when i see a deficit number and in terms of your presentation, the projected deficit that was referred to was 88 million fiscal year 18-19. excuse me? do i have this wrong? can you explain this a little bit more about projected deficit over the next two fiscal years, and we're talking about san francisco's projected deficit, correct, on page 7? >> absolutely. so as part of the joint report, the controller's office, mayor's office, and the budget office looked at projected deficits for the next five years, and assuming nothing changes, they stack on each other going outward. so in 18-19, which is the first year, an $88 million deficit, and in the second year, it's

$173 million. >> i appreciate it. with a total of 262 million. >> correct. >> you mentioned a figure of 1.5 and 3 million. is that our portion of cuts, for lack of a better semantic word? >> correct. so the rubbings of -- rubbing is 2.5% of the department's general budget. the remainor, about 50 or $60 million, which is what that's taken off of, so that's our original request for 1.5 million. >> these figures that you're bringing for the projected figures are about the same projects figures as we were

using last year. >> this year is similar to last year's request. >> all right. as an individual, in terms of the commission, but as a commissioner with the rest of our colleagues here, i can understand and digest 1.5 and three mill because that was similar to what the scenario was last year. i know we're in a quote, unquote, robust economy and have been. i know there's some talk of budget and deficit, which i don't take lightly, as well. i know that deficits will occur, but i have a tough time of reacting in terms of what that number is, because if i just kind of react or i project, those numbers can get real, real large. and as i look at numbers that are less than what i project in my mind, i have a tendency that oh, that doesn't seem to be that bad or projected. honestly, commissioners, when i

see an # 8 million rejected, fiscal 1819, and 173 million for 1920 fiscal year accumulated, i can understand that. i don't -- i'm going to use my vernacular. i don't get shook-up on it. because that 88 million, it seems like a better number than i've seen previously. i remember the years under mayor newsom, when we dealt with deficits budget year after budget year after budget year. i'm not going to say that i'm used to the process, but the budget process started with the our office and the mayor's office and instructions. so when i hear instructions of no more spending, i take that to heart. i understand the need of grant writers, and i understand the need of other areas within the

department, but i also understand, and this is just me and my expression, other areas of need within the department haven't even come close to fully funding beyond trying to get us into a full professional working fire department, and i know that these are words, and i know that we're trying to protect ourselves to be a modern, effective department or, as in some ways, a department for the 21st century. i know that. it's just a matter of how do we get to that is my particular question. i only say that again because when the newsom administration and the deficit affected us, there's a tendency, depending on who it is, for us to take one side or the other side. i know that we, as a fire department, are advocating for ourselves straight up. when someone gives an instruction no new hires or

everything rejects, i know it doesn't sit real well with us, but i'd rather be in control of our budget from this point forward, whether it's a projected deficit or other accumulated concepts. again, as the president said, i am for grant writers, as well, if we can be able to project that. it's just a matter of if we can, and i understand the advocacy that you've made, commissioner covington, for years, and i support that. it's just a matter of when we'll be able to do that. i must say that i get a little confes queasy when i look to the federal government for resources. maybe it's because of the current administration, but i do know there are grants in

certain foundations. i do know if we had the resources to seek out those funds, we would benefit from that, but i'm not sure how much dollars accumulated over years or time, because grants in my experience are usually one time or one time with two years or a presentation of justification. so if the concept is we can't get a staff budget within our city of grant writer, i.e., perhaps there's other measures in the department that we can do in terms of seeking out some kind of area of resources for that, so that's just my point on that. again, i don't know if it makes much sense to director kr orso as i express myself, because there's a lot of things, and i'm not done yet. ms-6, commissioner -- and i understand the comment where it came from, but ems 6, to me, is

our program. we're the ones that created it. i understand how the department or the department of health or the city needs to deal with the homeless issue or car booting in general, but ems 6, as i understand it, was again, a formation of our department under our services to directly look at a targeted population for given effects of our operation in terms of helping a citizen out. i think the departmental excess is a departmental pilot project, but no longer do i regard it as a pilots program. i regard it as a program that's working in conjunction with the other programs in the city, i.e., accumulated the navigation center or the alcohol dry center, but they have to work together within that. so i understand the concept of having accumulated or enough resources of dollars to do our job correctly. i understand that, and i support that.

