initiation should not occur currently. please do not consider those amendments or initiations. president miguel: thank you. >> these are comments i made regarding the documents you received for today. my name is kathy lynn and i live at 322 serrano drive in parkmerced. first, how can you possibly consider giving entitlements to fortress investment fund, a new owner of parkmerced. i'm told they are defendants in a $500 million mortgage fraud scam. i'm not a rent controlled unit slated for demolition. i'm a person who is slated to lose her home of 57 years along with 2,800 other people who are slated to lose their homes if this development goes through. so far we have no written document guaranteeing us future rent controlled departments, only verbal promises. suspending the protection of ceqa, environmental guidelines for this entitlement process is wrong. this process involves regrading of the entire site and will cause extreme environmental stress to the land. there will also be an expenditure of enormous amounts of water and gas to accomplish this. massive destruction of plan

and that's my problem with initiation at this point. i have questions about transportation, there are questions about all of this stuff that was raised before and, you know, staff may have given some input here, but craig hartman signed this thing, all right. is this the city's vision for this particular area? i don't think so. i think it's the developer's vision. if the city's vision the same, i would like to know if that is true and how that affects this particular document. i think that commissioner olague's statement, i forget of exactly how she put it, but if the vision is here -- what is the city's vision for housing out here? >> commissioner, we never prepared the document -- commissioner sugaya: the implication is staff has gone through it and offered it and things have been changed. >> we are the authors of the development agreement. commissioner sugaya: i'm not talking about the development agreement. >> we are never the ones to prepare architectural drawings in proposed project. commissioner sugaya: we have no staff analysis.

vice president olague: initially i was feeling ok about going forward with the initiation today, but there is still more information and i'm sorry i didn't get a chance to talk to ms. mullens and others. i was away for a couple weeks so i didn't get a chance to talk to people from the development team to issue my concerns as far as this initiation today is concerned and i just feel really and truthfully, i felt a little bit pressured, actually, to support the initiation. there is always the justification of, well, you initiate, you're not voting for the project, it's just inform. it's moving everything forward on november 18 and really technically less than a month away. i think that i would like to do things in the reverse order, rather than move the initiation ahead, i would rather hear first, have the hearing on the development agreement that the city has, even though that's not really our purview, it's the purview of the board of supervisors to look at this development in terms of how it addresses the housing needs of the city. we have the abag numbers, we have the housing elemen

point b is the initiation. initiation of a landmark site or district can be made by one of the following methods. so for individual landmarks, it's a resolution to initiate by the board of supervisors, a resolution of intent to initiate by the h.p.c., an actual resolution to initiate by the h.p.c., or for individual landmarks, upon a submital ever a complete nomination application to the department pursuant to the section above. and then to caveat that, -- i should back up. so to just actually reiterate that. for an individual landmark, if somebody, a property owner, a neighbor or what not, submits a complete application to the department so that we have to open up a file, we have to schedule it for the commission, it actually starts the initiation process. it then, in turn, starts a clock of terms of permitting and hearings schedule. as a check for that, so it wouldn't go unbridled and people couldn't just constantly throw in applications, we do have to schedule a hearing in front of the historic preservation

initiation should not occur currently. please do not consider those amendments or initiations. president miguel: thank you.

is that enough to satisfy commissioners to initiate? do we do the initiation after those hearings? maybe i could have some answers from the other commissioners on this. commissioner moore: the first thing i would say, i would like to pick up on the hybrid presentation. that is important to me. that requires work that has never been done. it allows us to comprehend the project. the second one is my own preference, if you are going around, i would prefer to have initiation following these presentations. >> is that your feeling? commissioner sugaya: that is w

