may i venture say when mr moore good good twenty times you know we would pick him up on the radio would have the search blocks around the area in we're always you know would always miss and. as time goes by pablo escobar popularity seems to increase. abating the authorities by luck or design makes him into a hero. in the rundown neighborhoods the poor are all on his side. if i know you have got it problem way here he wouldn't even need to us i doubt he's welcome here any time in our home he's welcome with open arms he will always be welcome. escobar also finds easy refuge with his cronies from the cartel and other traffickers on whose loyalty he can rely now more than a decade and a half later most i'm no longer alive. all that's left are some members of the escobar family who alone know how the godfather managed to remain at liberty for so long. maybe they might finally talk. according to some reports his son from pablo and his widow maria victoria have sought refuge in argentina. his brother roberto. that is younger sister. well still in. the escobar family had been untouchable for so

they want to settle is this you this is getting city because they said people people like mr or mr moore that you know interested in solving problems who introduced him into the solving the ideology and ideology that doesn't work i realize you lose your support and. your quote unquote solutions or involving government and that's the end yes this is yes mark my question and she's also a result of government because government works where i'm sorry i just i should work where where when did the banking but with the banking bailout who stepped in to fix that with the free market private companies probably. disaster the banking bailout is about. the economy would be you wouldn't you wouldn't be on television now to that isn't that just the sort of you know you can't produce proven nonentity you can't disprove it it would be worse if we didn't do that that's a non starter argument i let me on what he did you are you seriously argue are you seriously arguing that the government didn't need to step in yes absolutely i. need a little serious you're getting more serious if you say you don't know w

commissioner moore: that is correct. >> mr. smith, i think what commissioner moore is talking about is setting the first level back three or 4 feet away from the property line. >> i think it is to the east. >> i think i understand that. what i am pointing out is that there is a deck already there. you are inducing less than what they already have. commissinoner antonini: i still have a question. i am not sure. i guess i had a question. i was looking at some of these renderings. i do not quite see where the change is here on that west side. the one i am looking at here, i do not know if we could put this one up or not. it looks a little bit different. >> if i could answer commissioner suyaya's question, i was pointing out this is a one story deck in this location. if i understand correctly, the motion on the floor would provide a set back here. what i am pointing out is that that is reducing from what they have right now. commissinoner antonini: that is the way i am seeing it in this picture. i am seeing the deck extending, takin

commissioner moore: that is correct. >> mr. smith, i think what commissioner moore is talking about is setting the first level back three or 4 feet away from the property line. >> i think it is to the east. >> i think i

caller: mrs. moore, please do not take this personally, but the problem is you end 434 of your best friends -- and bush did this, clinton did that. at the end of the day, we are $14 trillion in debt. the deficit is over $1 trillion. the bottom-line is, 20% across the board. tell people this is what you have to deal with. now manage. guest: i want to show him this chart again. you know, the republicans are proposing cuts. the president has proposed three. if you look at this chart, if you cut every single time of money in those categories, if you cut everything out of education, everything out of agriculture, if you just stick to the things that you like, just pick and choose every single thing that you see on that chart, we would still not reduce the deficit at all, ever. so, we really do have to be realistic about what this calls for it. i hear about how a lot of people talk about we have to deal with the entitlements. what are a part of those entitlements? part of those entitlements or will we give to

moore: thank so you much, mr. chair. i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for five minutes. ms. moore: thank you, mr. chair. i rise to support the chu- morris amendment to the continuing appropriations act h.r. 1 because we're deeply concerned about the cut to the pell grant funding contained in the continuing resolution which would slash funding by $845, a 15% cut. and of course this amendment would preserve the pell grant program and maintain the full award levels. you know, i am, again, just a little bit perturbed, mr. chairman, like this cut like so many cuts in the resolution would disproportionately harm traditionally underserved communities. according to the national center for education statistics, pell recipients are more likely to be female, first generation college students, and less likely to be white than those who don't receive the grant. in other words, mr. chairman, they kind of look like me. minority students also face disproportionate unmet needs, meaning the amount they still need to pay for college

commissioner moore: i think they have clarified it. president olague: mr. smith, is this what you were describing? >> that is exactly what i was describing. commissinoner antonini: to continue, it sounds like that would give them less than they now have. i do not see what we are gaining with that. as far as the roof deck is concerned, i am not sure -- architecturally, i am not sure if it's what i see in the other pictures. but it is a right. it is something they can do. i am not sure if i necessarily want to remove that deck. commissioner sugaya: i am ok. vice president miguel: i would not want to remove the roof deck. i think it is perfectly compatible with the neighborhood and i see no problems with it at all. as far as an additional notch in the building, you are notching a deck. commissioner moore: we are nudging the building. vice president miguel: a minor notching, i would not object to. i do object to removing the roof deck. commissioner moore: normally, when a roof deck has a railing wood stays within the family of the railing's we see here, i would

mr. passmore dealt with them are still the issues before us today. commissioner moore: i believe this sets a precedent for the second unit, not the vertical air right, but the horizontal air right. i think that further compounds us to create variances on top of variances, when variances should be the last-ditch

mr. passmore dealt with them are still the issues before us today. commissioner moore: i believe this sets a precedent for the second unit, not the vertical air right, but the horizontal air right. i think that further compounds us to create variances on top of variances, when variances should be the last-ditch effort to make something work. this double building is an example of innovative in fill design. no variance on top of a variance. commissioner sugaya: i should have continued on. i have a question for staff. if this is in the rear yard already, the required rear yard, because the variance was granted, why isn't this considered an intensification? >> the proposed sun room? is that what you mean? it is actually just short of the rear yard. it is not in the rear yard. so it does not require a variance. it is" compliant -- is code compliant. >> the issue on the floor is to take dr and does approve the project. commissioner antonini: no. commissioner fong: no. commissioner moore: aye. commissioner sugaya: aye. vice president miguel: no. president olague: aye. >> the

commissioner moore: i want to step back a little bit and talked to mr. paul. there is a missing link. how the building is not code compliant because it misses a sound in this report that tells us in this building has outlived its useful life. we don't have that. we're having in noncompliant building. we're going up against what we have spent a lot of time on last year. that is the strategy that gives very specific instructions to us unless there are really clear reasons to protect the housing stock. having saidt hat, -- that, i personally do not feel we'd engage much in appreciating or not appreciating the buildings that have been designed. the analysis and the drawings are very thoughtful. they are all responding to the most subtle elements. that is primarily the scale. i can see a contemporary building, but it looks quite different from what is in front of us. the basic premise, i am not even sure what we are talking about. commissioner miguel: i also have a problem with hot demolishing the livable building. this is not a building that has to come down. i ha

moore: yes. on the ground floor, we are creating a notch against the west property line in the way mr. smith sketched it out. >> your motion is to pull in three feet from the property line. we need to put a number of there. you are also creating more transparency with the railing, where possible, with individual pickets. commissioner moore: including the third deck up there, yes. commissioner sugaya: i believe the other railings on the decks are what we are talking about, something on that order. so it is consistent. also, i think the city is moving toward not having glass rings because of impact on birds. it probably would be good to move away from them anyway. president olague: is that clear among everyone, more or less? ok. >> that is a motion on the floor to take discretionary review and approve the project with modifications you have stated, to have a notch on the ground floor and to make the railings of the decks more in keeping with a lighter picket fence look, to the extent possible. on that motion -- commissinoner antonini: aye. commissioner fong: aye. commissioner moore: aye.