but i believe mr. frye and staff monitor it much more frequently so that if staff aren't working on legislation coordination activities, they can be utilized in some other capacity. >> like landmarks? >> yes. tim frye, department staff. just to follow-up on that, the team leaders meet on a quarterly basis and go over the backlog and also whether or not we need to reallocate resources to, one, help deal with the backlog or there is not a backlog, can we have some folks work on designations or survey or other types of projects. >> could we be informed of that, too, just -- >> on a quarterly basis? sure, absolutely. >> thank you. commissioners, anything else? commissioner hyland. >> last meeting i had a question on the backlog and the processing time. in just looking at -- i know you presented the same information last time, but now we had a little more time to digest it. in july of 2013, we had 378 cases of backlog. and at the end of last year we had 495. in the letter from our commission to the planning depa

and in talking with mr. frye about the work that this fte will do and why it changed from fiscal year 13-14, it was because of the work in fiscal year 13-14 that staff worked on for the articles 10 and 11 amendments. and, so, there's a change in work. we just wanted to relabel that work. this is a summary of the fee elimination proposal that we will be making to the mayor's office on friday. there were no changes to this proposal. i did also just want to let you know that i worked with commission secretary ionin on placing this item on the advance calendar. so, it is tentatively scheduled to be heard on may 7. we'll have a formal hearing at that time tentatively. so, here's the budget -- remaining budget calendar. tomorrow i will be delivering this same exact presentation to the planning commission where i'll be asking for their approval of the budget so that on friday we can go ahead and submit the budget to the mayor's office. and then we'll come back in may for the public hearing on the fee elimination proposa

. >> mr. frye. >> commissioners, to consider in formulating your comments for the letter -- excuse me -- in response to commissioner johnck's comments, i think she's brought up some very good points and i would recommend if we do include, refer you to the cultural landscape and physical and natural resources and the policy that may be in that narrative explanation below the policy is where we had some of the more detailed information just to keep those policies concise. just another suggestion, johnck mentioned policy sites. so you might want to consider adding policy site to 1.13. >> thank you. commissioner hyland. >> i think in general we're moving in the right direction. i would like to see some of the language be much stronger. and it may be because we haven't lived with this long enough. this is all-new language and as we live with it a little bit longer, we'll be able to make sure what we need it to say, it will say. but in the other policies they're just much more direct and straight to the

. >> in 13 that mr. frye mentioned. >> okay, yeah. commissioner hyland. >> thank you, sue, for putting this together. i did have some wordsmithing on this that i wanted to present after public comment. so, if we're going to come back. >> yeah. so, why don't we do public comment. >> okay. >> so, members of the public? >>> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is greg miller. i live in the sunset. i'm on the board of the neighborhood association speak. personally, i'm worried about proposed revisionses to the rose. they may weaken the commission's ability to protect the historic resources of golden gate park. the park is listed in national register of historic places as a prime example of a great naturalistic park land. the [speaker not understood] document clearly states the park's key historic feature is the overall design character of the park. how the environment is balanced between forests and meadows and lakelands to provide a balanced framework for active recreation and passive enjoyment of nature. protecting such a large and co

so, i can provide information, you know, maybe more frequently through mr. frye, maybe, with the pack log. is that any point in time? >> if i could, commissioner, you're suggesting that it simply suggest -- that the letter say that we evaluate it kind of periodically through the year to make sure -- >> so next year we're at 600. >> with the goal of reducing the backlog, of course. that's all our goal. >> exactly. >> [speaker not understood] make sense. >> is it that each fte will account for tentative backlog or something, is there a way to attach that? we're adding 6 or whatever the number is we're adding. >> it's a little challenging to do that because some projects are very big and some are small. >> of course. >> yeah, i don't know -- most of the reason for the backlog is simply the vast increase in the numbers of applications. so, and there's usually a backlog in hiring people to catch up, you know. it takes six months to hire people. having said that, i think your point is well taken that the letter can simply suggest that, that we need to reevaluate it mid