development by empowering local communities act. it calls for overturning the f.c.c c. 5g order and overturn the regulation that's allow the f.c.c. to pre-empt local rules and governments in the deployment of these facilities. there are a ton of signa tories over 90 local government officials who have added a letter of support including our mayor. mayor breed has added her name to a letter of support for this legislation. i'm aware having spoken with staffers that they are also supporting this legislation and preparing to drop a senate version of this bill to overturn the f.c.c. order. also, the nrdc has challenged the f.c.c. in court and i was actually in d.c. to hear the oral arguments in the court of appeals. they are challenging the f.c.c. order on the basis of the fact it was a major order that didn't

undergo review an environmental review. furthermore, the order itself didn't undergo review and the order allowed for that review to be by passed each time these are cited and the idea is that the reason for any review is to determine which of these facilities do present a public-health and safety risk and which don't. and the idea is it's not for the fcc to determine that, that's the reason we have this flexible need for review system to determine that may pose a risk. i'm going back to my conclusion which i'm not able to make which is the approval of this permit should be overturned because as stated in march of 2018 it does not satisfy the tier b compatibility standards. it's too tall. the equipment is too distracting and cluttering and this is the determination from march 2018. it's specifically says it is too

tall and it says that the equipment is dis tracting and cluttering. there are three bullet points and the third is that it was significantly detracting from the defining characteristics of the rh-2 district. nothing has changed. the plans was disapproved at 40 feet and it remains 40 feet so there's no valid basis for the subsequent approval. thank you very much for your time. >> thank you. >> i received communication in may from lind ashley lindsey who is a person first declined the permit march the 13th and approved it july 2nd. i asked her specifically what was the historic presence at

2grattan street and this was her response. if i may please. it says that the historic designation for the building at 2grattan street is the building is in the eligible coal valley historic district which has been determined to be eligible for listing in the california register as a historical resource for the purposes of ceqa and the building itself has been termed a historical resource unless there's evidence to demonstrate otherwise. the subject utility pole itself is neither historic nor decorative. there was a question about the height and the neighborhood of the buildings. i can testify that this is a neighborhood of 30-foot buildings. belvedere street has the largest collection of classic edwardian

homes built in 1906. they stretch across the t-intersection with grattan street and all the homes immediately surrounding 2 grattan street are 30-foot tall buildings. also, i just wanted to verify that i have personally researched both the march 13, 2018 planning department disapproval and the july 2nd, planning department approval both by ashley, lindsey. she references to the architect actual plans dated february 7 the, 2018 and the photo simulation dated february 18, 2018. ask she refers to the june 19 architect actual plans for the permit that she -- for the approval that she did on

july 2nd. both of these architectural plans for both of these disapproval and the approval are exactly the same. 40-foot as the total height. thank you. >> you have 25 seconds if you want to continue. no pressure. >> you don't have to use it. >> again, i'm not sure how verizon can say that this is sleek, well designed, minimal. my second -- i recommended two things. that they seek a second location. i proposed they look at parnasis or change the design. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. we will now hear from

mr. albritten. you have six minutes. >> thank you. outside council for verizon wireless. members of the board, i'll try and run through some quick points. if you have applied for one of these permits, which i'm sure you haven't, there's a very intricate web portal that is used for up loading all plans and all different required submittals for these projects. there are several carriers up loading hundreds of documents regularly. it would be somewhat expedient and i don't know with all the intricacies were with respect to these plans but the original approval was denied based on the exceeding the height limit. i went to a meeting with the planning and public works about that and i think the planning

department is accurately represented. it might be one plausible explanation. before we get to this pole, we have to go through a pre flight walk with pg&e. it takes several months to schedule and several months to occur. we are very limited in the pg&e polls we can use and in this carrying the poles are replaced the decorative poles and we have limited options to use a telephone pole in our facility. as you know understate law, we have the right to place a telephone equipment on telephone polls anpoles and that was the e 25 and that's the way it was drafted the way it is. because it's located on an existing pole, we're taking an exiting vertical element and adding 10 feet. we feel that that is the estheticsly preferred way to put these facilities in rather than fake trees or any other types of poles and other devices that

