>> good morning. this is the regular meeting of the abate appeals board. i would like to have everyone turn off electric devices. next is roll call. we have a quorum and then only.

for all parties giving testimony, please stand and raise your right hand. do you swear the testimony you're about to give is the truth to the best of your knowledge? thank you, you may be seated. there are two cases, case 6865 and 6866 for 1641 a to grove street have been withdrawn and were withdrawn in advance of the meeting and we apologize. we have item c, approval of minutes. discussion to adopt minutes for a meeting on september 18, 2019. >> move to approve. >> second. >> there is a motion and a second and any public comment on the minutes? all commissioners in favour?

and any opposed? the minutes are approved. commissioner moss is present, as well. thank you. case number is 6867-109113 peer street, llc, of ryan j. patters.

188901, to be returned to staff and cancel the notice of abatement. and for the record, i just wanted to state the department will present their case first and then the appellant. symptoms next, public comment and members have three minutes each to speak and rebuttal time of three minutes for department and the appellant. would the department lining to come forward? >> my name is jose lopez and today's case at 109 peer street. we have received a complaint on august 29, 2018. our inspector was assigned to the district, met with the complainant of the subject property and the result was

notice of violation was issued on august 31st, 2018. one year, several inspections later and three hearings, finally in order of off boughtment waabatementwas issuen july 11, 2019. i go into call our inspector christina who has been assigned to the district for three years and we go show you some pictures of the conditions that existed and how they not only continue to exist but in our opinions have gotten worse.

>> i'm christina moi and i'll show you a couple of photos regarding the matter of this and the firstphot photo is the rear door. there's damage and warped on that door and this is the rear door to the rear exist stairway. so that's what it looks like at the bottom. the next photo i would like to show is in a bedroom. this bedroom is towards the front of the building facing pier street and as you can tell,

there's mold at the bottom and on the right side, there's peeling paint. the next photo is also in the same bedroom and there's mold on the ceiling and also on the wall with peeling paint. let me see if i can adjust this. now, the next photo is in the bathroom and this is the ceiling of the bathroom and you can tell and see that there's mold on the ceiling and along the sued of thside ofthe wall. thank you, jose.

next photo is mold on the ceiling where the pantry is in the culture above the sink. here is a photo of the bottom of the roar stairway. this is the dry-rotted wood that's holding up one side of the stairway. and the last photo is the heater and this is the only heating unit and i went back to this on

october 4 to do a reinspection so i can give you an update because as you can tell some of the photos are dated awhile back since may, so i just wanted to give you a quick update that these violations have not been corrected and have not been fixed. the only item on this notice of violation have been fixed with a permit, is the rear stairway, which they have fixed some of the risers and some of the stringers and they have permits for that. thank you. >> commissioner walker? >> thank you. can you tell me how many tenants are in this building? how many us units. >> the property has to three units didn't threunits and thre.

the upper unit and the only one occupied in these photos and in the notice of violation in relation to that unit. >> so have you seen the other units? >> the other units are under construction and there are permits open and we have seen some pictures -- i have seen pictures that they're doing complete renovations of the unit. >> but this is not part of the renovation? is there a permit polled for any of this? >> i don't know if for the renovation of the upper unit there is an active permit. >> in fact some of the violateses don't require a permit to address the peeling paint and address small issues. there are items, like the heater, we do require a permit

to replace it and if there is a simple repair, they don't need a permit. the third case, we require a permit and they have a permit do temporary work, repairs, because my understanding is that they will be building a new set of stairs when the construction is finalled. finished. we sent the case three times to a hearing and previous hearings, the cause was continued because they show they have permitted to do some other work and a second time, the case was sent back to the staff, but, again, over three years -- i'm sorry, over one year, the conditions of the occupy unit still the same or worse and that is why the staff has found that they have been violations an to the occupant of

the building is the department recommends the order be upheld and all costs incurred by the department be accessed. >> and the the tenan tenant is l there. >> yes. >> the pickets o pictures of thr stairs, is that part of the upper unit for egress. >> yes, second means of egress for the upper unit. that was a big priority for us because the upper unit is still occupied. and they responded and i mean, i was satisfied -- i was happy to see they got a permit to do some repairs to that. >> thank you. >> would the appellant like to come forward.