being on the commission for a number of years, i remember when we, the fire department for -- the term was merge ambulance services from the department of health to our fire department. there was a lot of thinking and constants behind that, but we didn't have a lot of resources with that. through the cumulative years of our services with ambulance and ems services. 20 years now, chief gonzales, i think it is. >> yes, sir. >> i think we've done a pretty good job in terms of handling where we're at now, with the kind of service. i think we've learned a lot. i think we know what we're doing, and i think the directors and that expertise, within that resource, perhaps that's the justification that we might be able to make in terms of dollars. maybe not all dollars that supports the system, but dollars that are projected for the future services needs within the city and county through ambulance services. so i know i'm rambling a little

bit within that, but these are just kind of some of the points that i want to make because i know through the process of timelines, we have a deadline among ourselves. i snknow we've got a working committee. i know we've got to meet, and then, the process occurs. i do respect your comments, commissioner covington, in terms of the grant writers, and i do understand clearly, your commissioner veronese, in terms of making sure we have the adequate funds in our department. it is the process that we're talking about. so again, i just wanted to comment on that and not lessen the stress and strains of what we're going to be facing as a department and as a city. if y thank you, mr. president. >> thank you, mr. vice president. commissioner hardeman. >> thank you, mr. president.

i'll try to be brief. as we all know, you have family roots in the fire department. you chose to work in the office and not out in the field, so we know your heart's in the right place. the confusing part, and i keep going over this every year -- so this fire department is ordered to keep the stations open as full staffing all the time. that's the biggest part of our budget. so when it says 2.5%, 2.5% has co got to come from a lot of other places except where the largest portion of the budget is going. so how do you deal with that as a budget person for us -- as a financial officer, how do you address that because it's really 5% in some respects because you're cutting so much from everything else.

how do you deal with that or do you have a logical explanation? >> i mean, that's one of the difficulties, so the vast majority of our budget is dedicated to front line staffing, as you mentioned, and that's one of the issues that was brought up by a number of commissioners in the past. during the economic downturn, obviously, the cuts -- it would be much, much, more, and it was percentage wise in the past. but the problem was during the last recession, fortunately, we were able to keep open all of our station, but everything else is reduced, and we're still recovering from that, whether it's equipment, whether it's facilities, those kinds of things, and it's easy to say that, you know, we funded staffing at the stations, but to support that, there's so much more that goes into that, just -- the regular response, and that's where you get into the equipment, and that's where you get into kind of facility work and other supplies, and that's where, unfortunately,

during the last downturn, that's what we cut. fortunately, we have an equipment plan, we have some facility funding, so we're maki making stripes to catch up to where we should be, but in no way does that solve all of our problems or our needs. we're constantly struggling, even in good times, and in bad times, as well. >> well, the other question, mr. corso, is the itch will i indications of station 49, if we had to cut 2.5%, we'd have to layoff three ambulance drivers, and i don't think anybody knows how many people work in san francisco now, but if you look at the streets and the commute hours, you know it's a lot of -- a lot of people working here, and that number is questionable. who knows, and the tourists, and you have 35,000 hotel rooms that are, like, 90% occupied,

so that number -- >> 1.5 million every day. >> yeah, so the estimate would come from the expert, boma. that's part of their business is knowing that. i don't know if we've ever had this department staff to take care of 1.5 million people. but any way, that's not your problem. that's ours. so any way, that's just -- would there be a projection to layoff ambulance drivers or how would that work? >> i think the city has high day and night populations in history, and we've seen that in call volume that's continued to increase. so as we've done in the past few years, i think we would advocate for more resources on the ems side to battle that increase. we're seeing -- there's some