were used in the past. we wouldn't want to put this antenna at 30 feet. if we put this at 30 feet, we would look right into the adjacent houses. when you are in an area like t. you wanthis, you want it to be e the houses in order to provide service around the facility. the antenna and design has been reduced in order to provide over the roof tops. it has a benefit of raising the antenna over the view line of the structures so the 30-foot pole and the 30-foot building stays the same. there's just a thin on top and we think this is really the esthetics way to bring this very important service to the community. we have looked at all six pole and we have one selected.

so we have not ignored pernasis in anyway. with respect to views, we follow the law. if it's an average view street, we follow the law. that is what it is today and that's how this particular street is categorized. this comment about the five feet pg&e requires that switch to be between seven and eight feet. it's going to be seven and eight feet and that is -- there isn't going to be equipment at the five-foot level that would obviously effect pedestrian traffic. there was a comment about frequencies and effective radiated power. different frequencies have different standards for the amount of power but it's the significant absorption rate because it's an ex pose you're .

it's the -- please stand by

supreme court. i've told you neither verizon nor at&t were part of the lawsuit. >> so, counselor, as you -- since you're usually very thorough in your brief, so the appellant stated that in the original denial of the thing, that the plans were stamped and it showed the 40-foot height.

as you just mentioned, did you bring any material to substan substantiate that? >> the original plans, showing the 40-foot. the plans are in there showing the 40-foot height. >> i'll ask dpw. >> absolutely. it led to a meeting about these facilities. >> this is what you're talking about? >> let his staff bring that up. >> this is katy. >> hi, how's it going? >> over head. >> sorry about the glare. i'm trying to zoom in. these are the original plans submitted. you can see that 42 feet 2

inches. this is out of the application portal that we used to submit to dpw. that was committed or uploaded january 12, 2018. the second set, the 40-foot mark. >> you've earned your pay tonight. thank you. thank you, councillor. >> thank you. we'll now hear from public works. you have six minutes. >> hello. no new comments. thank you. >> okay. so, mr. sanchez, did you want to use some of their time?

>> planning department. just to clarify one aspect about the street view and the quality of the street view. yes, there was map that was created as part of the general plan, part of the open design element. that has not been updated in some time, but the purpose of the map is not to identify streets of character that are quaint or historic perhaps and attractive to look at, it's about view corridors. so good views are another product of the street system. the majority of the city streets may be said to have pleasing views of the bay, the ocean and other parts of the distant city and it goes on to include this map. i think those have not changed as much, but it's not really about the qualities necessarily of the individual streets. you may find a street with a lot of overhead matter that is a good for excellent street, but it's because of the orientation

of that street, the elevation of the street, the greater view that it affords. so that is how that rating system was created. i think the board knows that i don't often ask for continuances, but i want to be certain that we have reviewed this properly. so i would like the opportunity to review this with staff to be sure that everything has been portrayed here is accurate, that what i'm telling us accurately representing what the staff has related to me. that we properly reviewed it as a zoning protection location, given that historic resources and potential districts there. if the board would afford us the opportunity for the short continuance to confirm those facts. i apologize, i don't like it, because i know that people have to come back to the hearing and i don't want to waste the

board's time, but i want to be certain here. i usually feel pretty certain what i'm speaking about, and i'm not as certain as i would like to be. i apologize for that. >> that was beyond a reasonable doubt and you said, well, she told me that and i think -- well, it was too hazy. so that's what got me. are you done? because i have a couple of questions. can you refresh my memory. this reminds me of clay street, clay and walnut. same argument. the pacific heights neighborhood association spent lots and lots of money probably in the tens of thousands of dollars to underground everything. and turn that neighborhood into a pristine neighborhood without