>> good morning, president mccarthy and members of the board. ryan patterson, attorney for the property owner. thank you for your time this morning. this is an unusual case and a bad situation, as you can see. this is a property unit that purchased the property over a year ago and with the intent of repairing it and has taken every step possible to do that. on the overhead, this is a copy of the permit detail's report and if you wouldn't mind distributing a copy to the members, as well, so you can see. the owner obtained a permit to make repairs and abate the vay violations and has done as much work with the tenant in position possession. the problem is that the tenants refuse to leave. anothethey are in litigation tro gain access to the unit to be

able to do that. the contractor, as i understand it, is refusing to do more work. they've done as much as they can with tenants there. they will speak to the details about that and i'll give you, if you like, a copy of the summons and complaints, the lawsuit tkpwaeugslitigationto gain acce. i'll finish by saying, i think it would be very wrong for the city to penalize an owner for

doing everything that they can do to abate the situation. it's not their fault that they can't go further. if an order of of of off abatems imposed, it will be hard to get construction financing to do the rest of the repairs. so i would appreciate your consideration of that. i think the right thing to happen here is that it be canceled or returned to staff so that the department can do whatever is possible to help with this. iwe appreciate any help or ideas you may have. but an order of abatement will be counterproductive in getting this done. thank you. happy to answer any questions. >> good morning. i want to give a brief history of our involvement with the building. so we purchased the building in may of 2018, immediately set out

to figure out what was wrong with the building and develop a set of plans to start fixing it. we had reached out to the housing department to discuss how do work with the tenants in the building. so as you see, the entire building is in really bad shape and it's a result of essentially 40 years of lack of maintenance. so the roof has fort lauderdale. the siding is coming off, substantial dry-rot throughout and so for the rear stairs, the big issue, it a secondary means of egress and needs to be torn down completely. , along with most of the pantry attached to the rear stairs and i cannot do that with tenants in the building. their second means of egress, however bad shape it is in right now, i can't remove that secondary means and i've looked

at putting secondary scaffolding stairs at the front but it's too close to powerlines so i can't get additional scaffolding in there. these are all symptoms of what is happening and i could put paint over that, but it will come right back until we can fix the dry-rot and the siding that's pulling off. we want to. i want to do this work probably worse than you want me to do this work but i can't until i

can get into the unit and do it. and the last part, all of the foundations need to be replaced. the building is lifting substantially to the left. the foundations are shot. i need to raze the building and there's a big sag in the center. as i do this, with plaster, if the unit is not gutted, plaster will fall off the walls and doors will be jammed shut as we straighten the building. so these are all reasons that my contractors will not proceed with the work while the unit is occupied. >> what is your time frame for the work that needs to be done where the tenants need to be relocated? >> the whole building will take 18 months.

>> the building was purchased in may of 2018 and when you purchased it or when the purchaser, were the other units occupied at the time? >> no. >> so this was the only unit and you were aware there was a tenant who presented difficulties in relocating? >> yes. >> so i had another followup? >> sorry, commissioner. >> so have you tried to arrange a relocation plan with the tenant? i mean, what efforts did you go through for that? >> i think i can address that one. as i mentioned, the landlord/tenant matters were handled by a different firm. we've been in discussions with the tenants for quite some time and i would say attempted discussions because it's been very, very difficult to try to get their attorney to the table

and very frustrating. >> did you engage our code enforcement outreach team at all? we have some folks that we use with our housing division to try to resolve issues between landlords and tenants. we have a whole program. >> no, not off water of that. aware of that. >> i see folks from that program in the audience and might be something we discuss when we look at options. >> great. and i do have copies of the plans for you, as well, just in case you want to see the extent of the work. >> i think it's clear there needs to be work done. >> if i could just clarify. this is a permanent relocation, if that's what we're calling it, correct? >> yes. >> so an eviction? >> yes. >> it's a substantial rehabilitation petition.