projection on the fire side, but longer time when we're talking about additional stations and additional resources to help kind of serve those new developments that are coming on-line, those are additional conversations we're going to be having with the mayor's office, but kind of with regards to the ems, we're, as we do every year, taking a look at call volume, demand, and what our resources are, and we'll be asking for additional resources to keep up with the demand and serve our patients. >> but the 2.5, that would be exempt, sort of like the stations are exempt. >> i think we would look at that globally and continue the discussions with the mayor's office to meet the services that are demanded of us all over the department. >> 'cause our on time performance is remarkable now compared to what it was not too long ago, so we'd hate to have a budget cut and reduce that. so that was good news. i'm glad you're thinking positively, at least in that end of it.

thank you for your report. >> thank you, commissioner hardeman. chief gonzales, you had a comment? >> i'll try to keep it short, president. thank you. this is about the budget, but i was going to try to circle back around to cd-3. you can reprimand me, miss secretary, if i go off topic, but as far as the budget goes, i agree that friends of the san francisco fire department, that should be resurrects, if possible. i know there are reasons why it did go away. i think refocus -- refocus. i think someone here -- let's use that smile. let's use that smile to refocus. she could definitely help, and i'd just like to say a couple other words regarding some of the words that were said to cd-3. we don't take it permanently against commissioner veronese. i don't take it personally. as far as what you said, commissioner hardeman, as far

as the smile and no push over, she is definitely no push over. i am going to tell you, one day, i tried to push her over, and i don't recommend for anybody to try that at all. congratulations, raemona. it was a great pleasure working with you. thank you. >> thank you. vice president nakajo had a final comment. >> yeah. in this budget discussion, in terms of where we're at now and preparing, again, i can't help but acknowledge the support that mayor lee gave this department. mayor lee gave this department a support to personnel, two classes a cleayear, what we we with the replacement list, when we went with the justification of ems 6, so when we start talking about our department, where we were and where we're at now, we're at now because of the support of mayor ed lee, and that department and worked with everybody to -- to have us

in the position that we're in now. and i think we all can acknowledge that we're in a good, serviceable point at this point, with serving san francisco, taking our job serious on all levels of our department, and so i just wanted to bring that up because it's not like we haven't been getting there. we are there, and we want to stay there, and we want to get better, so that's my point. >> absolutely. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. vice president. i have a couple of people -- okay. go good. couple of questions myself, but did you -- >> no, i don't. i don't. >> okay. dealing with the meeting dates, have you come up with a list of the meeting dates for the budget committee? >> not yet. we should have that by the end of the week. >> okay. please share that. >> absolutely. >> and then any materials that are distributed, share that with all the commissioners. >> absolutely. >> a couple of us will attend

these meetings, but i think every commissioner here is interested in the budget process and what the various recommendations are from the participants on the committee. i see that you need a january 10th capital equipment budget. you know, have you put that together already? is that something you can share or will share with the commission, our request for capital budget? >> absolutely. we have a few meeting coming up over the next couple of weeks, we will absolutely share in advance of the meetings for review. >> i know there's certainly i.t. improvements and other -- we're looking at marine unit, potential, you know, improvements there that we need to fund. a lot of stuff, so just wondered if there were additional capital expenditures that we needed to request. >> so in general -- sorry to interrupt you. in general, capital refers to facilities. >> just facilities. >> and then i.t. is technology related projects and equipment

is equipment funding. so no staffing increases, per se, that's part of our overall budget. we're on those three separate tracks. >> are we still on forward to having two classes next year as well as our equipment program. >> so last year's budget process approved two years, which is the year we're currently in, and then, the next year, which is also the first year of that process, and in that process was approved the hiring plan -- continuation of the hiring plan and the equipment plan, and those were, of course, mayor lee's initiatives and funding initiatives from the department, so they have not been continued into the second budget year yet because that budget year has never been up for discussion. >> but that would sort of be a legacy of his. >> from the mayor's office, the comment has been that, but any changes, we'll keep you appraised of them.