ask to initiate or nominate. it's only the owners, the h.p.c., the board of supervisors essentially. so i don't know if you want to stop at each topic to discuss or have public comment or if you would like -- it's up to you. president miguel: we'll continue. >> ok. the second component that i'd like to raise is moving on to administrative or certificates of appropriateness, which is the entitlement that the h.p.c. has to grant for any building that's in a historic district or an individual landmark for any work, demolition, anything. i'm going to jump to page 19 of the article 10. proposition j gives the h.p.c. complete authority to approve, disapprove or modify it also allows the department unlike the current article 10, to delegate certain work to staff, to have an administrative, quicker process to occur. article 10 currently does not have that. it basically requires every exterior alteration to go in front of the historic preservation commission. be it one window, be it a nonvisible, rear window or stair, eve

i will move to the initial recommendation. the first recommendation was for the commission to develop effective -- supervisor maxwell: do we have that in hard copy? >> you do not have the power point? you will, momentarily. they are on page 11 of thef powersor point. -- of the power point. i believe it is on page 11. the first initial recommendation is that the puc develop processes for transparent and meaningful participation. supervisor maxwell, you raised good ideas about how we ensure participation is transparent. people understand how they can get involved, they understand their role. they may not see it in the final program or project, but they have the opportunity to provide it. stakeholder participation is transparent to the people can share information and not only get it for themselves, but disseminate it. so that the members are part of the process for community needs. are they doing what they said they would do? not just in design, but in implementation and oversight. as my partner said, and as you said, public uti

our current proposal to you is to have the initiation hearing. where you would initiate the code changes and the general plan amendment changes on october 21st and then have the actual hearing on the project and the co-changes on november 18th. so there would be four weeks between initiation and your actual hearing on the project. that's been our standard practice is to have at least three weeks between initiation and your hearing, because the required notice period is 20 days so your practice has been to have at least three weeks between initiation hearing. since there has been discussion of having an entitlement hearing on the 21st there was an ad placed in the newspaper this week, so on the 21st you will have to continue that item officially to the 18th when that item comes up before you. but just to reiterate, what we are now proposing is the initiation of the code, and general plan amendment on october 21st and the entitlement hearing and the certification of the e.i.r. on november 18th. and we plan to have the packets to you and the comment

he thought the towers were the best things to deal with initially. he should have stuck to his first instinct. that is the solution that would most address some of the problems we have currently. you can have preservation incentives and still retain and provide some infill in the existing units. by taking out some of the parking area or parking structures onsite. there are alternatives that have been eliminated by the

i would pref prefer as we move through an initiation that we initiate things but leave that as an open question. and i think that's an important part of it. and also i might point out on the market octavia, this commission passed a different type plan that was approved after the supervisors modified it. we voted, i forget the exact vote, but obviously a majority, on a parking situation that allow allowed up to 1:1 parking and as a right .75. and i might be mistaken and some to do with two bedroom or one bedroom but it was quite different than what came out in the final product from the supervisors. and we went through years of hearings with all these different groups talking about different areas and different desires they have on this question. we tried to reach a comprise which i think we did. so to take that same and apply this to the block even though it's only one more block, i would like to hear from all the decision makers and i am just weighing in on what's before us on this. >> commissioner moore? >> i would like to express my strong support for this and to be initiated and al

is that enough to satisfy commissioners to initiate? do we do the initiation after those hearings? maybe i could have some answers from the other commissioners on this. commissioner moore: the first thing i would say, i would like to pick up on the hybrid presentation. that is important to me. that requires work that has never been done. it allows us to comprehend the project. the second one is my own preference, if you are going around, i would prefer to have initiation following these presentations. >> is that your feeling? commissioner sugaya: that is fine with me. commissioner olague: i have -- should we continue? this is an action item on the agenda. what is the appropriate way to deal with that? do we continue to a later date? is there a suggested date? the fourth and the 18th? would we consider the initiation on the 18th? >> i would like staff to take a stab on how they feel they can cover all of these documents, whether it is -- i understand the initial meeting will be the hybrid kind of presentation. we will get the overview and get into parts of the physical plant. -- pla