>> commissioner walker? >> so the tenants, are they seniors or disabled? i'm just trying to figure out -- >> yes. >> to both? >> yes. >> and how long have they been there? >> 35 years, a long time. >> so seniors have been there for 35 years. >> you said payments were made? >> yes. >> does that insinuate an agreement was made that they would move out wor out or what'g on with that? >> there are legal requirements paid for relocation and that's what was done.

>> if we have finished, we might go to public comment, you believe. >> we have rebuttal. >> public comment and then rebuttal. any members for public comment? yes. >> thank you. my name is hal fisher and i live at 117 powers. 117 pierce. i have been the neighbor of the tenant, the master tenant, jackie long, for 26 years. i am also -- and she is here. he's asked me to speak on her behalf and after that really interesting edited presentation, i would like to correct the record on any number of things that were said by

mr. patterson and mr. marenoff. because, first of all, you should also start that there were first permit that was opened was opened at mr. marenoff's request and opened because he got -- he got the notice of violations and he went to miss long and baste basy waived it around and said you have to move out. it's not safe. i got involved, looked at it, showed it to people i know in the city and they said it's ridiculous. so they initiated this because they have been attempting to ease them out as quickly and as cost effective as they could. one thing that miss long did mention right at the beginning, two obeginningis that the roof . if you stand on pierce street, you can see through the roof. the only thing she's requested

since last august is that they stabilize the roof with something, a tarp, so that the water does not leak into his bedroom and on her bed. she has never filed a complaint. she has never asked for these things to be taken care of and they have been granted access to the unit. i actually wa, actually, was tht called the building inspectors in and asked them to look and that's how they discovered this. i also -- mr. marenoff pulled three separate permits. on the third permit, it was cathed acanceled at the requestf mr. marenoff and his attorney and the most interesting thing, is that mr. duffy, a senior inspector in dbi, got up and

addressed that the dbi handled this incorrectly and mr. walsh wrote a whole letter saying that the building on a scale of, i think, 1-110, was a 9 in terms f damage. mr. duffy got up and said this inspector had to right to write that letter and they canceled the whole thing. mr. duffy said the building was safe. so we have that. and the third permit that they requested was to add a roof deck and three rooms in the garage so that they could turn eight-room flat into an 11-room flat. the building does not have to be lifted for a seismic retrofit. it has to be lifted because it's going to be luxury flats out of this. so as for relocation, they have continued to send checks, of which none have been cashed.

i have lost count how many times they've sent checks. and basically, we have proposed to them a solution to this. the two vacant units were famil- >> i'm sorry, your time is up. >> we only allow three minutes. >> can i just say one thing? this is a 73-year-old african-american woman who has her own disabilities. her daughter, barbara is schizophrenic and she has to provide primary care. you all know how many mental services there are for people. the son-in-law has had significancsixoperations since d there's a 9-year-old. >> ok, thank you very much. we appreciate you coming. >> any additional public comment? seeing none, rebuttal by the department.

>> the roof which is the source of leaks, we would like to see -- you need permission to get inside the unit to fix the roof. you would love to see that and fix the exterior wall and insecure access to that unit but we have not seen that and that's again, just over a year and the conditions still exist. >> commissioner walker, please. >> so there seems to be a differing opinion about -- i mean, we're looking at what the violations are and they are really habitability issues. to this reflects a total rebuild and strengthening and whatnot, way beyond what we're looking

at. so i'm assuming that this is -- a lot of this is by choice rather than by code. because what we're looking at are just violations around the back stairs, mold, habitability issues, things that don't require esrubgtin evicting peop. that's what we're looking at, right? i want to be clear. >> yes. we can see the extent of the work proposed. we can see it on the two vacant units where the walls have been clear and then new construction and then plumbing, electrical and whatever else and i'm sure that it's the plan for the third unit, but however, we still have an occupied unit. it's been over a year.

and we feel that there's no necessary -- it's not necessary to move the tenant out completely in order to go skph d fix building paint and mold issues. the department would not be serving the department in moving the cause through the process. >> thank you. >> rebuttal for the appellant? >> this is certainly a tough case. i think we're in agreement on that.