wires all over the place. and i recall -- i'm just asking that you affirm my recollection. i recall that we asked for another location and it didn't work, but what was the gist of it was i believe that piece of equipment ended up standing on top of a light pole. is that true? >> i can't say with certainty about the facts of the case. i defer to the board. i think the board had initially denied the application and then came back? but -- >> we continued. >> and then the other one was on steiner street at either bush or pine, i think it's pine, where the church is and it was across the street from the church. the church obviously is a

prominent historic location. and again, the same issue, is this a good view street? is it a historic district? blah, blah, blah. can you clarify that? >> it did not significantly detract. there was confusion as to the quality of the view street because they were referring to a different map perhaps. one that was on public works website. and i think there was a misunderstanding about has that meant exactly, but i think the fact that the department did review it. did appropriately determine that it would not significantly detract. it was one pole on a very large street frontage in front of the grand building and that was not going to, in and of itself, detract from the character of the building or what is there. >> president swig: the irony of this for me, and it's not a laughing matter, but it makes me laugh, the translation of the belvedere is beautiful view.

so obviously when the street was named, somebody thought it was a beautiful view. but how often -- streets of all the neighborhoods, all the trees that we see planted there were probably not planted when it was created. i don't know which came first, grattan or belvedere. they came the same. i don't go back that far. and frank is not here anymore. but how often is there a reevaluation of what the historic is? i understand that the corridor is the key thing. we have knocked down -- we

knocked down something on, i think it was 18th avenue in the sunset because there was a view corridor that went directly to golden gate park and that was in fact a beautiful view. but how often is there reevaluation of when a street becomes something more gracious as a result of evolution versus what it might have started as? >> so the map that was adopted has been a design of the general plan decades ago has been amended probably eight or nine times in the interim. however, such amendments i doubt were looking comprehensively at the whole street view system. for example, there are specific mapping elements in here that need to be amended when the heights are changed downtown. that's the call for some of the amendments.

i don't know there has been -- and i don't think there has been -- i'm guessing, but i don't think there has been a wholistic effort by the city to reevaluate that and determine should this be removed entirely from the urban design development? should it be updated? there is a lot of ways that it could be approached. kind of more on a level for historic districts, we have city-wide surveys, surveys are parts of rezoning efforts. that is something that happens ongoing, but this map and the urban design element is archaic. i think it may only exist in the original paper form that was kind of scanned and put in as the general plan. i would say there is no effort to update it because the map doesn't reflect that. the map reflects the original document probably from the 80s. >> mr. sanchez, as my were the

brought up previous cases, i think the difference between those cases as the permit holder has said, this is a more robust system. the others were just the height of the equipment, where this has more robust equipment on the pole itself. you know that was in the brief and that was mentioned. one of the things in the brief, it says the project is not designated to be a minimally visible. the angle and size of the pole is distracting and cluttering elements of the existing pole. is that a planning or from one of the -- appellants? is that criteria -- there is a big difference. we've had quite a few cases where they increased the pole. and they've spent a lot of

energy trying to make it as unobtrusive as possible. but with the additional equipment on this particular pole, that's a lot of equipment. i mean, and so, it's not just the pole and the height of the pole, but it's the mass of cluttering as per web planning says. is that a criteria for denial? >> certainly, yes, but the overall design, it's not just the antenna. we look at the equipment. that's why we have condition of approval that the equipment is painted to match. we look at the related equipment and not just the antenna. >> commissioner honda: looking at the illustrations from verizon, i mean, that's -- in my personal view not attractive. but that's my view, right? that adds quite a bit of clutter as per what planning says. >> president swig: or if i could add to my fellow commissioners

point of view, in the past, all it is is just this little box. and we agree, all it is is a little box to support the two which stands on the top. this has moved from a little box to fairly significant multiple amount of equipment that goes well beyond a little box. and my fear is that was not taken into consideration and communicated by your staff, which would be another reason you might go back and talk about this. and also, you know, d.p.w., no disrespect intended, but my -- i have nightmares about this stuff, believe it or not, because i care so much. i wonder whether -- there will be a great tendency to rubber

