercial district and the other of the visa determining economical district it creates both district