>> when you talk about the set asides being 30% of the city's overall budget, does that include the prop f set aside? >> so my understanding is yes, that is also included there. i'll confirm with the mayor's office on there, but that's the data that they provided, mainly the ones provided from the ballot initiatives, across those lines. >> so keeping our stations open across the city is roughly, what, a $200 million annual expense? >> i would say approximately that's the ballpark. >> thank you very much, mark. we'll look forward to continue to working with you on the budget and appreciate the work you put into it. >> thank you, commissioners. >> is there any comment on the budget presentation? seeing none, public comment is closed. madam secretary, would you call the next item. >> item 8, commission report. report on commission activities since last meeting of november 8, 2017. >> is there any public comment on this item?

seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners do you have anything to report? commissioner covington? >> thank you, mr. president. i saw mayor lee last wednesday. there was a small business popup at city hall for small businesses in san francisco and for citizens to get to know more about some of the -- the small businesses that they may have not previously been aware of. and he was in the hallway. i was leaving, and he said oh, i see you bought some stuff, and i said yes. yes, i definitely did. and he had his usual broad smile and chuckle, and he gave me such a warm greeting and a hug. and he said i know commissioner

covington, you're always pushing for those academies. every time i see you, you -- even if we just have a few moments together, you say, we need more academies, and i did support this department so -- so very well, and just was a delight to be around, whether you agreed with him or you didn't agree with him, when you were lobbying him. he was just a kind, wonderful person, and i will miss him tremendously, just as our civic father and as someone who held this department in such high esteem. >> thank you, commissioner covington. commissioner hardeman?

>> yeah, very briefly. you don't want to -- i mean, everybody -- hundreds of folks spoke yesterday on tv and radio about mayor lee, but the one thing i didn't hear was ferocious loyalty. when this commission had the finger pointed out it, rightfully so, by all unions, the variety of 798 and the rest of the ethnic unions, everybody was pointing the finger at us, and the chief. when mayor lee called us into his office, and there was a number of meetings -- like i said publicly, he blamed us, chief, and he blamed this commission, and he called us back. how's it going? how's the chief? how's he doing?

is there something that needs to be fixed so we brought up all these things, and so did the chief. but the one thing he did was he never publicly blamed us. privately, he chiued us oewed . there was very lengthy meeting, telling us what we needed to keep the performance, but what we needed, he just gave us, and the board of supervisors -- so that's the one thing i would say. this man was the most loyal person you could ever have as a friend. when our reappointments, commissioner -- some people were mad at us and some people were mad at the chief, he stood right by us, and there were some very good candidates that raised their hands that wanted to be fire commissioners. the mayor stuck with loyalty,

and that is extremely commendable, and i'm extremely grateful that i was able to be his friend at least since the early 90's, and we used to call each other the railroasurvivor then, he was mayor, and i couldn't believe it. on a separate note, st. michaels's day, november 21st, i became grandfather to little alexandra michelle. i became a grandfather, so that's my biggest news of last month. thank you. >> thank you, commissioner hardeman. commissioner veronese. >> briefly. when i met with the mayor back in april, it may have been march, and he asked me if i would join this commission, of course, i knew going in that this was something i really wanted to be a part of. the fire department has been an entire part of my life, whether

anybody knew it or not. my grandfather was a huge part of the fire department. he used to come down and do lunches, and they embraced him, and it touched me. when i heard that there was an opening at this commission, i absolutely jumped on it. when i met with him in his office, we went through all the separate different issues, or he advised me of the different issues that were going on here at the department. and instead of asking me to address them specifically, he asked me to just be myself. he chose me for my values, not for what i could do specifically related to problems, even though that there were specific problems related to -- in the department that may or may not still continue that are related to my training as a civil rights lawyer and as a police commissioner and a state criminal justice commissioner.