displacement of tenants is not something we like to see but this is a building with real problems and if the neighbor who spoke thinks this is a safe situation and a good spwaeugs fosituationfor people to give l, i'm happy to invite board members to see the property and you can see what condition it's in and what kind of work, more importantly, has to be done there. we're happy to -- the owners have happy to tarp the roof if there's a leak situation that can be done. i would think it could be done expeditiously. and if there are other individual items that cosmetically the department thinks can be done without moving tenants out, that's the conversation we should have. but th mold doesn't occur on its

own. there's an underlying problem and that has to be solved and that's not something that you can just walk in and have the tents gtenants go to the other m over. this is a much larger undertaking. again, the order of abatement, we agreed there are serious problems in the building that must be addressed, putting the order of abatement on the building when the owner is doing everything possible, including litigating to abate the violations, it's wrong and will interfere with the ability to do that. as i'm sure you know, there's an order of off baitmen abatement e building. lenders don't want that. they're lending on a project. anything else you would like to add? >> so just reiterating one last time that the items that we see

are the symptoms of the problem, not the problem and in order to fix the problem, i have to get into the walls and i have to get into the walls everywhere. so it's not -- i need to get in everywhere skpe and i cannot dot with tent tenants in the buildi. >> the right thing to do is return this to staff, not issue an order of abatement that will interfere with the project being completed. thank you. happy to answer my other questions. commissioner. >> so i'm going to ask the same question that this reflects way more what we're looking at and so you can choose to do that, but i think that sets up a whole different legal situation for you that we don't deal with here. and i think we're being asked to look at the mold and the

habitability issues in this building and only that. so that's what we're going to probably talk about. >> if there there' there's an io talk the walls apart to solve the mold issue while people are living there, i doubt that the department would be comfortable telling us do that, but -- >> well, the 18-month project is not about replacing drywall but about changing the structure of the building and that's what seems to be happening here and i don't want to conflux the issues. that's probably not a word. we're able to deal with severe habitability issues and i don't know that requires this.

>> there are ways to make temporary walls and wall off sections of a wall to deal with mold. it's not preferable. i want to second commissioner walker. we're conflating two separate things here and i want to focus on the actual habitability of the 75-year-old tenant. >> commissioners, we always do right by our tenants here and i think we've done a good job and i'm having trouble with this one. i think we need to face -- as a contractor and in the contractor's seat, i have to disagree with the level of impact that's going to be on this building to anybody occupying it. it's going to be huge and as i look at it and i'm putting on my

contractor's hat here, i don't see how anybody could be in this building. , join this construction. i don't think it's fair to ask idle parties to consider this. i understand the limit we're in here and this is not a good situation, but the city's work are trying to come up with policies and procedures to represent both sides. i just think this falls into that category. i really appreciate the fact that we're given these drawings because if i didn't have these, i would be not as consrupbsed cs situation can't be resolved. but if we do put a tarp over -- and i hate the thought of that, kind of stopping the leaking and babandaiding it. how does this construction go forward and how is this building brought to code and not impact

the tenants? i don't see it. i would respectfully request -- i know there's a stand-off and i don't want to get into that. mr. patterson pointed out he wasn't involved in the early part of that. so i would like to see one more run at trying to figure this out. i know, commissioners, it's a big ask, but i would suggest to take the offer of returning this to staff for a periods to have serious discussions and face the reality of this project here and this building, in my eyes, this cannot be occupied whraoeu whilo this construction. it will be too much. so what can be solved and resolved to make this happen? i don't know. i'm hope bu open but i want to e

rate thing. >> commissioner walker? >> i'm sympathetic to that, i really am, but i think we need to get our tenant folks in and have a meaningful discussion about what the impact is. because it's huge and it's really not clear to me that's there's been a serious alternative to permanently replace evicting someone and i don't want to condone that here. i get the border concept of what's going on here, but that's not what's being v vi violated. this is similar to illegal demolitions that you have a building that has permits for