stamp all this stuff, it's article 25, i'm screwed anyway, they'll shove it through and why do i have to worry? there is that paranoia that exists in my nightmares. but this is suddenly, we're going from the tube on top of the pole, which was bad enough, esthetically, no disrespect intended to the technology, but come on. it wasn't created that way. with the little box that was six inches by 18 inches or something like that, as i recall, to the same tube, which is still causing the same issues, but added to this mass far larger than it was before -- >> robust infrastructure. >> president swig: robust infrastructure. great term. i think we have to watch out for that. i think d.p.w. has to watch out for that before they

rubber-stamp this and i'd like clarification as well from your own team how they're dealing with this moving from a small box as was previously described to us, as my fellow commissioner says, robust infrastructure. >> my knowledge of the technology is not excellent. the boxes depend on where it's located, too. so i think in this case, the requirement for an electric meter -- i don't think that's required on all of the poles. i defer to the permit holder. but i think this -- by the nature, some require more equipment on their behalf. to reduce it to the minimum amount possible, i'm assuming that has been done in this case, but i can further discuss that with staff. >> i just want to follow up on commissioner honda's question and put a finer point on it. it seems in the denial letter there were three bullet points

why this was denied. and then it was later stated through the applicant's brief. let's take off the table and say they looked at the right plans when they wrote it. do the two other bullet points still have merit based on the planning department review? height notwithstanding to disapprove? >> we would ask them to minimize the equipment. if we can confirm that the equipment is minimized, then it probably would comply, but i can discuss that with staff. my assumption was it was. but i'd like to confirm. >> commissioner lazarus: my question was related to your suggestion about the continuance. there seems to be a planner at the focal point of all of this. is it possible she might attend

the next hearing? not that we don't trust you to -- >> will you hold her in contempt if she doesn't? >> commissioner lazarus: i don't know if that's appropriate. >> i know may be on a reduced schedule, but i can see if that is possible, her or her supervisor, or i can get -- confirm my understanding and have additional discussions with her so i can more competently speak to it. >> commissioner lazarus: i'm just offering that as a possibility. this is an unusual situation where one planner is given an opinion and changed it. >> we'll offer her that opportunity. >> we rarely see new the hot seat. >> every wednesday night. >> just for clarification, as my fellow commissioner said, you know, if that is part of the denial process, we would leek to see what they did to minimize that to reduce that for allowing it to get approved? >> okay. i guess one final note, too,

sometimes even if projects don't change, you know, there may be new facts that come up that lead to a different decision, better understanding of context. so you know, just knowing that going forward. >> okay. i think the board has made this -- >> no. >> thank you. so commissioners this matter is submitted. >> president swig: any further comments from the commission? we dealt with the physical aspects of the neighborhood. we dealt with the physical aspects of the pieces of equipment. any questions from or further comment on the issues related to the technology and the health issue, which was a key portion of -- >> i just think that we're looking potentially to continue this. i want to make sure that both parties understand the information we're looking for so we're able to make a decision. >> one thing i think we didn't comment on was around the

historic nature. i know you put that on your list of things to look at, mr. sanchez, the historic eligibility of the neighborhood and how that interacts with this decision. >> what i'd like to do, the reason i bring it up, is i'd support a continuance for the things that we discussed. >> how much time would you need, mr. sanchez? >> i know the board doesn't have that many hearings left -- there is july 17, 26 and next week. i'll not be here next week. but if there is room on the 26th, the following wednesday, certainly could follow up. >> president swig: that would work. >> we could put you in there. >> president swig: i'm trying to keep it tight to that specific element and take the technology piece off or the health piece