and so when he passed away two days ago, i thought to myself, this is very sad for the city to lose a leader like this, but i thought to myself, the best way to -- the defendant way to honor mayor lee is to honor him in the task that we complete in our service to this city. he was a servant to this city, and to ensure that as we do that on a day-to-day basis, that we do that consistent with our values, and those values that he wanted or that he chose us for. and so my commitment to mayor lee, although he is gone in body, he will continue to live in spirit through me and the rest of the commissioners as his choice of commissioners to serve on this commission, this great department. and that will continue on and on and on as long as we are

here. and that's the part that i'm excited about, because there's a lot that we can do as commissioners. this really is a lot that we can do as commissioners. it's not our job just to sit here and rubber stamp things that the department brings us. and i'm encouraged, and i look forward to that, and i look forward to work with every person in this room, getting to know you better, and i do that in honor and in memory of a good man, mayor lee. so that being said, i appreciate the opportunity to serve that he has given me, and i will continue to honor him in my service to this commission, to the department, and to the people of this city. >> thank you, commissioner veronese. i couldn't have said it better myself. thank you on behalf of the full commission. madam secretary, would you call the next item. >> item 9, correspondence, letter from anonymous, dated 11-15-17.

>> is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. any questions by any of the commissioners on this item? commissioner veronese, i see your name here? yes, no? >> that was from the last item, but i'm wondering why this is a -- is this correspondence item just an item in our agenda and so as people send correspondence to the commission, it appears here? >> correct. you read it, right? >> i don't read anonymous letters, actually. i have made it my practice not to read anonymous letters, so if you are out there, and you want to send the commission a letter, put your name on it if you want me to read it. >> thank you, commissioner veronese. commissioner hardeman, you had a comment? >> very briefly, mr. president. no one -- i might have missed

it. did we decide not to discuss anything about the drones or just -- just draft policy was presented to us, but we didn't get into it at all. >> chief francisco is out of town. >> so we're going to hold off until chief francisco comes back next month? good. fine. that was it. thank you. >> i must have missed that. >> we're going to have to get out of here by noon, so madam secretary, would you call the next item? >> item 10, agenda for next fire commission meeting. >> drone policy. >> are there any public comment on this item first? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners, do you have comments on the future agenda? >> future agenda could be presented at your choice of time. i talked to chief gonzales and chief white, for lack of a better definition, a

presentation by the dive team that might include surf rescue or cliff rescue. it might include rescue one, rescue two. as i understand it, it's a collaboration when it comes to dive teams or training, it might guarantee chief gonzales the training department or support services. i'm just looking for the best kind of comprehensive presentation to this commission so that we can be educated as to the goings on and the training and equipment and functions of this unit, for lack of a better term, the dive team or rescue team, chief gonzales? >> we'll work with the rescue team to fill in whatever slot is available. >> thank you skbl and i also have the dem coming in to present on the early warning system. we had a suggestion to do an update or a presentation on the strategic plan.

we have the budget, and we also have a closed session settlement, and it's a morning meeting, so we need to be out by 12. >> thank you, madam secretary. commissioner veronese, would you like to add something on the future agenda? >> i second the motion on commissioner cascio on the dive team. i prior -- well, prior to next meeting -- i second it, but i amend the thought when that item comes before the commission, whether it's the next meeting, it should be a meeting further out so that we have the opportunity not only to learn more but also to perhaps even visit so that we can see for our eyes, but when that comes up before the commission, i would ask that that not only comes up for discussion but possible action. second, the drone policy, i'm pleased that it was a part of -- at least it's a part of

the packet, is that right? so this is a public document now. >> it is a -- yes. >> all right. so the draft of the general policy. >> it's on the web side under agenda packets. >> great. it's now a public document, and it needs a little bit of work in my opinion, but if this is an issue that's important to you, we want to hear it, so when you see it on the agenda, please let us know. if you are an agency or an entity that has a stake in this, send us a letter. put your name on it, and -- and that's it. so i look forward to making progress on that particular issue. that's it for me. >> thank you, commissioner veronese. commissioner covington. >> thank you, mr. president. i would just like to refer my fellow commissioners to page 9 of mr. corso's document that was distributed to us this afternoon.

