mr. bueller and the planning staff. just to go over some of the issues raised at the call for the audience last week. there i believe in your package should be a letter from sf heritage. i would like to address briefly that and then we can throw it open to questions and we have the technical staff to assist you through this. essentially three request were made in that letter. i will try to summarize as best i can and perhaps mr. bueller can better articulate this. i will give it my best shot. one was to further describe the regulatory role of the planning department in this office in the legislation. our initial thinking on that is the regulatory role of planning is fairly well already described in the code and so we are not sure there is a lot of benefit putting in additional issues relative to regulations in what's essentially a proprietary decision the city is trying to make here in terms of being a seller of tdr, we have to be careful of mixing regulatory and proprietary role as a challenge. i'm happy to talk about

mr. bueller's recommendation is not just for the remaining 550 here but for all future city tdr. the board could accomplish that setting certain criteria by an ordinance. and that's probably the best way to approach it. then of course you can take any policies when the department of the war memorial come back to you for the 550,000 here. >> i will say i will work with your office to try to draft something that complies with that for the future. so that's very helpful. >> if i may, i would also like to note that if the intents here is that we are able to sell all of our -- which is a current shortfall. the current intent that any proceeds could reduce the debt when we take out the program in two 2 years with a certificate of participation. that's an important to all the city's debt needs if we are able to reduce that level of cop that affords us to reduce that debt and we have many competing needs for that debt. just keep that in mind in terms if this is an overage it will still come to this project. supervisor mark farrell: supervisor mar? >> that will ensure and that we are moni