one thing and you're addressing one thing and then you run into dryrot or whatever and the whole building is gone. we need toverdoing which is somg that happens evicts people and we don't have enough ability to look at that in a bigger context. nor do we have jurisdictio juri. so having more time to work out a different alternative is -- i'm willing to do that. >> commissioner mccarthy. >> we would have a time restriction on this because -- and i think what we could help is to give both parties understanding that if they come back, that we can't support and you think that doesn't help the legal grounds and i think one

more good run at this and my sense is you have to choice but to work out an equal, fair solution for everything. everybody, so everybody can do the route thing. right thing. the commissioner, gum given thee frame and we can talk about that, but if you want to make comments to add to it. >> thank you. inspector moi again. so i want to reiterate that i have given the owner time for them to get the items on the violation corrected. for example, i sent them a letter to give them more than 30 days to get that fixed and that was on october 9th of 2018. and then i referred it to hearing, which gives them

another 30 days to get these items fixed on november 16th, where this hearing happened on december 21st of 2018 and it was returned to staff. so here again, i gave them another time where on may 20th a reinspection to see if any work was done on these violations and it was all outstanding, nothing was completed. and i sent it to the hearing again on june 6th of 20 -- may n june 6th, there was a decision where it was continued for another 30 days. now, i did a permit research on june 19 to see if there are any

permit acquired for the rear stairway and there was. and it was the permit number four for the rear stairway work. and then i decided to tkpw*u tom to t get that done, as well. so on july 15, there was another hearing where that is where that 30-day order of abatement happed and there was time before i sent out any, any time of initial billing. i did not send out any because i understand the situation of the building. but all i asked for the owner is to complete and fix all of the violateses on this notice and majority of this is deferred maintenance that can be fixed

during the time the tenant can be staying there. for example, mold, you can fix mold when the tenant is in there. peeling paint, they can fix peeling paint when the tenant is in there. damaged flooring can be fixed when the tenant is in there and all of this time we have given them, i feel that the tenant, myself and the department has given them time that is reasonable, that is considerable and that is really, really generous to them. so i urge that the commissioners stay with what the discussion has made which is the order of abasement to be standing. thank you for your time. >> commissioner walker? >> so in any of these efforts, was there an effort to try to to get the folks involved to

discuss? because the issue the tenant is in the building and i get there's a agreemen disagreementr they can be in there or not, but we have a situation where one person says they have to be out to do the work and one says they don't. >> our primary goal is achieving compliance. every time the case goes to a hearing, i will meet the person representing the owner at the hearing and we are going to inform them g i. in fact, i informed them about the abatement appeal when that was ende issued. we tell the owner this and we provide pamphlets where we have the groups.

so we have, as christina stated, exhausted our ways on to work with the owner. we're happy to see that they got a permit and this permit was issued on december 6th of 2018 and we know that we have a granduous plan to fix this problem. we have a door, where we have air filtration in a flooring issue and that's why we don't understand how come they cannot fix those items to improve her quality of life. so that's where we stand. >> commissioner mccarthy? >> nobody is disagreeing with the process here and i still will stand to the point of view of looking at the drawings and thelogicathe level of work.

you as i as a contractor can lok everybody in the eye when you start this, you'll find more. i don't know how you do that with somebody living, particularly an elderly and special need's people living there. i don't know how you do it, right? so once again, what we're trying to do here is that was then and this is now. what we're doing as a commission, we're trying to structure -- and i would be interested in mr. patterson coming up to framework that to see if the commissioner could support such a framework on what the next steps would be to send it back to the department, to sit down and commissioner walker's point, were they involved in the part and negotiation? i don't believe you answered that. >> well, we have made the information available. >> it's a yes or no. were they involved in the negotiations of it? >> they have. >> they have? >> yes. involved in the negotiations and

i would be interested in hearing from them, as well, to see why they felt there might be a scenario to send this back to try to work with it. >> i think commissioner walker had a question. >> i want to just say something that i agree that -- and i would likely vote to uphold the order of abatement and the question is how do we move forward here? we have certain jurisdiction and we don't have other jurisdiction. so we're just trying to figure out how to solve this problem, how to deal with this particular set of violatese violations in y that's effective. law it's complicated. >> mr. patterson, i would be