the special meeting that may be called if necessary, again, page 9, february -- the week of february 15th to february 20th. i think it would be prudent to have the commission secretary poll the commission as to what days might work just in case we need that meeting. i schedule my travel around these meetings. i've never missed a commission meeting, so i would like to know in advance if, you know -- what days to block out in case it's needed. >> thank you, commissioner covington. >> thank you. >> we'll try to do that. i think we need to put in a future closed session our review of the chief. that has to be on the agenda. >> we still haven't received

instructions, well, from the hr and the mayor's -- >> well, put that on the list, and of course, the department physician. we have to do those two evaluations, and i think we'll have the election for commission officers probably the second meeting in january , if that works for everybody. all right. i am going to defer our closed session existing litigation issue until our next meeting. >> we might be able to get it done. >> you think we can get that done in five minutes? all right. well, we'll make an effort, then. is our attorney here? >> item 11, possible closed session regarding existing litigation. >> any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. we're going -- >> the public comment would be to go into closed session. >> exactly.

are we going into -- >> and the litigation. >> commissioners, what's your pleasure. >> so moved. >> we are now back in open session. the time is 12:11. item 12, report on any action taken in closed session as specified? california government code section 54957.1(a) and san francisco administrative code section 12.1 b. >> well, in consultation with our city attorney, the commission has accepted the recommendation to settle on the existing litigation of duckett versus city and county of san francisco. it was a unanimous decision. >> item 13, vote to elect whether to disclose any or all discussions held in closed

session as specified in san francisco administrative code 67.12(a). >> is there any public comment on whether we disclose or not? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners, what's your pleasure? [ inaudible ] >> i have a motion, not to disclose, second from commissioner hardeman. all in favor? we shall not disclose. >> item 14. >> adjournment, again, in the -- >> oh, sorry. >> i would just like to, in the name of our departed mayor, ed lee, whom we all loved and all knew well, adjourn this fire commission meeting today. this meeting is adjourned. thank you.

>> before we start, may i ask for a moment of silence in honor of our mayor who passed away yesterday? >> thank you. >> clerk: thank you. this is the december 13, 2017, meeting of the san franl board of appeals. presiding officer at the moment will be our vice president, frank fung.

we're expecting board president darryl honda to join us shortly. we're joined by ann lazarus, bobby wilson and rick swig. deputy city attorney will provide the board with any advice this need. i'm cynthia goldstein. we have corey teague, assistant zoning administrator, who is here representing the planning department and commission. we should be joined shortly by senior building inspector joseph duffy. and perhaps somewhere in the room i'm not seeing is amanda higgins with san francisco public works. if not, she will be here momentarily, representing their bureau of street use and mapping. the board requests that you turn off our silence phones or electronic devices and carry on conversations in the hallway.

rules of presentation are as followed. appellants, permit holders and respondents have 7 minutes to present and 3 minutes rebuttal. people affiliated with the parties must be in the 7- and 3-minute parties. public members have 3 minutes each and no rebuttal. we ask that you please speak into the microphone. to assist the board, you are asked but not required, to submit a speaker card or business card to staff when you come up to speak and we have speaker cards on the mode yum for your use. we also have customer satisfaction surveys and welcome your comments and suggestions. if you have questions about reque requesting a hearing or rules, call us. we're at 1650 mission street, room 304. this meeting is broadcast live on sfgov tv and will be

rebroadcast on friday on channel 26. there are dvds of the meeting available for purchase. we'll swear or affirm all those who intend to testify. any member of the public may speak without taking an oath pursuant to their rights under the sunshine ordinance. if you do intend to testify at any of tonight's proceedings and wish to have the board give your testimony evidentiary weight, stand, if able, raise your right hand and say i do or i affirm. stand now. thank you. do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth? thank you very much. vice president fung, two housekeeping items. first is item 10 ch.