with regard to the initiation process, the proposed initiation process in the revised ordinance models best practices in other cities such as los angeles, where, for example, the commission has the opportunity to screen and reject frivolous nominations before moving them forward. likewise with regard to the administrative certificate of appropriateness process, this will greatly streamline the current review process by exempting minor work from faulty of a review. i think this is a very important proposal. and to clarify some of the concerns raised by the earlier speakers, it will greatly streamline the review process to make it less onerous. if you live in historic districts. and likewise, with regard to the period under which the interim controls are in place, i would like to underscore what staff already said that cases will not be frozen as suggested by some of the earlier speakers. but they will be allowed to proceed as if the district had already been designated. that means that the administration certificate of appropriateness process will be available to those property owners a

we have got the city supporting a major initiative around restored justice and practices. so that -- you know, what's going on to help if students become involved in the juvenile justice system. we are just learning how to use acts of wrongdoing as opportunities to teach rather than to punish. we are learning to do that and we think as we get better and stronger at doing that, we will be able to intervene earlier. in terms of other specific programs, the city is helping us to learn how to do what's known as family group conferencing, a city initiative that is going to betraying all of the employees within the pupil services component, how to take a family-systems approach, which we have not had as much experience as some of our city partners. they have helped up with efforts with the opening of the care program in the bayview and soon the care program that will be in the western addition, which is funded with money from behavioral health, department of public health and there are more interagency meetings happening than i have ever seen before. there is has been an interag

to take any initiatives. there will be a lot of talk there were probably not be any tangible results. >> thank you for that update. the imf says the global growth will slow next year after expanding at a rate of 4.8% this year. they are forecasting 2% growth worldwide next year. they expect a margin economies to grow three times as fast as industrialized nations. they have raised their forecasts for germany to 3.3% this year and 2% next year. stock prices continued to advance on european exchanges on better than expected german factory orders in the hopes that further economic stimulus package is in richer countries. -- packages in richer countries. we're joined from the frankfurt stock exchange. >> normally this would weigh on currency and shares when a rating agencies downgrades ireland but nothing like that happened. the euro started to rally. also, the share markets in germany continued their rally. they began yesterday mainly driven by new economic german data. industrial numbers went up by 3.5%. if you

the new leaders' initiative established the brower youth awards, which recognizes six people from 13 to 22 years old living in north america annually for their outstanding organizing advocacy and achievements in the field of environmental justice. in 2010, the awards are based -- actually every year -- on how their efforts benefit the environment but also raise of the community in terms of measurable results as well as movement building and raising awareness. awardees this year include folks from alaska, wisconsin, iowa, new york, and for the rico, but i'm very proud that deanthony is our san francisco honoree, only the second san franciscan in many years and one of the few californians that have won this award as well. he has been involved with the environmental service initiative since its inception two years ago, and the environmental service initiative is that collaboration between the school district and environmental justice ", and their efforts are to bring critical environmental education and service learning throughout the city of san francisco. besides mission high, which h

that we have the power to initiate. so i think that it was very appropriate that it shows up that way in our -- in this proposed article 10. however, what we have done, which you probably didn't notice but i would like to point out, initiation is on what page? there it is. we say -- tara kind of skipped over this, but we say for nominations submitted to landmark -- let's see -- and/or cultural to support initiation as well as additional information which may be required by the application procedures and policies established by the h.p.c. this commission does plan on setting up some procedures and policies in due time, sooner rather than later hopefully, about our attitude about what kind of consent of the public is required, what kind of meetings we should have with the public. i personally will not vote for any historic district that a majority of the public comes here and says they don't want it. i just think that's inappropriate. i want to do historic districts that have strong community support. so i think that's go

secretary avery: there is a motion on the floor to initiate. on that motion, commissioner antonini. >> commissioner borden. >> aye. >> commission irmoore. >> aye. >> commissioner miguel. >> aye. secretary avery: thank you, commissioners. you are now on item 9. case 2010.0054u, the personal wireless service facility site permit. >> good afternoon, commissioners. welcome back, commissioner borden. and the legislation before you moves the public works code with modifications to improve the process. since the initial adoption in 2007, the department of public works has been accepting personal wireless services applications to be placed in the public right-of-way and under certain circumstances referred them to the planning department for an administrative review and recommendation or two the recreation and parks department depending on the protected area it resides in. the planning department would get referrals when the installation would be on a street important to urban design and views identified in the general plan. or a street determined with