off since it has not been a hefty discussion. let me comment on the health piece. sometimes i wonder, and i'm looking at the appellant for those on tv, we hear these same comments ad nauseam. and i think all of us sit here not as scientists and question everything that the appellant was questioning tonight. we've had -- like yourself, we've had ph.d.s who have stood in front of us went chapter and verse and been convincing as others like him who come up in front of us and sometimes i wonder if they're -- sorry, mr. allred, but if their daughters were living 12 feet from the equipment, if they would have

the same point of view? but we can't control this, because there are laws in place. and until the public feels that they can put enough pressure on the senators and congressmen and assemblymen and those who put is this stuff in place and can rise above the lobbying organizations like the iaeee, we're going to have these laws and article 25. we cannot reinvent the law. that is the shared frustration and fear. i never like to treat it lightly. i want to reaffirm that when i say we have to resolve the technology issue tonight and not deal with it next time, it's because we really can't rise above what has been stated for us as the law.

article 25. findings of the fcc. so go to work. i invite the public to go to work and get it changed if you feel like you need to get it changed. continuance. >> make a motion. >> there is no further comment to this point. >> so it's not going to be an issue. >> motion to continue. >> comments are finished at this point. >> i don't understand the process -- how to speak and for how long. >> our director will explain that. >> we'll address that. >> do we have a motion? >> i'll make a motion to continue to june 26, so that the department can clarify their position. >> okay, so we have a motion -- >> we'll ask it, thank you. >> we're going to ask. we'll cover that after. >> bring a box? size of the box? >> sir? sir? >> we have a motion from commissioner honda to continue

this matter to june 26 so the planning department can confirm whether or not the steps report appropriately fold and the permit was disapproved. for the benefit of the person who spoke out of order, that will include the equipment that was to be placed on the pole, the height of the pole and all the process that went into evaluating that position. >> can we confirm the availability of the appellant? >> are you available on the 26th? >> the 26th is my birthday and the one week of the entire year i have a family vacation plan. >> then we'll postpone. >> it's not ideal for me. >> we'll move it. >> we'll move it. what do we have after that? if we go after that, it's -- >> august 7 -- i'm sorry, july

17. >> i'm going from memory. >> july 17 is very busy. is theremy chance we can move to it august 7. >> i won't be here for that hearing. that's my birthday. >> mine is not until august 26, but we don't have it on my birthday. >> okay. we're very busy in july. and i know mr. sanchez will be gone august 14. don't tell me it's your birthday. >> it's the week after my birthday. i'll be coming back just for that hearing to be available. to ensure that it is staffed. so it will be okay. >> wow, you are a city guy. >> would august 14 work for the parties? >> i think two of the commissioners realized the 14th, we'll be absent. >> two of you are absent?

>> we may not have is hearing because we don't have a quorum. >> right, we can put it on the calendar in july and we'll have a later evening. >> make it happen. >> okay. 17 or the 31st. >> you prefer the 31st? >> doesn't matter, but base -- >> why don't we try the 17th? we may have cases moving off. >> july 17 works for all parties? >> right. >> so we're amending the motion to july 17. on that motion from commissioner honda, commissioner lazarus? aye. that motion passes and it's continued. let's confirm, did you want the department to submit additional documents or just a verbal report? >> i would be comfortable -- city attorney, i think -- >> it's my motion, i think it's

okay. >> president swig: city attorney from a legal stand point, should we have documentation or is public testimony acceptable to fill in the blanks? >> i don't know if there are documents that could be relevant or the parties relevant to the issues. >> president swig: so let's stick with commissioner honda desk -- >> in term of the times to speak, generally each party gets three minutes to address the issue. no rebuttal. >> i think it's fine unless we have further questions. >> and public comment as well. thank you. so this concludes the hearing.

