they have in the afternoon an alice griffith area so he's making a lot of mistakes in this thank you so much. >> thank you. next speaker. >> you know that there are only two speakers here and their giving us only two minutes. we need real people to represent san francisco. we have somebody in district 10 that has no clue. first and foremost and the attorneys know and anyone who knows about land use is we can't take a one hundred 3 acres in this case without first having a meeting with the fact so no meeting was held and suddenly 3 hundred acres were declared a survey area we intended all the meetings so we know what we're talking about. but now suddenly dpw is coming her and saying no, we need this land vacated so he can do our infrastructure on land that is in filled the worse type and is prone to flooding that you have several representatives that have rubber stamped and attorneys that can't stand up i'll call them boovendz who does not represented our country and not represent our nation don't represent san francisco. can you image what you're all doing. the process has not been f

development and it's important for the street lands to the city to allow us to constrict the alice griffith the 2 hundred and 506 housing unit for a total of 4 hundred units plus. the office of community infrastructure the successor to the redevelopment agency is to be consistent with the hunters view shipyard plan and the bayview hunters point and candle stick shipyard development plan. those plans were approved by the board of supervisors in 2010. the planning department has vermd the proposed vacation of the easements are in empowerment with the general plan and restores the county city surveyor i'm available for questions >> no thank you very much. >> okay. at this point weigh go to. i have two public comment cards (calling names) if you would please come forward planning commission. mranltsz >> i'm going to make the statement i hope you don't pass on this today everything in here is crap. i live one block and dollars homes in this areas this was tried to be passed when sizing was here and it failed. this has been rewritten it can't be nobody but olsen lee. when i looked in the back her

for instance, we had an approval to retain balances for alice griffith for mexican museum, african-american museum of diaspora. there were balances retained for rops 2 and 3 at the time due diligence reviews were done. what dos has said they clarified, if you have any of those balances left, you need to show that on rops 1415 a. if it's restricted or needed for enforable obligation [speaker not understood]. they instructed us if you have any money left you said you needed to hang onto for rops 2 and 3, you have the next rops period to get that out the door. we tried to incorporate that. and then the other thing they clarified is then if you had received rptts in a rops period and you encumbered that to a contract in that same rops period, how do you show that on rops 1415 a? and they did say, well, again, if the expenditure is happening after this now longer accrual period, they did want to sort of see that activity in reserves. so, even though you will have previously reported that amount as expended because you've encumbered it to a contract, it's no longer available to be redistributed a