the parties have jointly requested that the matter be rescheduled to january 10, 2018, to give them more time to come to a settlement agreement. >> so moved. >> thank you. any public comment? >> last time people were not aware that the case had been continued and waited for a significant amount of time. want to be sure that they are aware that this case is up for continuance. >> 21 rosemont place will be moved it our january 10 calendar. okay. on that motion from commissioner lazarus to move item 10, vice president fung? >> vice president fung: aye. >> commissioner lazarus: aye. >> commissioner swig: aye. >> commissioner wilson: aye. and commissioner honda? > president honda: sure, aye.

>> motion passes and we'll move that item as requested. the second housekeeping testimony is 12, 17-166, 100 and 122 rivoli street. that has been withdrawn. item 1 there is general public comment, an opportunity for anyone here to speak on a matter within the board subject matter jurisdiction but not on tonight's agenda. any general public comment? seeing none, we have commissioner comments and questions. commissioners, anything? >> president honda: i apologize for being late. i would just say that i'm truly saddened and heartbroken over the sudden passing of our 43rd mayor, edwin m. lee. i would like to offer my condolences to the lee family,

anita and their daughters. it's been my extreme pleasure to work with you and your administration and i will try to continue the dream for fairness and equality and i hopefully will not disappoint you. because we were friends, i saw how tirelessly and dedicated you were. after 40 years of service in the city, this is not how i saw you riding into the sunset. i know in my heart that you are already at a tee box, so hit 'em far, hit 'em straight. >> thank you. anything else, commissioners? is there any public comment on this item? okay. seeing none, we'll move to item 3, board consideration of the minutes of the december 6, 2017, meeting. >> unless we have changes or deletions, may i have a motion? >> so moved.

>> thank you. any public comment on the minutes? seeing none. we have a commission from commissioner lazarus to adopt the minutes. >> vice president fung: aye. >> commissioner swig: aye. >> commissioner lazarus: aye. >> commissioner wilson: aye. >> president honda: aye. >> adopted. this is to discuss and possible action to approve procedures for selecting an executive director of the board of appeals. i have informed you that i plan to retire next year and that i edge occ-- encourage you to takn the recruitment process and get someone in place to support you and the efforts and work of the staff at the department's office. i have some suggestions for now you can move forward with that process. and we also have heather james here from the department of

human resources who can answer any questions and go over a timeline that she's put together for what a recruitment effort might look like. my hope is that you will consider either adopting a draft job announcement or delegate the authority to me and/or someone on the board to approve such a job description. and also the authority to have that job description published through the city's portal and through publication in newspapers and on-line sites that cater to the legal community and those individuals that mate be -- will be able to place those advertisements. i've suggested to you also.

that someone can act as a liason to move this forward and authorize the department of human resources to screen candidates and also to come back to you in january if they think that pool is sufficient or if additional recruitment efforts are required. if so, you could consider engaging the services of a firm. there's a prequalified pool of recruiting firm that the city uses. you can engage the services of such a firm to expand the search and do more targeted outreach. i'm not recommending that you do that at the out set because it would delay the process and i'm worried it would not give you an opportunity to have a candidate in place by the time i leave the seat. and then you need to make some decisions about how you want to

conduct interviews and if you would like to have a panel peer-review panel. sometimes departments will tap individuals from other departments, for instance, zoning administrator would take someone from building inspection. people that come to the board regularly to help with nonbinding advice to you about possible candidates that are in the pool. so some of those decisions you could make at a later date, but i would hope that you would discuss and take on some decision making tonight for the initial steps so we can get the job announcement out and start soliciting applicants. heather, if you wouldn't mind stepping forward and walking the board through the timeline that you put together, which you should have with you. >> i'm heather johnson. i'm with department of human resources. >> could you speak into the mike, please? >> sure.