>> i went through a lot of struggles in my life, and i am blessed to be part of this. i am familiar with what people

are going through to relate and empathy and compassion to their struggle so they can see i came out of the struggle, it gives them hope to come up and do something positive. ♪ ♪ i am a community ambassador. we work a lot with homeless,

visitors, a lot of people in the area. >> what i like doing is posting up at hotspots to let people see visibility. they ask you questions, ask you directions, they might have a question about what services are available. checking in, you guys. >> wellness check. we walk by to see any individual, you know may be sitting on the sidewalk, we make sure they are okay, alive. you never know. somebody might walk by and they are laying there for hours. you never know if they are alive. we let them know we are in the area and we are here to promote safety, and if they have somebody that is, you know, hanging around that they don't want to call the police on, they don't have to call the police.

they can call us. we can direct them to the services they might need. >> we do the three one one to keep the city neighborhoods clean. there are people dumping, waste on the ground and needles on the ground. it is unsafe for children and adults to commute through the streets. when we see them we take a picture dispatch to 311. they give us a tracking number and they come later on to pick it up. we take pride. when we come back later in the day and we see the loose trash or debris is picked up it makes you feel good about what you are doing. >> it makes you feel did about escorting kids and having them feel safe walking to the play area and back. the stuff we do as ambassadors makes us feel proud to help keep

the city clean, helping the residents. >> you can see the community ambassadors. i used to be on the streets. i didn't think i could become a community ambassador. it was too far out there for me to grab, you know. doing this job makes me feel good. because i came from where a lot of them are, homeless and on the street, i feel like i can give them hope because i was once there. i am not afraid to tell them i used to be here. i used to be like this, you know. i have compassion for people that are on the streets like the homeless and people that are caught up with their addiction because now, i feel like i can give them hope. it reminds you every day of where i used to be and where i am at now.

>> growing up in san francisco has been way safer than growing up other places we we have that bubble, and it's still that bubble that it's okay to be whatever you want to. you can let your free flag fry he -- fly here. as an adult with autism, i'm here to challenge people's idea of what autism is. my journey is not everyone's journey because every autistic child is different, but there's hope. my background has heavy roots in the bay area. i was born in san diego and

adopted out to san francisco when i was about 17 years old. i bounced around a little bit here in high school, but i've always been here in the bay. we are an inclusive preschool, which means that we cater to emp. we don't turn anyone away. we take every child regardless of race, creed, religious or ability. the most common thing i hear in my adult life is oh, you don't seem like you have autism. you seem so normal. yeah. that's 26 years of really, really, really hard work and i think thises that i still do. i was one of the first open adoptions for an lgbt couple. they split up when i was about four. one of them is partnered, and one of them is not, and then my biological mother, who is also a lesbian. very queer family. growing up in the 90's with a

queer family was odd, i had the bubble to protect me, and here, i felt safe. i was bullied relatively infrequently. but i never really felt isolated or alone. i have known for virtually my entire life i was not suspended, but kindly asked to not ever bring it up again in first grade, my desire to have a sex change. the school that i went to really had no idea how to handle one. one of my parents is a little bit gender nonconforming, so they know what it's about, but my parents wanted my life to be safe. when i have all the neurological issues to manage, that was just one more to add to it. i was a weird kid. i had my core group of, like, very tight, like, three friends. when we look at autism, we

characterize it by, like, lack of eye contact, what i do now is when i'm looking away from the camera, it's for my own comfort. faces are confusing. it's a lack of mirror neurons in your brain working properly to allow you to experience empathy, to realize where somebody is coming from, or to realize that body language means that. at its core, autism is a social disorder, it's a neurological disorder that people are born with, and it's a big, big spectrum. it wasn't until i was a teenager that i heard autism in relation to myself, and i rejected it. i was very loud, i took up a lot of space, and it was because mostly taking up space let everybody else know where i existed in the world. i didn't like to talk to people really, and then, when i did, i