interested in your thoughts. >> thank you for come. >> i work for the housing clinic and oversee the department of which we see-op and racquel is here and we're a little under understaffed but we came to know about this case because from time to time, we look at the abatement hearing and we keep ourselves updated even though we don't come to these hearings that often, which is good in a way. tso when we saw this address, we found out what was going on. we're not clear as to what really has transpired for a year because this is the first time we're hearing all of the facts. we would be interested in,

basically, figure out how we can help the tenant ans and figure t what is going on for the last one year. i really admire what country cha has said and i feel there have been chances given and i don't know all of the facts. >> have you all been involved in this yet? >> no, this is the first time and we just got introduced to the tenant and neighbor so this is the first time so we're digesting what we're hearing and we have had situations where we have helped tenants in difficult circumstances and we could bring that expertise and we have a law office that can help to guide us. >> great. >> and we're a big fan of you guys. you have helped us out in the past and that's why we love approving a budget for you every year. >> we appreciate that. >> so it just seems like they have not been involved as much. >> correct.

>> and i would just like to remind our department that see-op is really important for this bringing together folks and finding solutions that might not come from a notice of violation. so you would move to continue this for 30 days, for a next abatement appeal. >> could i get mr. patterson up here on the time frame and then we will back up whatever we decide on that. what's your thought? >> i think one of two things has to happen for us to move forward. either the tenant's attorney needs to mediate with us to find a solution here that will work for them and for the owners or the litigations has to conclude to gain access to that unit to do the work. and i think 30 days might be helpful and maybe they'll change their minds and come to the table.

>> and maybe you will? >> we're at the table. we're eager and doing everything we can to negotiate with them but we need a negotiating partner. if tenderloin housing will bring more in for the tenant, that's up to the tenant, if she wants more lawyers involved. but we need a negotiation to move forward or have to conclude the litigation. but the order of abatement, that's just going to sit on title and make it harder to get financing to do the repair work. >> thank you. >> thank you. the tenants' neighbor is indicating -- >> i have something. so i think that the goal of our code enforcement outreach program, just to remind you, isn't legal but finding solutions that augment our code

enforcement efforts and it works effectively to hopefully find solutions and my experience is that both parties generally don't like it 100% because it's usually in negotiation. so i'm hopeful that we can find some way to resolve these issues that are before us in a way that makes more sense than what we're looking at. and so that would be a good solution and i'm willing to wait 30 days, as long as it's going to make more sense. >> i would invite you back up. thank you. >> quickly. >> i just have to correct a couple of things. we have been in mediation and the tenant is represented by legal assistance for the elderly. we did not get anywhere in mediation and, basically, one of the reasons do these corrects is

corrections, it will end up as an ill effect and the militants wiltents willtenantswill be the. many of what mr. patterson said is not true, claiming we weren't in mediation but we have been in mediation. the next thing will be a mediation with the judge because they have filed for eviction and this is why dbi, you think, basically wanted to pull the permits on them. tout so thso the other side is g fair, thank you. >> commissioner walker? >> so i move to continue this for 30 days. and i strongly urge both parties to come together to find a solution. otherwise, these issues are

going to be resolved in court and that's out of our hands. >> a motion to continue the case, is there a second? >> second. >> roll call vote. residen rol (roll call). >> the motion carries. you believe it's 4-1. thank you. >> my next item is e, general public comment. is there any general public comment for items that are not on the abatement boards's

agenda. item f, adjournment? >> motion to ajourn. >> a second. >> commissioner moss seconds this. we are now adjourned, 10:07 a.m. and we'll take five minutes and then reconvene.

>> 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.

[roll call] >> item number 2, opportunity for the public to comment on any matter within the committee's jurisdiction that is not on the agenda. seeing none, we're going to move on to item number 3, approval with possible modifications of the minutes of the august 26th, 2019, meeting. minutes, any objections? >> i don't have objections, but i did note a lot of