this other ballot initiative getting a lot of attention as proposition 19.egulate, control and tax cannibus. little less marijuana use in privateomes, allow marijuana growth in private residences for personal use and permit cities and counties to authorize the cultivation and sale of marijuana. marijuana is the largest cash crop in california, the first state to permit the use of their -- medical marijuana in california 14 years ago. many argue the initiative would have a profound effect on ending therrests of non-violent drug offenders who are disproportionately black and latino youth. the california naacp supports proposition 19 and says legalizing it is a civil-rights issue. we're joined on the telephone from sacramento by california naacp president alice huffman. welcome to "democracy now!" >> thank you for allowing me to be on the show today. my position and the naacp position is that we have a drug war and the penalties and implementation of action by police on the drug war has caused a disproportionate number of african-americans and lanos to be arres

would we consider the initiation on the 18th? >> i would like staff to take a stab on how they feel they can cover all of these documents, whether it is -- i understand the initial meeting will be the hybrid kind of presentation. we will get the overview and get into parts of the physical plant. -- plan. it may take more than one other meeting to go over the design structure and all of that. i don't want to go beyond the initial meeting. maybe two beyond that. it would be perfectly adequate. >> would you continue to early december? >> yes. >> could i have a date for continuance? do we have the first or second week in december? >> your schedule is the last two hearings. >> let's continue the initiation to december 9. that is a motion. that is contingent on having the workshops fit into the existing schedule. >> that is good. president miguel: is very second? >> i will second. >> i have lost my vote log. commissioners, on the motion for a continuance of initiation until the ninth of december, commissioner antonini? commissioner ant

and it's not so much the conversation about the legalization of marijuana it's that this initiative is so poorly written is going to create more issues than it answers so how is it exactly that this initiative is going to work i mean tell me why it's not actually going to regulate or control or bring in revenue . well it's not going to work first of all the myth is that it's going to bring in one point four billion dollars to the general fund of california to help us during this downturn in the economy truth of the matter is the state of california doesn't get one cent if this initiative passes instead every city which four hundred seventy eight cities in california or every county which there's fifty eight now has to develop their own taxying regulation and control mechanism or scheme to try to regulate this so you're going to have over five hundred governmental bodies with different taxing schemes tacky taxi rates regulatory schemes it is a public policy disaster now alan would have to say that we have this is going to be just a public policy disaster a bureaucratic nightmare then

this initiative will make a difference. one of the innovative ways the iraq and afghanistan veterans of america have engaged this new generation of membership is understanding that technology will be the key to outreach to a lot of these folks. we have developed something called community of veterans which is sort of like a social networking site for veterans of iraq and afghanistan. within their we are able to provide tons of resources, and we are ecstatic to be able to provide this resource in there. one thing that we also do is reconnecting veterans. when we deploy, we find ourselves on these little fobs with people. that is the goal. reconnecting people once they come home. the reliance we have on the national guard and reserve can be overwhelming. these folks are not on military bases, not in a place where they can reach out to a neighbor. now we know there is a community here in san francisco that will support the veterans when they return. i would also like to propose another initiative. when i was in afghanistan, th

initiative that works on community benefits. and they can set the standards and benchmarks for community participation. the recommendation is the puc adopt the policy statement and agency wide program that is integrated with the core mission. there are methodologies to determine whether adequate resources have been allocated to the program. it is not an afterthought, what you're doing for the community. but the concerns about community involvement and community ideas -- the policy will be brought in the sense that it will not be prescriptive as opposed to giving policy guidance to integrate community benefits from the puc. the third initial recommendation is to develop long-term plans to sustain and fund public involvement beyond completion of these capital programs, the water system improvement program and the sewer system improvement program. projects are about to be embarked upon. it is important that that involvement is sustained over the life of the program. supervisor maxwell: it also could be a policy for the city as well