overshared. i was very difficult to be around. but the friends that i have are very close. i click with our atypical kiddos than other people do. in experience, i remember when i was five years old and not wanting people to touch me because it hurt. i remember throwing chairs because i could not regulate my own emotions, and it did not mean that i was a bad kid, it meant that i couldn't cope. i grew up in a family of behavioral psychologists, and i got development cal -- developmental psychology from all sides. i recognize that my experience is just a very small picture of that, and not everybody's in a position to have a family that's as supportive, but there's also a community that's incredible helpful and wonderful and open and there for you in your moments of

need. it was like two or three years of conversations before i was like you know what? i'm just going to do this, and i went out and got my prescription for hormones and started transitioning medically, even though i had already been living as a male. i have a two-year-old. the person who i'm now married to is my husband for about two years, and then started gaining weight and wasn't sure, so i we went and talked with the doctor at my clinic, and he said well, testosterone is basically birth control, so there's no way you can be pregnant. i found out i was pregnant at 6.5 months. my whole mission is to kind of normalize adults like me. i think i've finally found my calling in early intervention, which is here, kind of what we do. i think the access to irrelevant care for

parents is intentionally confusing. when i did the procespective search for autism for my own child, it was confusing. we have a place where children can be children, but it's very confusing. i always out myself as an adult with autism. i think it's helpful when you know where can your child go. how i'm choosing to help is to give children that would normally not be allowed to have children in the same respect, kids that have three times as much work to do as their peers or kids who do odd things, like, beach therapy. how do -- speech therapy. how do you explain that to the rest of their class? i want that to be a normal experience. i was working on a certificate and kind of getting think early childhood credits brefore i

started working here, and we did a section on transgender inclusion, inclusion, which is a big issue here in san francisco because we attract lots of queer families, and the teacher approached me and said i don't really feel comfortable or qualified to talk about this from, like, a cisgendered straight person's perspective, would you mind talking a little bit with your own experience, and i'm like absolutely. so i'm now one of the guest speakers in that particular class at city college. i love growing up here. i love what san francisco represents. the idea of leaving has never occurred to me. but it's a place that i need to fight for to bring it back to what it used to be, to allow all of those little kids that come from really unsafe environments to move somewhere safe. what i've done with my life is work to make all of those situations better, to bring a little bit of light to all those kind of issues that we're still having, hoping to expand into a little bit more of a

resource center, and this resource center would be more those new parents who have gotten that diagnosis, and we want to be this one centralized place that allows parents to breathe for a second. i would love to empower from the bottom up, from the kid level, and from the top down, from the teacher level. so many things that i would love to do that are all about changing people's minds about certain chunts, like the transgender community or the autistic community. i would like my daughter to know there's no wrong way to go through life. everybody experiences pain and grief and sadness, and that all grief and sadness, and that all of those things are temporary. - working for the city and county of san francisco will immerse you in a vibrant and dynamic city that's on the forefront of economic growth, the arts, and social change. our city has always been on the edge of progress and innovation.

after all, we're at the meeting of land and sea. - our city is famous for its iconic scenery, historic designs, and world- class style. it's the birthplace of blue jeans, and where "the rock" holds court over the largest natural harbor on the west coast. - the city's information technology professionals work on revolutionary projects, like providing free wifi to residents and visitors, developing new programs to keep sfo humming, and ensuring patient safety at san francisco general. our it professionals make government accessible through award-winning mobile apps, and support vital infrastructure projects like the hetch hetchy regional water system. - our employees enjoy competitive salaries, as well as generous benefits programs. but most importantly, working for the city and county of san francisco gives employees an opportunity to contribute their ideas, energy, and commitment to shape the city's future.

- thank you for considering a career with the city and county of san francisco.

[gavel] >> the meeting will come to order. welcome to the monday, june 17th special meeting of the government audit and oversight committee. i'm super gordon mar, the chair of this committee. thank you to this committee's. >> clerk: john carroll. and also thank you to charles and maya at sfgov for staffing this meeting. mr. clerk, do you have any announcements. >> clerk: please ensure you silenced cell phones and other devices. you wish to have as included as part of any of the files, ld