i'm heather johnson, department of human resources client services division. i'm happy to answer any questions or get more information if you need it. so just running through the timeline that is was provided t you. assuming some -- assuming the job announcement is approved shortly, this week or early next, we could get the job posted immediately. we would want today or in the not-so-distant future, if we want to meet the timeline of mid march, to approve the timeline and decide on what steps to take as far as recruiting. the next thing to do is, like i said, post the job announcement. we can also decide where to post externally and if there is any other outreach that we would like to do.

as far as your own networks, might want to reach out to people that would being interested in the position. i'm happy to help with ideas for moving that forward. through the start of the new year, i can review the applications, if you would like me to, for initial screening and come back to you in early january to let you know about how many applicants we have. how many meet the minimum qualifications and look like if they're suitable candidates or if we have to take more time gathering applicants before we find someone. at that point, we can reassess our timeline and confirm whether or not you would like me or someone else to do a phone screening. and we can start scheduling interviews at that point in time. at that point, it will either move through another screening process or schedule interviews with the board. how long it will take to get a candidate depends on how

difficult it is to get the board scheduled for interviews if you all want to participate in all the interviews and how many candidates we decide to take to an in-person interview. any questions or anything you would like more information

>> i would suggest that we don't close it. never over until it's over. along those lines, if we get down to the date of ms. goldstein's retirement and we haven't found a suitable candidate, what happens then? >> i'd have to check, but the board is responsible for choosing cynthia's replacement so, we'd have to work with you on what to do next, but it's generally in your discretion as to cynthia's replacement.

>> there's been times in other city departments where somebody sits temporary, deputy city attorney, or someone else until the recruitment process is finalized. >> i don't think it's a good idea to have a board official pushed into a decision that's not the right one. >> i would recommend we look at -- you have a range of dates. i would look at trying to hit the earlier ones because something always happens. >> of course. >> or cynthia will continue to stay on. >> somehow that's not in the material presented here. [laughter] >> can anybody float a motion to deny retirement? >> it's occurred to all of us. >> that motion fails. [laughter] >> you didn't do a roll call. >> can we run down -- cynthia,

you have listed a whole bunch of things that we -- you would like us to consider tonight. could you go over those for us slower people one by one so we can address each one separately to make sure that they're all considered and commented upon? >> yes. i would be happy to. the first thing is for the board to decide who among you wants to be involved and in what way starting with, do you want to pick somebody to be your point of contact, somebody that i can work with, that heather can work with, as we move forward with the process? >> as a board liaison? >> yes. >> i would volunteer. >> okay. >> i would also volunteer. if somebody feels strongly about it, you know, i will pass. >> well, the good thing is, i think, vice president fung, you have gone through this process

during the change of guard at the board of appeals prior, haven't you? >> vice president fung: i was going to make a statement saying i never expected that i would have to go through this process twice in my lifetime. perhaps i've been here too long. >> i would defer to your experience and withdraw. >> vice president fung: let me state that the decision making and review process and decision making will be by the entire board. it's only acting as a liaison and perhaps a focus to make sure that it moves along. that's how i see it. and one thing i would state is if you look at the job descripti description, the -- both in terms of experience and qualifications, this process is further along than we were the previous time. we were -- the board members

were inventing things when we went through it before. >> well, we've had the luxury of having excellent leadership over the last decade. that's going to be tough -- some big shoes to fill. >> so board liaison is commissioner fung, since i defer to him. >> if you like, we can make a list of things and take a motion at that point. and next, job announcement. if you are satisfied with the draft or if you want to delegate to the vice president and -- to finalize it or how you would like to finalize it? >> commissioner lazarus: i was fine with it. one minor edit, but i can convey that later to our